The King’s Speech: Hits and misses in the court of public opinion
The State Opening of Parliament is an amalgamation of ceremonial oddities, exemplified by a Member of Parliament (MP) being taken hostage. This tradition dates to the 1600s, when, following the execution of Charles I, the relationship between Monarch and Parliament was somewhat frosty. ?The Palace holds an MP; this year, the pleasure was Samantha Dixon’s, until the King returned safely to his residence. Thankfully for Charles III, the threat of a state execution is less prevalent nowadays.
Groaning republicans may be relieved to hear that behind these lingering quirks, there is some substantive policy. The King's Speech lays out the government's ambitions for the next parliamentary year. This year, 40 bills that Keir Starmer's government will aim to pass were outlined by the King. However, not all bills are born equal in the court of public opinion. Recent You Gov polling asked the public which bills they deem a ‘good idea’ and which they thought were the ‘wrong priority’. This article will look at the hits and misses of announced policies, providing some analysis and insights along the way.
The hits…
Sewage water became a hot topic over the election campaigning period, with a policy about number two’s taking the number one spot in order of public importance. ?82% said it is a ‘good idea’ to ‘make the bosses of private water companies personally liable for company lawbreaking’. A key reason for this is that the policy had a high amount of bipartisan support; both Liberal Democrats and Reform voters that were polled agreed with equal weighting.
An honourable and unusual mention is the fourth most popular policy, ‘banning the sale of high-caffeine energy drinks to children’. This policy was largely drowned out by the noise of other headline-grabbing policies during the election campaign and gained little media traction. ?So, why do people care so much? Perhaps it can be seen as a ‘package deal’ that places tighter restrictions on young peoples ‘freedoms’, as both the bill on vaping and the advertisement of high-sugar foods are met with equally high popularity. As growing concern over the disconnect between Generation Z/Alpha and their elders has grown, with many feeling the law hasn’t caught up with new technology, devices, food and drink, mitigation tactics are becoming increasingly prioritised.
?
…and the misses.
The most unpopular policy of those announced during the speech (by a significant amount) was ‘establishing a football regulator’. ?This Bill was a hangover from the Conservative government receiving bipartisan support in establishment politics. Generally, political pundits and campaigners have spoken out in favour of the bill, which would help to ensure a fairer system for all of those within the football pyramid, particularly those at the bottom. The question arises as to why the bill does not resonate with the public. Perhaps people generally support premier league teams anyway, or football isn’t important when considering more monumental issues, such as immigration and the cost-of-living crisis, could be listed off. However, perhaps a more cynical interpretation is the accusation that the Premier League has been actively lobbying against the bill. These concerns were raised back in April by the previous Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, who wrote to the Premier League Chief Executive, Rochard Masters. Masters had brought advertising in a political media newsletter and wrote an opinion piece in a national newsletter, citing the bill as problematic. A mix of apathy and Premier League lobbying may have culminated in a shift of opinion in what was otherwise considered to be a popular bill.
The economy, health and immigration are the most important issues for the public. Immediately after the ‘big three’, comes housing. Therefore, it is surprising that the bill on ‘Reforming planning restrictions to accelerate large infrastructure projects and housebuilding’ polled so lowly in public opinion. This could reflect two things. Either the public is not fully reassured by Labour policies and housing targets, with the previous government failing to deliver on their ambitions. Another reason could be that whilst people agree with the premise of increased housing availability, they have entrusted their council to maintain local greenbelt and infrastructure and are unwilling to see that change done locally.
?
The bottom line
In the confused landscape of policy, bills, and government, the King's Speech serves as both a ceremonial tradition but also a platform for outlining governmental priorities. This year's address showcased a broad array of initiatives, some of which resonated strongly with the public, while others missed the mark.
Given that the Labour Party won a landslide majority and has already extended Sitting Hours to pass the bills, it’s unlikely that any of these bills will fail. However, Labour will look to public perception data to see where bills need tweaks, when to draw media attention (alongside when to turn them away).
?
?
?
?