General Election Briefing 2015 by FTI Consulting

General
Election
2015:an FTI Consulting briefing paper

2 // FTI Consulting LLP
General Election 2015
Leadership Succession

FTI Consulting LLP // 3
FOREWORD
Thursday 7 May will see the
country head to polling stations
in what has been labelled “the
most unpredictable election since
1974”. Much like that election, the
electorate is likely to wake up the
next morning with no clear result
and a hung Parliament. Frenzied
political negotiations between
parties will ensue to determine
the next tenant of Downing Street.
In 1974, as a twenty five year old
Labour activist, I watched the
Conservatives fail to convert
consistently favourable polls into a
seat majority despite winning a greater
share of the vote than Labour. The
SNP doubled its share of the
popular vote and sent seven MPs to
Westminster. Key issues of contention
between the parties were immigration,
the recent entry to the EEC and a
clear commitment to “immediately
seek a fundamental re-negotiation of
the terms of [that] entry”, all of which
bear remarkable similarity to
the current state of affairs.
Since then the environment has
changed. Voters’ tribal loyalties to
the two major parties have been
eroded, with new parties rising and,
sometimes, rapidly falling. Trust in
the political establishment has been
dented by repeated scandal, and over
the past five years a stable coalition
government has reassured voters
that hung Parliaments need not
mean chaos. New political forces
to be reckoned with have emerged,
eroding the Conservative/Labour
domination of Westminster and
influencing the policy directions of
“mainstream” parties.
Rapid globalisation and the legacy
of the financial crisis have raised
fundamental questions about the
extent to which regulators should
intervene in the economy, the
course of action to take with regards
to debt and deficit and the prospects
of efficiently collecting fair tax
contributions from multinationals. In
1974, policymakers struggled to
understand the implication of the
oil embargo and the entry into an
era of ever increasing oil prices.
In 2015, energy policy is being
re-defined by the collapse of the
price of Brent, the potential for a
global climate change agreement in
Paris and spiralling tensions with and
within big energy producing regions.
Security at home and abroad is
being challenged by chaos in the
Middle-East, tense relations with
Moscow and the threat of terrorism.
An incoming government will have
to deal with increasingly disparate
security challenges where the
boundaries between domestic and
foreign policy are less discernible and
the relationship between civil liberties
and security is increasingly contested.
For all these fundamental changes,
many of the policy questions that will
be hotly discussed before and following
will be surprisingly familiar to the 1974
voter. What place does the UK have
in – or out – of the European project?
What is the role of government in the
economy? What should be the role
of the private sector in our National
Health Service? How should we
control immigration?
Having been in government until July
2007 and served as an adviser and
non-executive director to a number of
companies in different sectors since
then, I have seen the dramatic effect of
the global financial crisis on the political
and regulatory environment in which
business operates.
In the UK, political risk features
increasingly on the boardroom
agenda. A series of global business
leaders have found themselves
mauled in Parliament, and no
business is immune to the impact
of government policy. After this
election, the ability of business to
fulfil its potential to create value for
customers, employees, investors and
society as a whole will be even more
dependent upon its effectiveness in
engaging with decision-makers in
and around government.
On 7 May, just as I did in the
spring of 1974, I will be anxiously
watching results come in. Peter
Snow’s swing’o’meter may have
given way to predictive algorithms
– but nail-biting re-counts, unexpected
defeats and continuing political
uncertainty will certainly keep me
gripped – as, I suspect it will you.
The Rt Hon. Patricia Hewitt
Senior Adviser, FTI Consulting
The most unpredictable
election since 1974

CONTENTS
The State of the Nation 5
Tradition and Processes 6-7
Options for Governance 8-9
A PartyAffair 10
Conservative Party 10
Labour Party 11
The Liberal Democrats 12
UK Independence Party 13
Scottish National Party 14
The Rest 15
Ones to Watch 16
Leadership Successors 17
Marginal Seats 18
SPOTLIGHT ON the seven most
marginal seats in the UK 19
AllAbout the Issues? 20
The Economy 21
Financial Services and
the City 22
The NHS and Healthcare 23
Home Affairs AND Immigration 24
Immigration 24
Securityand Criminality 24
Foreign Policyand the EU 25
Securityand Defence 26
Scotland and Devolution 27
Energyand Climate Change 28
Transport 29
Education 30
Local Government and Housing 31
lifestyle 32
Conclusion 33
The FTI Consulting Public
Affairs team 34
Public Affairs and
Government Relations –
Our Team 35

The State of the Nation
For the first time since the Second
World War, Britain has been governed
during this parliament by a coalition
of parties – consisting of the
Conservative Party, which holds
302 seats in the current parliament
and are led by the Prime Minister,
David Cameron, and the Liberal
Democrats, who have 56 seats and
are led by the Deputy Prime Minister,
Nick Clegg. This government will
not fight the forthcoming election
on 7 May as a coalition – the
parties are rather ostentatiously
going their separate ways, and
have been doing so for some time,
even while in government.
Splits within that coalition have
given rise to the biggest single problem
the Conservative Party now faces in
its attempt to retain government
(and, preferably, govern alone). After
five long years in power, because the
Lib Dems have blocked it, the Tories
have failed – despite the powers of
incumbency – to deliver overdue
changes to the constituency boundaries
on which elections are fought.
This may sound like an arcane point,
but as every gerrymanderer knows,
it isn’t – it’s vital to the outcome at
the polls. Labour presently has
a baked-in advantage in our
constituencies, reliably winning
smaller seats in the north of England
while the Tories fruitlessly amass
piles of votes in more populous
southern seats which contribute
nothing extra to their standing in the
House of Commons. Consider this:
At the 2005 General Election, Labour
won with a three point lead over the
Tories – they took government with
a majority of more than 60 seats. Five
years later, in 2010, the Conservatives
had a seven point lead over Labour, but
did not gain an overall majority at all.
As the latest polls show,the two main
parties are polling neck-and-neck in
national terms.This really means that
Labour is ahead.By how much is unclear,
as there are so many intangible factors to
be considered on a seat-by-seat basis —
candidate preference,willingness to vote
for a minor party,and so forth – but
they’re ahead.
This is enhanced by the coinciding
change in fortunes of the minor
parties. The rise of the Eurosceptic
United Kingdom Independence Party
(UKIP) splits the right, harming the
Conservatives. The remarkable decline
of the Lib Dems splits the left, helping
Labour. The Lib Dems face ignominious
defeat at the polls nationwide, losing
perhaps over half their seats. On the
other hand, having won the European
elections last year, UKIP is presently
polling at somewhere between 12 and
14 per cent. As they draw their support
predominantly from those who might
otherwise vote Tory, anything north of
four or five per cent significantly impairs
the prospects of Conservative success
in marginal seats.
Taken together, these points are the
challenges for Cameron’s Conservatives
in May. On the other hand, there are two
major advantages in their favour. First,
the economy is steadily improving. For
an important slice of the population,
quality of life has not improved for a
very considerable time, producing
a disconnection for some between
economic numbers and their own
sense of how things are going.Yet the
country as a whole increasingly feels
like things are “on the up” – and this
is traditionally the most important
electoral consideration in the United
Kingdom, as elsewhere. The
Conservatives will repeat their
messaging about their ‘long term
economic plan’, the driving down of
the deficit, and the addition of 1,000
jobs per day since they took office,
right up until polling day.
Second, Ed Miliband, leader of the
Labour Party and putative future Prime
Minister, consistently underwhelms the
public. Cameron is regularly preferred
as a leader in head-to-head polling —
and a desire to avoid disturbing that
clarity may explain the apparent
reluctance of the Tory campaign team to
have head-to-head leader debates.
Predictably, these are therefore the twin
themes of the Tory campaign.
There’s a minor party point that harms
Labour, too – north of the border, a
resurgent Scottish Nationalist Party,
(SNP), has rebounded remarkably from
its recent defeat in the independence
referendum and looks set to capture a
swathe of Labour (and Lib Dem) seats.
This doesn’t help the Tories much
though, as an alliance between the
right-of-centre Conservatives and
solid-left SNP just won’t happen —
although contrary to metropolitan
London speculation, their fantastically
bitter rivalry with Labour means a Lab/
SNP coalition is pretty unlikely, too.
Taken together, all of this means that
the election will be close, and it is unlikely
that a single party will form a majority
government in its own right. Another
coalition of some form is very possible.
Ironically, despite their forthcoming
beating, it is likely in my view that so
long as the electoral mathematics add
up, the chastened Liberal Democrats
will remain the most palatable (or least
unpalatable) choice as a partner for
both of the major parties. Clegg’s Party
has already demonstrated that they can
be a “party of government” rather than
just a party of protest. Therefore, in an
election which everybody loses —
Labour not improving their vote, but
gaining seats; the Tories getting more
votes, but fewer seats; UKIP getting a
pile of votes distributed across the
whole country, and almost no seats as
a result; the Lib Dems getting savaged,
but still having more seats than UKIP –
the perverse outcome may well be
that the party which loses worst gets
to stay in government with a new
coalition partner.
The ultimate irony? All of the other
parties, which on this analysis will
have lost out from it, campaigned to
keep our electoral system during this
parliament: only the Lib Dems, perhaps
the sole beneficiaries from it in May,
wanted to change it.
By Alex Deane
Managing Director &
Head of Public Affairs

TradiTion and procEssEs
wHat is tHe role oF GovernMent
durinG an eleCtion Period?
purdah began on 30 March 2015, the day parliament
was dissolved. Throughout this period strict restrictions
apply to the civil service. Ministers must exercise care not
to bind future governments and should avoid taking
major policy decisions, entering into significant government
contracts and making senior public appointments.
in the event of a hung parliament these principles will
continue to apply throughout any period of negotiation
between the parties as they look to form a viable
government. if decisions cannot wait, they may be
handled by temporary arrangements or following
relevant consultation with the opposition.
wHat will HaPPen iF tHere is no
Clear MaJority?
convention dictates that in the event of no clear majority
the incumbent will have the first option at forming a
government - david cameron would likely remain in office
and seek to hold on to power – be that through building
a coalition or attempting to govern as a minority.
should the incumbent party not be able to command
the confidence of the commons by passing a queen’s
speech, there will follow a flurry of inter-party discussions
to try and establish formal coalitions or confidence
and supply arrangements.
recent examples suggest that previous prime Ministers
only step aside when there is a clear choice of who should
be put forward to the queen to form the next government.
it remains to be seen whether or not these examples
will be regarded in future as having established a
constitutional convention.
1 2
1
HUNG PARLIAMENT
ELECT
7 MAY
2
3
COALITION
MINORITY GO
SECOND
QUEEN
SELECT CO
CHAIR EL
SELECT CO
MEMBERS C

wHat will tHe role oF tHe Civil
serviCe be?
during the negotiations, should the leaders of the
parties seek the support of the civil service, it can
only be organised by the cabinet secretary with the
authorisation of the prime Minister. Throughout, the
support must be provided on an equal basis to all
parties and the civil service will continue to advise
the incumbent government in the usual way.
wHat HaPPens iF tHere is a
Clear MaJority?
in the event of a clear majority, the process of forming
the government will stick to the traditional course. if the in-
cumbent is defeated in the polls, the prime Minister will ten-
der his resignation and that of the government to the queen,
advising who should be asked to form the next government.
The date of the first meeting of the new parliament will
be determined by a proclamation issued by the sovereign
– recent convention suggests this would fall on the first
Wednesday following the election. The house of commons
will meet to take the oath and elect a speaker and in the
second week of parliament’s sitting the queen’s speech
will outline the government’s legislative programme.
3 4
1 2 3
1
MAJORITY GOVERNMENT
TION
Y 2015
4OVERNMENT
D ELECTION
NS SPEECH
OMMITTEE
LECTIONS
OMMITTEE
CONFIRMED

Options for Governance
The hegemony of two-party politics is over, for the immediate future at least. The British electorate has
adjusted to the idea of a hung Parliament following five years of stable coalition, but post-election negotiations
are likely to be far more complicated this time around. Not only has the impact of the coalition on the Liberal
Democrats introduced a much higher degree of caution among the minority parties, but with the margins looking
so tight, negotiations will have to account for a number of possible allegiances, encompassing a
much broader group of parties than in any previous election.
Minority Government
The Conservatives shied away from this in 2010, but would either of the main parties now consider forming a
minority government? Both sides face internal opposition to any new coalition agreements but with the introduction
of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, which abolished the prerogative power of dissolution, there are new risks to
consider. Whilst previously one could expect to see an intense bout of popular policy decisions before a second
election was announced in the hope of securing a majority, the Prime Minister’s hands are now tied. Requiring
two-thirds support in the Commons for another election, the incumbent party would perversely need to secure
the support of the opposition to go to the polls early, or face the prospect of having to limp on as a minority
government until put out of its misery by a vote of no confidence. Don’t be surprised however, if in the event of
another hung Parliament, the Fixed Term Parliaments Act is repealed as part of post-election negotiations.
Two Party Coalition
In 2010 the Liberal Democrats played kingmaker, but with the party predicted to lose half its seats it remains to
be seen whether it will have the clout to support either of the major parties in a two-way coalition. Despite ruling out
a formal coalition, the SNP may be Labour’s best hope if they can secure a confidence and supply arrangement.
Expected to win a significant majority of Scotland’s seats, the SNP’s success will be somewhat of a catch-22 for
Labour since most of those seats they are expected to take are currently in Labour hands. South of the border there
is strong anti-SNP sentiment and Labour will be under pressure to avoid an arrangement which will undoubtedly
involve significant policy benefits for Scotland.

Rainbow Coalition
The assumption that no overall majority in May will result in a two-party coalition is no safe bet – the multitude of
smaller parties vying for a share of the vote will not only impact the number of seats gained by each of the main
parties, but by diluting the vote share it has the potential to undermine the legitimacy of both Labour and the
Conservatives if they try to govern alone, or in coalition. The media have been quick to highlight the prospect of
a ‘coalition of the losers’, with a strong possibility that come 8 May, negotiations will begin around forming a rainbow
coalition. For Labour this could depend on a confidence and supply arrangement, involving the Lib Dems, Plaid
Cymru, the SNP or the Greens. For the Conservatives it becomes more problematic – if the Lib Dem Party offered
to lend its support once more, it certainly wouldn’t accept a deal with UKIP to bolster the numbers. The Democratic
Unionist Party offers another option, with some polls predicting it to return with up to ten seats.
A Grand Coalition
Given both age-old enmities and recent exchanges in the House of Commons, such an outcome is almost
unfathomable. Both leaders have dismissed any suggestion of such an arrangement, but with the electorate so
split it could be argued to be the truest reflection of public sentiment. Arguments persist that while both of the
main parties have been keen to exacerbate their differences in the lead up to the election, sitting either side
of the centre ground, there is significant crossover in policy agendas.
Not seen in the UK since the Government of National Unity of 1945, it’s highly unlikely to occur in 2015.

A PARTYAFFAIR
To an extent, the Conservative Party has pinned any
hope of an electoral victory on Lynton Crosby’s carefully
choreographed and highly disciplined election campaign.
There is no issue by issue approach for the Conservatives,
just one consistent message: the ‘long term economic
plan’ is working.
This single focus approach is helpful for managing both
external reactions but also internal divisions. The same key
issues which have split the Party time and again – Europe
and immigration – have not only failed to go away under the
coalition; they have become more pronounced and
problematic. In particular, the unclear narrative on the
European question is having a particular impact on those
Conservative MPs feeling the UKIP threat in multiple
marginal seats across the country.
The electoral mathematics doesn’t look good for
Cameron. Despite a strong, steady stream of good data,
the Conservatives are failing to capitalise on the economic
recovery, while the Prime Minister’s comparable popularity
to his opposite number Ed Miliband does not seem to be
solving the Party’s long term image problems. This is
a particular problem given their failure to appeal to key
swing groups such as women. Cameron has come under fire
for the lack of female representation within the Party, with
just 48 female Conservative MPs and four female Cabinet
Ministers while the policy agenda has consistently trailed
Labour in the polls with female voters, particularly mothers.
Conservative Party
All in all it seems unlikely that the Conservatives will
win the 325 seats required for an overall majority.
It didn’t manage it in 2010 and that was before UKIP
started to chip away at its votes.Yet optimism remains and
the 2014 party conference was positively buoyant.
Conservative campaign pledges:
• Delivering a stable economy through the ‘long term
economic plan’
• Helping people have the security of owning their
own home
• Ensuring hardworking families have decent
standards of living
• Securing a stronger NHS and education system
DAVID CAMERON
Cameron remains the most trusted party
leader in the eyes of the electorate, even
on the Conservatives traditional weak
spot – the NHS.Time and time again
the Prime Minister has returned to the
Conservative line – the economic plan is
working, and in Osborne’s words,“Britain
is standing tall again”.
Cameron has a number of success
stories against which to leverage his
position – unemployment at an all-time
low, increasingly encouraging growth
figures and a shrinking budget deficit.
But his reputation as a leader of the
minority, for the minority, persists.
Support for him is widespread, but
shallow: he does not motivate the
faithful as others have done in the
past, and there are no“Cameronites”
in the country to provide a base of
support and proselytise for him. Under
his stewardship, the party membership
has decreased by around 27,000.
Rumours abound that if the
Conservatives fail to secure a majority
in May Cameron will be forced to step
down as leader of the Party. However,
if - as predicted there is no clear
majority, then it is likely that Cameron
will retain his grip on Party power
throughout any period of negotiation.
The Prime Minister has proven that he
is able to lead a coalition government
and, as polling day nears and the
reality of electoral uncertainty mounts,
that fact may help to swing the votes of
those sitting on the fence.

ED MILIBAND
Miliband is not a popular Labour
Prime Ministerial choice, polling
behind Neil Kinnock in both his 1987
and 1992 campaigns.
The paradox of steady party popularity
coupled with leader unpopularity could
come back to bite on polling day. But
the Party know their leader is not their
greatest asset and as such are focus-
ing on the issues – especially the NHS.
Compare this to Cameron who is
front and centre of the Conservative
campaign – in the knowledge that he’s
more popular than Miliband.
But Miliband has played a clever
hand, downplaying his unpopularity
by making light of it and stressing his
convictions. The hope is that when it
comes to polling day the Labour
base will hold up and that the left
will stay united in the face of a
fragmented right.
Whatever one’s opinion about Ed Miliband as future Prime
Minister, the Party’s polling has consistently stood up.
The opposing political parties have not been able to break
the 35 per cent barrier that the Party has, to its credit, held
on to – despite a supposedly unpopular leader at the helm.
The reason for this consistency is the immoveable core vote
and active grass roots that allow the Party to withstand
negative assets. Electoral geography also gives the Party
a significant advantage.
It’s no secret that there has been a shift to the left in party
policy, compared with the Blair/Brown years. Some may
view it as cynical politics – others as good opposition –
but taking the side of the disadvantaged voter in the face
of public sector cuts has proved distinctive. It is also,
importantly, a conviction of the leader. As the economy
started to grow under Osborne, a major line of attack was
removed from Labour’s arsenal, but the Party adjusted
quickly and has reemphasised differentiation in the hope
of voter preference for more gradual cuts.
The Labour Party needs another 68 seats to secure an
overall majority in the House of Commons, and has a
campaign focused around five promises:
• A strong economic foundation
• Higher living standards for working families
Labour Party
• An NHS with the time to care
• Controls on immigration
• A country where the next generation can do
better than the last
The leadership has pinned its hopes on instilling a narrative
of fear in the electorate: fear that the Conservatives will
destroy the NHS, and fear that cutting too severely and
quickly will lead to harsh realities for the public. It’s a
powerful message, but only time will tell if the large and
politically decisive UK middle class will buy it.
Having once been Labour’s electoral bedrock, Scotland
is now a challenge and the majority target of 68 gained
seats net will be much more difficult to achieve if the SNP
bandwagon holds up. Some polls suggest around 40 seats
could be taken from Labour and the Lib Dems in Scotland –
it is unlikely to be as much as that but it’s a significant
threat to a potential Labour majority.
If the Party does enter into government (in one form or
another) it will have a significant job on its hands to repair
negative perceptions of it held by UK business. Business
doesn’t represent the multifaceted electorate, but it’s
vital to have on side.

NICK CLEGG
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, like
his Party, has suffered in the polls since
the previous election. In the same way
Ed Miliband’s personality polls badly,
Clegg faces an image problem and
questions are being raised about his
future as leader of the Party.
While a leadership contest in the Liberal
Democrats is certainly not imminent,
reports suggest that several MPs say
there is an unspoken assumption that
he will stand down as Liberal Democrat
leader in the next parliament - whatever
the result in May.
Polling has suggested that Clegg
could lose his Sheffield Hallam seat
to the Labour Party, which has only
fuelled the Labour campaign to oust
him. If he does maintain his seat,
which should not be ruled out, then
contrary to recent media speculation,
we can expect him to see out another
parliamentary term, if reports from
his aides are to be trusted.
A PARTYAFFAIR
After decades ‘in the wilderness’, the Liberal Democrats
are for the first time facing a General Election with a record
in government to defend. From a party of protest, to a
party of power, the 2010 to 2015 journey has been a
remarkable one: the Liberal Democrat’s electoral success
in May will depend largely on how it presents its record
as part of the coalition.
It is undeniable that the Liberal Democrats have proven
resilient in the face of public disapproval – a number of
policy u-turns and compromises to the Conservatives have
left approval of the Party, and its leader, consistently low,
lingering around or below the ten per cent point for most
of this parliament.
With 56 seats to protect, the Liberal Democrats will
be keen to maintain their history of capitalising on
incumbency. The Party often fares well in individual seats
it already holds, but it has a mammoth task to convince
voters nationally of their credibility. Since party conference
season passed, the leadership has sought to distance
itself from the Conservative Party. Messages have had a
defensive focus, emphasising what they have stopped the
Conservatives doing rather than championing Lib Dem
achievements. In an election characterised by a split
vote across the left and right of the political spectrum,
leader Nick Clegg is keen to highlight the position the
Liberal Democrats supposedly hold as a party of
moderation at the centre ground.
THE Liberal Democrats
One question the Party will have to consider is who they
‘get into bed with’ should they hold the key to power. The
present coalition has much to boast about, presiding
over an economy in positive growth and with a string of
achievements co-credited to both parties. But there is
tension between the parties within it, especially on the
backbenches, which could force the hand of any coalition
negotiations. The question still lingers over whether the
Liberal Democrats would prop up a Labour-led
government while Ed Miliband is a leader.
This all depends on two obvious things: the number of
seats maintained by the Liberal Democrats in May, and
which of the larger parties does better – given that Clegg’s
2010 pledge to speak first to the Party with the most seats
seams a precedent which the Party is likely to follow. For
the Lib Dems, optimistic commentators have suggested
that the number might drop only to the forties, whilst
others have suggested that a decimation of the seats
will cut the Liberal Democrats to the twenties.

UKIP’s journey to the political mainstream began in 1999,
when they obtained three European Parliament seats.
Their political history has since then been one of peaks
and troughs, albeit with a generally upward trajectory:
their winning performance in the European elections in
2014, coupled with successes in council elections and two
Westminster by-elections throughout this parliamentary
term, has cemented their position in this election as a
significant challenger party.
Nigel Farage’s commitment has been an important
mainstay for the Party and its supporters, rocked by the
increased scrutiny it has faced. Various revelations about the
behaviour and attitudes of particular party members have
emerged over the past year, threatening UKIP’s credibility,
but – perhaps because of their out-of-the-mainstream,
populist positioning – this seems not to have had too
adverse an effect on its poll performance, which consistently
floats between ten and fifteen per cent - outperforming the
Liberal Democrats since 2013.
UKIP must convince the public of their credibility when it
comes to offering robust policy across the spectrum, rather
than just their platform on immigration and Britain’s EU
membership. Describing UKIP as a “classical liberal party”,
communications lead Gawain Towler recently released 100
reasons to vote UKIP, a varied, but non-comprehensive
overview of the Party’s agenda.“Towler’s reasons” form
part of an ongoing tussle between libertarians and more
socially conservative populists which often goes unnoticed
by the political mainstream but becomes more significant
as UKIP’s influence rises. What has not gone unnoticed
UK Independence Party
is their growing membership, often at the expense of the
Conservative Party, whose defectors are untroubled by the
Conservative claim,“vote Farage, get Miliband” -or even
think increasingly that “they’re both the same”.
UKIP has upped its game when it comes to targeting seats,
understanding the drawbacks of First-Past-the-Post as
an electoral system for its chances of success. The Party
has intelligently focused its efforts on a limited number
of constituencies, where the collapse of support for the
Liberal Democrats and Conservatives means the seats are
most vulnerable to them. Included in this is Heywood and
Middleton, where they came within a whisker of winning
at the recent by-election. In some seats now, UKIP isn’t
splitting the Conservative vote – the Conservatives are
splitting theirs.
Consider the narrowness of the band of options for UKIP:
winning two seats (i.e. what they already have) would be
a bad result, whilst a sum total of four – what they are
projected to gain - would be excellent. However, the real
impact of the “People’s Army” in 2015 is what it does to
others. In many southern seats, the UKIP vote threatens to
be the difference between the Conservatives managing to
hang on to marginals and losing them to Labour.
In the immediate term, facing a hung Parliament, the political
leaders may need to bargain even more than in 2010 to form
a functioning government. Past lines about never doing a deal
with the Conservatives“whilst led by David Cameron”are now
conspicuous by their absence from Farage’s talking points.
NIGEL FARAGE
For many, Nigel Farage is UKIP and
UKIP is Nigel Farage. There is no doubt
that the charismatic leader has been
a huge part of UKIP’s ascendency,
leading UKIP to its first victory in a
nationwide UK election at the 2014
European election.
His outsider “telling it like it is” status
appeals to an electorate dissatisfied
with the three traditional parties and
a media who are happy to buy into
personality politics. Farage has already
said that if he doesn’t win the Thanet
seat he will step down as UKIP leader.

A PARTYAFFAIR
NICOLA STURGEON
Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon
is a powerhouse and was the natural
successor to her friend and mentor Alex
Salmond. Sturgeon has enjoyed high
trust ratings among the electorate from
the outset. She has a reputation for
being serious and straightforward to
work with which should come in handy
for the task ahead: securing more
powers for Scotland and taking her party
into the 2016 Scottish election.
Jim Murphy’s election as leader of
Scottish Labour has done little to
dampen the SNP’s electoral hopes as
they continue to poll stably. Salmond
will not be the SNPs Westminster
leader but he will crave influence
which could be problematic for
internal SNP politics.
2014 will long be remembered as a milestone year for the
SNP. Despite losing the Scottish referendum they ran a far
tighter race than many predicted. Their support base has
soared and in 2014 alone the Party membership more than
tripled from 27,000 to over 90,000. One in ten Scottish
adults is now a member of the Party, making the SNP the
third largest party in the UK by membership.
To some extent, the referendum has legitimised the Party
to a broader Scottish audience, addressing persistent
credibility issues and providing a platform from which
to launch a significant General Election campaign.
The polls vary on how many of Scotland’s 59 seats the
SNP can expect to gain in May. The most conservative
estimates suggest few more than 20, but the more
optimistic have predicted figures in the late forties.
The majority of those seats expected to fall into SNP hands
are traditional Labour strongholds. The SNP has been
conscious to target Old Labour voters with their social
democratic ideology, mixed with messages for a dynamic
and progressive vision for Scotland. The Scottish
Labour Party has taken years to adjust to this having been
out of government in Scotland since 2007. A perceived
failure by Ed Miliband and the Westminster branch to engage
with Scottish Labour in the lead up to the referendum
has helped the SNP’s cause.
Scottish National Party
Consider this, without the potential risk of an
immediate exit from the UK there could be more than a few
non-independence supporting, pro-Scotland and
anti-Westminster establishment voters that will view the
SNP as a viable alternative to a lacklustre Labour.
The SNP’s message is focused on anti-austerity – a clear
differentiator and appeal to traditional Labour heartlands.
Policies such as the 50p rate of tax and a combative stance
to keeping the Conservatives out of power has done much
to enhance this appeal with the Scottish electorate. The SNP
will have to be careful though – if they do end up holding the
balance of power and use it in a way that is viewed as overly
obstructive and regressive, then the Party could feel the
impact in the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections.

The REST
The past two years have seen relatively
significant gains for the Green Party,with
support increasing three-fold.However,
consistently polling at around the 6.5
per cent mark they are unlikely to add to
their current seat in Brighton.With twelve
key seats in their sights the Greens are
likely to have the greatest impact on the
electoral outcome by splitting the share
GREEN PARTY
of the vote in particularly tight Labour
and Conservative contests.
If elected, the Greens will abolish
the ‘bedroom tax’ or ‘spare bedroom
subsidy’, end austerity, return the
railways to public hands, scrap tuition
fees, phase out the use of fossil fuel
and increase the minimum wage to
£10 an hour by 2020 – quite a policy
agenda. During a now infamous radio
interview, leader Natalie Bennett was
backed in to a corner over funding for
the Party’s plans to build 500,000
social rented homes, seriously
denting her already questionable
credibility amongst the electorate.
Northern Ireland’s Democratic
Unionist Party (DUP) is currently the
fourth largest party in Westminster
with eight incumbent MPs and may
well be in a position to prop up a
‘coalition of the right’ should the
opportunity arise in May.
The DUP have enjoyed electoral
success in recent general elections,
and increasingly within local councils,
a unionist tide is growing in Northern
Ireland. This trend has led the DUP and
the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) to join
forces in a formal pan-unionist pact for
this election.
Democratic Unionist Party
This alliance aims to maximise the
unionist voice in Westminster, through
fielding only one pro-union candidate
in up to four of the eighteen northern
Irish parliamentary constituencies.
On this basis, some polls show the
DUP returning with up to ten MPs,
making them an attractive coalition
option to prop up a Conservative-led
government through coalition or
confidence and supply. Likely issues
for the DUP could include the costs on
business from reforms to the electricity
market and upholding ‘The Stormont
House Agreement’.
UKIP too recognise the potential for
support from the DUP to propel them
into an attractive position to ‘get into
bed’ with the Conservatives. Leader
Nigel Farage, said the Party could
form part of a coalition government
with the Conservatives and the DUP,
stating that “in that circumstance
there would be some points of
agreement between us and the DUP”.
However the DUP have been left out
of the recently announced seven-way
TV debate despite having more MPs
than four or the seven parties invited
to debate, most obviously the SNP
and Plaid Cymru.
With three MPs currently representing
the Party in the House of Commons,
Plaid Cymru will seek a greater
mandate to stand up for Wales in
Westminster. Leader Leanne Wood
has grand ambitions for the election,
pledging to join other anti-austerity
fringe parties in the hope that
collectively they can “rebalance the
power” in Westminster.
Plaid Cymru
The level of dissolution within the
Liberal Democrats in Wales has
bolstered the commitment of Plaid
in some seats. However, despite the
Lib Dems polling at six per cent, there
is little appetite for Plaid’s vision for
Wales. A BBC poll showed just six per
cent of the Welsh population eager
to see a greater degree of devolution.
The Party’s support too has slipped
– Plaid Cymru is no longer the official
opposition in the Welsh Assembly,
polling at around ten per cent, behind
Labour, the Conservatives and UKIP.

ONES TO WATCH
With 86 MPs standing down at the General Election there will be an influx of new talent across all parties. In recent
years we have seen newly elected Members move quickly up their party ranks and five of those currently attending Cabinet
were elected for the first time in 2010.
Kit Malthouse,
North West
Hampshire
• Defending a
Conservative
majority of 18,583.
• He is former Deputy
Mayor of London
for Policing and
for Business and
Enterprise.
• Currently a
Member of the
London Assembly
representing
West Central.
Craig Mackinlay,
South Thanet
• Defending a
Conservative
majority of 7617.
• A semi-marginal
Conservative seat,
Mackinlay is up
against UKIP leader
Nigel Farage.
• A former leader
of UKIP himself,
Mackinlay is seen
as key on the EU
question.
Nusrat Ghani,
Wealden
• Defending a
Conservative
majority of 17,179.
• Ghani previously
worked at the BBC
World Service
and on policy for
health charities
including
Breakthrough
Breast Cancer
and Age Concern.
Christine Jardine,
Gordon
Victoria Ayling,
Great grimsby
• A relatively safe
Lib Dem seat,
Jardine will defend
incumbent Malcolm
Bruce’s majority
of 6748.
• A journalist by trade
the former special
advisor to Nick
Clegg should do
well if she succeeds
in defeating Alex
Salmond.
• Challenging a
Labour majority
of 714.
• Ayling contested
the same seat for
the Conservatives
in 2010. Having
defected in 2013 she
is now a key ally of
Nigel Farage.
• In 2010 UKIP
secured just 6.2 per
cent of the vote in
this seat.
Sir Keir Starmer,
Holborn
St Pancras
• Replacing retiring
incumbent Frank
Dobson MP, he
seeks to defend
Labour’s 9942
majority.
• A former Director of
Public Prosecutions
who oversaw the
prosecution of Chris
Huhne, Starmer
has been touted as
a future Attorney
General.
Polly Billington
ThURrock
• Challenging a
Conservative
majority of 92.
• Close advisor to
Ed Miliband and
media director for
his leadership
campaign in 2010,
the former BBC
journalist will face
a tough campaign
in one of the most
important election
battlegrounds.
Darren Hall,
bristolwest
• Hall contests Bristol
West against
incumbent MP
Lib Dem Stephen
Williams who
carries a majority
of 11,366 and
Labour’s candidate
Thangam
Debbonaire.
• In the 2014 local
elections the
Green’s got the
most votes
within the seat,
suggesting it could
now be a three-way
marginal.
Stephen Kinnock,
Aberavon
• In a safe Labour
seat, Kinnock will
hope to defend
Hywel Francis’
11,039 majority.
• Husband of the
Danish Prime
Minister and son
of former Labour
leader Neil Kinnock,
he formerly worked
at the British
Council, World
Economic Forum
and the Global
Leadership and
Technology
Exchange.
Alex Salmond,
GORDON
• Currently held by
retiring Liberal
Democrat MP Sir
Malcolm Bruce,
Salmond will
hope to return to
Westminster by
overturning the
incumbent party’s
6748 majority.
• Salmond will be
fighting to ensure
that the SNP
secures its
position in
Westminster.

LEADERSHIP SUCCESSORS
With so much at stake for each of the leaders, we take a look at potential changes in party leadership post-election.
BORIS JOHNSON,
Mayor of london
THERESA MAY,
home secretary
George osborne,
chancellor of the
Exchequer
The London Mayor will seek
his return toWestminster in May
in the safe Conservative seat
of Uxbridge,where incumbent
Conservative MP,John Randall
secured 48.3 per cent of the vote
in 2010.Speculation has long
been rife around Boris’s political
ambitions,and there have already
been calls from Conservative MPs
to make Boris - the“one nation
Tory”and one of Britain’s most
popular politicians - central to the
Conservative election effort.
The longest serving holder of
her current Cabinet post for 50
years,she has been the MP for
Maidenhead since 1997.Amember
of the Shadow Cabinet from 1999
to 2010,including stints as Shadow
Secretary of State for Education
and Employment,Shadow
Secretary of State forWork and
Pensions,and Shadow Leader
of the House of Commons,May
became the first female Chairman
of the party in 2002.Despite a
recent feud with Downing Street
she is still considered to be a
frontrunner in any leadership battle
to succeed David Cameron.
Elected to his seat in 2001,
Osborne became the youngest
Conservative MP in the House of
Commons.His first frontbench
appointment came in 2003 as
part of the Shadow Economic
Affairs team,quickly followed
by his appointment as Shadow
Chief Secretary to theTreasury.
He served as campaign manager
for David Cameron’s leadership
campaign.In 2010 he took up his
role of Chancellor of Exchequer,in
one of the most testing economic
environments of recent history.
Chuka Umunna,
ShadowSecretaryofStatefor
Business,InnovationandSkills
The Labour MP for Streatham
since 2010,Chuka Umunna has
risen quickly up the ranks.Umunna
was a key member of Ed Miliband’s
leadership campaign team and
within five months of becoming an
MP was appointed Parliamentary
Private Secretary to the Party
leader.Since taking up his post
in the Shadow Cabinet,Umunna
has spoken out on the benefits of
immigration to the UK,the need
for better regulation of the financial
services industry and investment
in schools.Considered to have
Blairite tendencies,Umunna
has been cautious not to make
any public pronouncements of
leadership ambitions.
Andy Burnham,
Shadow Secretary of
State for Health
Aformer parliamentary researcher
and special advisor,Andy Burnham
was first elected as the MP for
Leigh in 2001.He entered the
Cabinet in 2007 as Chief Secretary
to theTreasury under Gordon
Brown before being promoted
to Secretary of State for Culture,
Media and Sport.Having been
appointed Secretary of State for
Health in 2009,Burnham put
himself forward as a successor to
Gordon Brown,but only secured
10.4 per cent of the vote.He has
championed Labour’s plans to
integrate social care into the NHS,
winning favour with the trade
unions and party rank and file.
TIM FARRON
MP for Westmorland
and Lonsdale
Farron became the MP for
Westmorland and Lonsdale in
2005,ending the Conservatives 95
year rule,in what was seen as a key
success for the Liberal Democrats.
He served as President of the Party
from 2010 toJanuary 2015 and
since the start of the coalition has
positioned himself to the left of
the Party’s leadership,a move that
has won favour among activists
keen to maintain distance from the
Conservatives.If Nick Clegg loses
his seat in May,many see Farron as
the man to rebuild the Party.
Yvette Cooper,
Shadow Home
Secretary
Yvette Cooper was called to the
government just two years after
being elected as an MP in the
safe Labour seat Pontefract and
Castleford in 1997.She has held a
number of government positions
during her political career,including
Chief Secretary to theTreasury,
Secretary of State forWork
and Pensions,Shadow Foreign
Secretary and her current post of
Shadow Home Secretary.Familiar
with the party machine,Parliament
and with extensive experience
in the House of Commons she
has been tipped as Labour’s first
female leader.
Douglas Carswell
MP for Clacton
After defecting from the
Conservatives in 2014,Douglas
Carswell became UKIPs first MP
after retaining his Clacton seat in a
by-election.Political commentators
have touted Carswell as Farage’s
replacement after the leader
indicated that he will step down as
leader if he fails to win his South
Thanet seat.Carswell has become
known atWestminster for being
an outspoken advocate of political
reform and action to clean up British
politics.He has proposed radical
changes to force politicians to answer
outwardly to the electorate,leading
the DailyTelegraph to nominate
him Briton of theYear 2009,and
Spectator readers voted him their
choice as Parliamentarian of the
Year in the same year.

Marginal Seats
Little about this election is certain. What makes it so unpredictable is the potential for a split vote across
both sides of the political spectrum. What we do know is that, as usual, marginal seats will prove to be fundamental
in determining who will become the next Prime Minister.
Marginal seats are those which require a swing of five per cent or less for the incumbent party to lose. There are 650
individual contests for seats in the House of Commons, 194 of which are considered marginal. In 12 of the 17 elections since
1950, fewer than 1 in 10 seats changed hands from one party to another. To secure a majority and avoid the inevitable
compromises of coalition negotiations, both major parties must add seats to the current total they hold, 20 for the
Conservatives and 68 for Labour, an outcome few would predict with much confidence.
On the right UKIP are polling close to the Conservatives in around 10 seats, making it possible that they will add to their
current two MPs. Similarly, a three way contest on the left between the Green Party, the SNP and Labour, will potentially
cost Labour a majority and as some polls suggest, up to 52 seats in Scotland.
194 most marginal SEATS in
Britain, needing up to a FIVE per
cent swing to change hands.*

SPOTLIGHT ON the seven most marginal seats in the UK
Camborne and
Redruth
Conservative majority 66
Whilst a Conservative hold is
predicted in this Cornish
constituency, concern is mounting
over how smaller parties could
disrupt the outcome. Both 2010
candidates are standing again;
Conservative MP George Eustice
and former Liberal Democrat MP
Julia Goldsworthy against the
backdrop of growing popularity
for UKIP. Eustice needs just a
0.1 per cent swing away to lose the
seat. Polls predict a slim
Conservative hold.
Thurrock
Thurrock is number two on Labour’s national target list.The seat
was won with a swing of 6.6 per cent from Labour in 2010 byJackie
Doyle-Price.Having built up a successful profile as a constituency MP,
her main challenger is a senior Labour figure,Polly Billington,a close ally
to Ed Miliband.However UKIP’s rise in the area is thrusting candidate
TimAker in,making it a three-way marginal.The Party now has six
seats in the Council and are polling in some cases higher than Labour.
Hampstead and
Kilburn
Labour majority 42
Hampstead and Kilburn is the
most marginal seat in Britain. The
incumbent MP Glenda Jackson
announced in 2011 that she was
stepping down after more than
20 years in Parliament. The polls
predict a Labour hold with their
candidate Tulip Siddiq, the first
Bengali woman to sit on Camden
Council. Siddiq goes up against
Conservative Simon Marcus and
Liberal Democrat Maajid Nawaz.
HENDON
A staunch Labour seat since
1997, in 2010 a 4 per cent swing
saw Conservative Matthew
Offord win the seat from Andrew
Dismore. The two go head-to-
head once more, and it is likely to
be a struggle. Polls are predicting
a Labour gain, but a late surge in
the polls for the Green Party
could yet keep Dismore out.
North
Warwickshire
The most marginal Conservative
seat in the country turned blue in
2010 after being held by Labour
since 1992.As sitting MP Dan Byles
steps down,and just a 0.1 per cent
swing is required to lose the seat,
Labour’s Mike O’Brien is in with a
good chance of regaining his seat.
Solihull
Lib Dem majority 175
A target Conservative seat,
Solihull is one of the most
marginal seats in the Midlands.
Incumbent Liberal Democrat
MP Lorely Burt who first won
the seat in 2005 is unlikely to
retain it with the polls projecting
a Conservative gain for
candidate Julian Knight.
BOLTON WEST
Labour majority 92
The fourth most marginal seat
in the UK, sitting Labour MP
Julie Hilling is likely to have a
close fight against Conservative
Christopher Green. Despite a 6 per
cent swing to the Conservatives
in 2010, Labour retained the seat,
and the polls indicate another
slim Labour majority.
Oxford West and
Abingdon
The unpopularity of the
Liberal Democrats is likely to
make the contest for the seat
one-sided. Conservative MP
Nicola Blackwood is predicted to
build on the seven point swing she
gained in 2010 unseating former
Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris.
Labour has never held the seat,
and continue to poll badly.

AllAbout the Issues?
The battleground so far for this
election has been set. The NHS,
immigration and the economy are
the key issues the parties have
focused on to win over the hearts
and minds of the British electorate,
and importantly their core voters.
The NHS is fraught with issues, but
most seriously, a funding crisis in an
era of spending cuts. An aggregate of
around 40 per cent of the population
mark the NHS as the most important
issue to them, the highest level of
concern since April 2006. Consistently
scoring better on the issue than the
Conservatives, debating health plays to
Labour’s strengths and shores up the
Party’s natural left-of-centre vote.
Much the same is true of the
Conservatives with regards to the
economy: they poll better when
voters are asked about economic
competence and the issue is
historically more important to those
on the right. As employment has
risen and the deficit has reduced,
concern over the economy has
fallen 13 per cent since 2013, leading
the Conservatives to believe (and
persistently argue) that it’s ‘long term
economic plan’ is working. The Party
has shaped its agenda around its
successes on saving the country from
a double dip recession and against
many odds, stimulating sustained
economic growth.
In June 2014, immigration began to poll
as one of the most important issues
to the electorate. The level of concern
had increased to 38 per cent from 33
per cent in 2013, in line with the rise of
UKIP. UKIP has made the issue front
and centre of its campaign, giving voice
to a rising sentiment among the work-
ing class that immigration is harmful to
jobs and the economy.
Many polls hitting the headlines are
publicising the intended voting patterns
of a representative sample of the entire
UK population.They are interesting to
monitor trending movements after key
events,but this can have little relevance
when transposing these percentages into
the expected number of electoral seats
for that political party,so caution must be
exercised when reading the polls.
For example, in Scotland, FTI’s own
polling shows there is a concentration
of voters in many electoral seats such
that although the SNP is only polling
at 3 per cent nationally, their support
could result in over 40 MPs being
elected. Conversely, UKIP are
attracting well over twice as many
supporters across the UK, but their
supporters are more geographically
spread out and are likely to only yield a
couple of MPs. In summary, it’s not how
many voters one has nationally; it’s
where they’re clustered.
In polls, respondents are asked who
they’ve decided to vote for, or are most
likely to vote for, at that moment in
time. However, the electorate could
still change their minds. With such a
huge number of fickle voters, key public
events such as the televised debates
could have a dramatic impact come
polling day.
In the following section we take a
closer look at the key issues defining
this election campaign and the main
policy agendas across the parties.
The NHS, immigration and the
economy are the key issues
the parties have focused on

The Economy
According to Conservative campaign
strategists, a strong economy is
paramount to Conservative
electoral success.
OBR forecasts from the March 2015
Budget show that growth forecasts
have been revised upwards for 2015
from 2.4 per cent to 2.5 per cent and
in 2016 from 2.2 per cent to 2.3 per
cent before pushing to 2.4 per cent in
2019. Osborne was handed a boost
with the reduction in the price of oil
and the consumer spending power
this developed. He was also handed a
boost with reductions in debt interest
payments, reductions in welfare
payments and the sale of government
bank assets and shares – all of which
will be used to reduce debt as a
percentage of GDP. Public sector debt
is now expected to fall from a peak of
80.4 per cent of GDP this year to 80.2
per cent to 71.6 per cent in 2019-2020,
with the claim that austerity will end a
year earlier than previously anticipated.
Unemployment is of course a
primary economic indicator and is
expected to plateau at around 5.2 -
5.3 per cent for much of the next
parliament. If Conservative campaign
strategists are right in their perception
that voters will back a party with
strong economic credentials, then the
Conservatives should be seen to be
on a strong electoral footing: despite
Osborne’s promise to pay off the
structural deficit by 2015, which now
seems will not be achieved until 2019.
All parties are committed to tackling
the deficit: but the method by which
this is to be done represents some
significant distance between the
two largest parties. This difference
masks a point that by mutual
consent goes largely undiscussed in
front of an electorate tired of public
spending constraints – that the
next parliament is facing a tougher
round of spending consolidation,
no matter who is in Downing Street.
Robert Chote, OBR Chairman,
summarised public spending
projections in the next parliament
under present Conservative plans
as a “rollercoaster” – deeper real cuts
in the second and third years than
we have seen to date, followed by the
sharpest increase in spending for a
decade in the fifth. The SNP, Greens
and Plaid Cymru have been vocal in
opposing austerity – but they can get
away with such rhetoric without the
responsibility of government.
Looking at the polls, the economic
competency ratings of Osborne vs
Balls indicate a clear preference when
it comes to managing the economy
– it’s therefore no coincidence that
the economy does not feature front
and centre of a Labour campaign.Yet
competency ratings are predominantly
based on past and current perceptions
of trust and track record – not enough
consideration is given to the type of
economy that each party has in mind.
This debate matters because it goes
to the heart of discussing the nature
– or more precisely the level – of state
involvement in our economy.
The Labour Party intends to mould the
economic debate by tying the notion
of a strong economy to the idea of a
fairer economy – specifically targeting
low wages and zero hours contracts,
as well as small business start-up relief
and support. The productivity of the
UK workforce has been a theme that
the Shadow Business Secretary, Chuka
Umunna, has tried to push - naturally,
since observers conclude that whilst
other indicators are favourable, UK
productivity has failed to improve
under this government.
We’re all waiting for a much
anticipated rise in interest rates –
something which Andy Haldane -
a member of the Bank’s Monetary
Policy Committee (MPC) – recently
poured cold water on. How the next
government copes with potential
homeowner difficulties from this will
be important for credibility.
Questions over currency valuation
are paramount and the UK’s balance
of payments is concerning to some
economic commentators.Neither party
has so far really addressed this point.The
notion of currency devaluation is slim but
UKexporters are suffering with the high
valuation of Sterling and that makes long
term sustainable growth harder to achieve.
The Cole Review,to be published after
the election,will likely provide significant
content for Labour Party export policy.
Acoalition of the left is one of the
biggest worries to some business
leaders – a weak government,held to
ransom under a confidence and supply
agreement with the SNP could give
investors the jitters.Miliband may change
his interventionist rhetoric should he enter
government – but given all that has come
from him until now he will have to work
very hard to please business – especially if
he’s to maintain the 2.4 per cent increase
in investment growth forecast for 2016.
One of the policies that’s had
the strongest political cut through has
been Osborne’s ‘Northern Power-
house’– which seeks to counter
potential perception of Conservative
austerity in marginal seats. Working
towards a more balanced economy – in
geographical terms – is something that
will likely dominate the next parliament.
Despite relatively strong domestic
growth figures and projections,
inevitable Eurozone unpredictability
looms large over whichever party is
next in government.
not enough consideration is
given to the type of economy
that each party has in mind

Financial Services and the City
It was always going to be a difficult
parliament for financial services
following the upheaval at the end of
the last Labour administration. The
extent of architectural reform has
been significant, and the Chancellor
has been forced to bat for London in
Brussels on more occasions than he
would wish.
At home, we are likely to see renewed
confidence amongst increasingly
assertive regulators and investigators
who have been given license to rid the
industry of perceived bad practice.
The tax practices of financial service
companies will continue to face intense
scrutiny – something on which Labour
and the Conservatives can agree.
Personal finance product development
will bring cheap, exciting and,
hopefully, socially responsible benefits
for the consumer. It’s likely that
support measures that encourage
further competition in banking – in
business and personal capacity – will
be a focus for a new government.
Providers that stay one step ahead of
the regulators should beware though:
as we saw with payday loan caps,
government has the regulatory teeth
to clamp down on what it sees as
irresponsible behaviour.
FinTech is strongly championed by
the Treasury at present – how new
technologies (via Apple, Facebook,
Google and other start ups) become
ingrained in personal finance will be
a growing theme that will be closely
watched by politicians and regulators.
The Payments System Regulator
(PSR) will find its feet in the new
parliament and this could have far
reaching implications as it looks to
achieve the objectives of innovation,
competition and promoting interests
of service users. As well as payment
system operators, the PSR will also
have oversight of payment services
providers using that system (such
as a high street bank), and the
infrastructure providers. The regulator
presently has a remit over some but
not all players in the payments market,
which has caused controversy and is
likely to alter in the coming years.
The implications of the pension
reforms that came into place at the
end of this parliament will start to be
felt by the new government. Potential
hiccups could be very damaging
for the Conservative Party – specifically
in ensuring that consumers are
given appropriate advice before
using their annuity.
As for wholesale markets, the
development of a Capital Markets
Union (CMU) will have the backing of
regulators and politicians as London
could benefit substantially. However,
perceptions of the next government
by Brussels will be important in
ensuring that this advantage can be
taken. Brexit potential will not endear
a UK government to Brussels, but the
ongoing soft lobbying presence of
Commissioner Jonathan Hill will
help. The next government will have
to deal with a significant amount of
implementation of Brussels policy
that’s been in the pipeline for years
– such as PSDII.
A strong financial sector is paramount
for the next government of whatever
colour; despite perceptions of anti-
business rhetoric, Ed Balls does
recognise this. A vibrant sector that
pays its way in line with growth should
be their Party’s motto. If Parliament is
hung again, the space for campaign
driven politicians to target financial
services will be increasingly viable
and government and regulators will
potentially be more interventionist if
Labour is in Downing Street.
As March’s Budget showed through
the increase of the bank levy to 0.21
per cent, coupled with Ed Ball’s
commitment to fund spending
commitments in a similar vein, the
sector is seen as a good and cost-
free target in electoral terms. It will
be important for financial service
providers to emphasise that, if long
term sustainable growth is to be
realised, they cannot be used as a
bottomless cash cow to meet public
spending policy commitments. A
healthy financial sector makes for
healthy public services.

ThE nhs and hEaLThcarE
discourse in health has focused
around two key themes: the
systems through which healthcare
is administered and the use of those
services. questions of funding,
privatisation and the integration of
health and social care nationwide
have been dominant. For the
conservatives, the tactic has been
one of avoidance, as they seek to
avoid shedding votes over the issue.
Labour, on the other hand, see this
as their strongest suit, positioning
themselves as the“guardians”of the
nhs, ardently fighting against both
real and perceived privatisation and
promising to invest an additional £2.5
billion of funds a year in healthcare,
on top of the conservative’s £2 billion
spending plans.
The promise of additional funding is
a pledge that crosses party lines, but
the more pertinent question, and
the one most likely to shape policy
negotiations, is where the funds will
come from. Labour will use the
“mansion” tax as a key source,
supplemented by a clamp down on
corporate tax avoidance and a new
tax on tobacco companies. The Lib
dems will increase taxes on high
earners in their bid to secure an
extra £1 billion a year, while uKip
have promised an extra £3 billion
funded by leaving the Eu and
through middle management cuts.
prime Minister’s questions has
witnessed some of the most brutal
attacks on the subject of healthcare –
with Ed Miliband’s plans to“weaponise”
the nhs a fruitful source of
conservative attack lines. conversely,
david cameron has come under fire
for his perceived failure to “save”aE
units across the country. 2014 was a
pivotal year for secretary of state for
health, Jeremy hunt. The alleged crisis
in aE departments nationwide has
shattered his carefully crafted image
as the champion of patient care, while
the debate around competition and the
need for efficiency in the
provision of care have brought the
issue of privatisation to the fore.
With a third of nhs contracts awarded
to private firms between april 2013
and august 2014, shadow health
secretary, andy Burnham has been
tugging on the electoral heart strings
with his pledge to repeal the health and
social care act and launch a ten-year
plan for health and care.
Built around opposition to competition
for nhs contracts,anti-private sector
rhetoric continues to dominate the
Labour agenda.in reality,there wouldn’t
be wholesale repeal of theact,but
provisions would be put in place to allow
the nhs to return to its default position.
Burnham will be more concerned with
part three of theact,which relates
to competition.This could be heavily
amended and Monitor’s duties to
promote competition repealed.Burnham
may look to repeal section 75 which
allows for regulations to be made on
procurement,choice and competition,
although other provisions may be put
in place to avoid procurement going
completely unregulated.
The question of the nhs in Wales
has been used to full effect by the
conservative party as they try to
undermine Labour’s position as the
champions of the national health
service. The decision taken by
Welsh Government Labour Ministers
to cut health funding, by what the iFs
now estimates to be 8.6 per cent in real
terms, while the conservative led
government in England has protected
nhs funding, has given rise to
allegations of gross mismanagement
by Labour. cameron hasn’t held back,
stating: “Frankly what we have in our
nhs in Wales is a scandal and it’s a
scandal that’s entirely the
responsibility of the Labour party
who are running the Welsh assembly
Government”.
devolution has been front and centre
in the debate around improving quality
of care and more closely integrating
health and social care services to
try and ease pressure on hospital
departments. Greater Manchester
has been granted full control of its
£6 billion health and social care budget
from april 2016, but while shadow
chancellor Ed Balls has stated that
Labour would continue to devolve
more control of nhs budgets to the
regions, andy Burnham has insisted
that a model must be developed that
can be applied nationally to avoid the
disintegration of the nhs into a
so-called “swiss cheese” model. he
has heavily stressed the importance
of whole person commissioning,
single year of care budgets and
accountable providers.
Whatever the outcome in May,
the nhs will continue to dominate
debate and headlines, particularly if
the electoral outcome prevents the
governing party from implementing
policy that is central to their agenda.
devoluTIon has been FronT
and CenTre In The debaTe
around ImprovIng QualITy
oF Care

Home Affairs and Immigration
Immigration
A crucial battleground between
and within political parties -
immigration policy will remain a
top priority for both a Conservative
Party threatened by UKIP and
a Labour Party often at odds
with elements of its blue-collar
constituency.
For David Cameron, the issue will be
closely linked to affirming a tough
stance on access to benefits (on
which the European Commission
has recently taken the UK to court)
and on EU free movement rules.A
February 2014 survey suggested the
majority of the electorate (70 per cent)
think that immigration should be either
reduced or stopped completely (against
20 per cent for keeping at the
current level and 4 per cent for
increased).The relatively high cross-
party grassroots support for tougher
immigration laws has driven all
mainstream party commitments
on the subject. On the right, MPs have
been keen to portray immigration as
the source of societal concerns – e.g.
criminality – and unemployment. On the
contrary, the Labour Party continues
to tie the question of immigration to
low wages and abusive employment
conditions, drawing the limelight back to
stagnating living standards.
As a 2010 commitment which the
Conservative led government has
clearly and squarely failed to deliver
– i.e. cut immigration to the tens of
thousands – the issue has served an
Ed Miliband keen to further entrench
the UKIP/Conservative divide. Bringing
net-migration to below 100,000 a
year – from 242,000 – by removing
access to benefits seems as optimistic
as successfully renegotiating EU
freedom of movement with a strongly
reluctant Germany. However, whilst
Conservative intentions fall short in
terms of realism, Labour commitments
in the area remain vague – at best –
focusing on “stronger” border controls
and “smarter” targets to avoid dis-
incentivising highly skilled immigration.
Similarly Liberal Democrats would
re-introduce exit check at borders
and “ensure” EU migrants deserve
any benefits they receive. Drawing
inspiration from Australia, Nigel
Farage’s Party has to ensure that it
capitalises on Conservative/Labour
voter dissatisfaction on the subject
which remains a fundamental and core
element of UKIP’s appeal. Using a
combination of a point-based selective
immigration system and higher
deportations (intra and extra EU) based
on English language tests, UKIP aims
to reduce net immigration to 50,000 a
year. Against the tide and apparent
popularity of anti-immigration policy,
both the Greens and Plaid Cymru would
facilitate asylum seeking while the SNP
would devolve control of the issue.
Business and University leaders have
voiced concern with over-zealous
restrictions and this will need to be
accounted for by the next government.
Security AND Criminality
Regular headlines covering the
UK’s security services operations –
in particular data collection – and
media attention around young
Britons leaving for Syria have
compelled mainstream parties to
adopt tough stances.
Persistently arising proposals to
encourage commercial ventures to
capture, collect and store personal
communication data are unlikely to
stop in the new parliament, whoever
forms government. Driven by the
civil service’s desire to increase
telecommunication interception
capabilities a new administration
will need to face the issue which
both preceding administrations
have failed to put to bed.
The Labour Party has accused the
coalition government of weakening
Terrorism Prevention and Investigation
Measures (TPIMs) and other
counter-terrorism powers.
The Shadow Home Secretary Yvette
Cooper has focused on walking a fine
line between pragmatic support for
intelligence agencies which are striving
to keep pace with changing and
emerging technology and popular –
and vague - calls for improved oversight
of their activities. On the other side of
the aisle, Home Secretary Theresa May
supported the outlawing of groups
inciting hatred and combating “dis-
ruptive” public speaking by backing
Extremism Disruption Orders (EXDOs).
With little to gain and much to lose
when it comes to tackling anti-terrorism
measure, mainstream parties would
rather make their mark on security
on the streets. Labour’s pledge to
scrap Police and Crime Commissioners
and increase funding for frontline
policing are direct challenges to both
a key coalition policy and to the
Chancellors’ deficit reduction
ambitions. Similarly, its strong
endorsement of the European Arrest
Warrant (EAW) puts the limelight on
deep Conservative divisions over the
issue, enhanced by UKIP’s clear call to
withdraw from EAW.
...mainstream parties would
rather make their mark on
security on the streets

Foreign Policyand the EU
One of the fundamentally divisive
issues of our political era, Britain’s
place – or lack thereof – in the
European Union is set to occupy
a central role in the election.
A Labour Party increasingly at odds
with the business community hopes
that the Party’s commitment to staying
‘in’ will appeal to business leaders.
A Eurosceptic Conservative Party
threatened by UKIP views its
commitment to a referendum as
its salvation. Re-negotiation and
reform are on everyone lips but the
understanding of both words varies
widely between parties and
individual politicians.
Despite the comprehensive review
of the EU’s competencies which the
coalition government has undertaken,
there is very little clarity as to which
criteria would define a successful
‘re-negotiation’. While David
Cameron might find some cautious
endorsement in certain European
capitals and on certain issues,
fundamental EU reform implying a
treaty change is very unlikely to garner
significant support across the
Union. Both Berlin and Paris have no
intention of re-opening the Pandora’s
Box of treaty change.
Tying into most controversial
political issues – sovereignty;
immigration; financial regulation;
security; aid; trade etc. – the European
question is multifaceted. While the
Green Party may resent the ongoing
negotiation of the Transatlantic Trade
and Investment Partnership (TTIP)
between the US and the EU, UKIP
and factions of the Conservative
Party will target the EU’s freedom of
movement rules. Plagued by
grassroots antagonism and issue-
specific opposition, the EU has yet to
find a leading UK political figure that
would defend it as it currently
exists, let alone argue for an ‘ever
closer union’. Even if a Labour
majority enters Parliament post-May,
the momentum of demand for a
referendum may yet have gained too
much political force for Ed Miliband
to avoid one.
The prospect of an in-out referendum
spells a period of uncertainty which
would go well beyond May 2015.While
the SNP,the Liberal Democrats,Labour
Party would fall squarely into a pro‘in’
camp,the Conservative Party would face
potentially disastrous divisions within its
ranks in a prolonged campaign.Should
Brexit become a reality,the ramifications
would be immense.
On wider foreign policy questions,
whether in Brussels, Washington or
New York, an incoming government
will continue to engage with
international partners on
pressing foreign policy issues.
The commitment to maintain
government overseas aid budget at
0.7 per cent of national income, now
enshrined in law by the International
Development Bill, is unlikely to be
questioned unless there is a change of
leadership in one of the main parties.
The continued widening of the UK
trade deficit, which reached £34.8bn
in 2014, will likely see more emphasis
put on the role of UKTI and the
Foreign Office in promoting UK
exports throughout the world. The
strong commitment to this ‘economic
diplomacy’ which has characterised
the coalition government seems
certain to continue regardless
of the election result.
Tensions with Russia over the
Ukrainian crisis and the question of
new and renewed sanctions will
remain front and centre of the new
Prime Minister’s concerns. Similarly,
the struggle against the Islamic State
and attempts to re-create stability
in Iraq and Syria will not fade away.
Labour’s Iraq trauma has left deep
scars within the Party, which will
undermine any bold positioning
on interventionism and may be a
significant weakening factor for Ed
Miliband should he walk into Number
10. Neither the Ukrainian crisis or the
IS situation are likely to come to a
close soon.
The first real test of the new
leadership on the international scene
will be its contribution to negotiate a
successful outcome to the Iran nuclear
talks. Linked to the Iranian questions a
change in Number 10 would certainly
spell a re-calibration of the UK’s
position on the Israeli/Palestine
question. A Labour-led government
would be likely to offer stronger
support to Palestine in the United
Nations, particularly in light of the
recent results of the Israeli elections.
George Osborne recently announced
that the UK is to be one of the founding
members of the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank – despite concerns
expressed by the US over UK
involvement. This issue may have
ruffled a few diplomatic feathers but
it shows a direction of travel in UK
political circles towards closer
cooperation with China.
the European “Question”
is multifaceted

Securityand Defence
Defence of the realm is said to be
the first duty of the government,
yet the UK’s defence spending has
reached a new low. This led critics to
remark that the current government
has overseen the greatest decline
in British influence abroad for
generations.
The fight against the Islamic State and
growing diplomatic tensions between
Russia and the West over the Ukraine
are likely to weigh heavy on party
leaders’ minds. These global conflicts,
which have rightly dominated the
media, have focused the attention of
the electorate on what means are
available to defend the country, and
raised the question about how out-
ward-facing the UK can and should be.
Currently, the defence budget stands
at £36billion with no commitment from
either major party to sustain spending
at two per cent of GDP as prescribed
by NATO. In stark contrast, Nigel
Farage’s UKIP seeks to actually increase
spending to £50billion – despite
protesting that the UK is far too involved
in‘foreign’wars.With the UK’s spending
on third world aid set to be greater than
the spend on defence, the government
is under pressure from backbench
MPs, defence chiefs and even some
Cabinet members to recommit to NATO
defence spending requirements. Recent
analysis by the Institute of Fiscal Studies
(IFS) warned that other government
departments could face cuts of up to
16.3 per cent or £26.6billion rather than
the current forecast of £18.3billion if the
Conservative Party leadership give in.
As a result of huge cuts faced by
the Ministry of Defence, the British
Army’s regular soldier headcount
has plummeted to just 82,000. With
the threat of an extra 40 per cent being
cut, Britain will be left with the smallest
Army since the 1770s. Labour supports
the idea of cutting Army top brass in
favour of junior ranks. UKIP meanwhile
have made creating a Veteran’s
Administration one if its key priorities,
pledging to guarantee ex-servicemen
and women a job in the Police, Prison
Service or Border Force as well as giving
them priority for social housing.
“The British government
appears to have chosen
to retreat into diplomatic
irrelevance”
Douglas Alexander, Labour’s shadow foreign secretary
The advent of the Scottish National
Party having a shot at propping up
a Labour government means the
geographic positioning of the UK’s
nuclear deterrent could be a key
point of discussion post election.
On the left, the SNP, the Greens
and the Lib Dems have all committed
to abolishing Trident, whilst Labour,
UKIP and the Conservatives have all
committed to either renewing or
replacing it. SNP Leader, Nicola
Sturgeon has however said that
a decision to abolish Trident is a
condition to doing a deal with Labour.
In addition to the consideration of
security, the UK defence manufacturing
industry is also a significant economic
contributor. It is worth an estimated
£35bn, accounting for nearly 10
per cent of UK manufacturing and
employing over 300,000 people.
According to the CBI, there are “more
SMEs operating in the UK’s defence
manufacturing sector than France,
Italy, Germany, and Spain combined”,
and Britain is currently the world’s
second largest defence exporter.

Scotland and Devolution
While Britain continues to reconsider
its relationship with the European
Union, the union of nations and how
powers are devolved continues to be
a subject of contention. The outcome
of the Scottish referendum has once
again brought the question of how
powers should be distributed
across the Union to the fore.
Since the last election, devolution
in the UK has expanded rapidly -
developing from devolution of
powers to countries within the Union,
to the transfer of powers to cities.
Narrowly avoiding the collapse of the
Union left Westminster and its leaders
‘vowing’ to grant Scotland additional
powers in a number of policy areas,
including social security and consumer
affairs. The findings of the Smith
Commission, set up in response to
the last minute appeal by UK party
leaders to save the Union, may have
contributed to the referendum result.
This has not stopped the march of the
SNP though, and the concern of many
in Westminster is that the ratchet
progression of Scottish nationalism
will continue. A lot will depend on how
the Scottish Labour Party fares under
the leadership of Jim Murphy. It
appears to be too late for significant
electoral ground to be pulled back from
the SNP in time for May– a more
concrete bellwether of Scottish
Labour’s post referendum position will
be the Holyrood election in May 2016.
In preventing the constitutional crisis
which would have ensued,English
MPs too looked to alter their own
rights with efforts to address the‘West
Lothian Question’through proposals
for‘English votes for English laws’
(EVEL).Amechanism by which English
MPs could be given an exclusive role in
deciding laws that affect England only
is unsurprisingly proving contentious.
The government has put forward its
proposals,but Labour is cautious –
perhaps because the potential for it
to gain a House of Commons majority
would be seriously challenged under
such a scheme.
Wales too have extended their powers
through the St David’s Day Agreement.
The new proposals, which aimed to
bring Wales level with Scotland, allow
the National Assembly to lower the
voting age to 16 for Assembly elections,
have control over hydraulic fracturing,
ports and bus regulation. Despite this,
Wales’First Minister Carwyn Jones
criticised the government for not afford-
ing Wales the same respect as Scotland,
calling it“third rate devolution”.
In 2014,the British and Irish
Governments also reached a
landmark agreement on the future
of Northern Ireland.‘The Stormont
HouseAgreement’,heralded as“very
significant”and“remarkable”is intended
to bind the parties and communities
closer together on resolving past issues,
coming to a settlement on welfare
reform,and for the Executive,passing a
balanced budget.TheAgreement also
helped to resolve several other ongoing
political contentions including the
devolution of corporation tax to Northern
Ireland,while the British Government
agreed to provide a financial package of
an additional £2bn from 2014 to 2020.
With the possibility that Northern Irish
parties could become kingmakers in
May,further concessions for Northern
Ireland may be on the agenda for the
next parliament.
Following suit, large cities across the
UK have been granted greater
powers, in a decentralisation trend
that looks set to continue. The
creation of the Chancellor’s ‘Northern
Powerhouse’ has led to an agreement
where Manchester will elect a Mayor
with extensive localised powers over
issues including housing, transport
and policing. Further announcements
devolving control of money for skills,
training and the NHS have been
made – most significantly, Greater
Manchester’s local government will
have control of more than a quarter
of public money spent in its area.
Other cities making these ‘city deals’ to
date include Cardiff, Glasgow, Aberdeen
and the West Yorkshire Combined
Authority. The trend is set to continue in
the new parliament.
“Wales is still not being treated with the
same respect as Scotland, this continuing
imbalanced approach is damaging to the UK.”
Carwyn Jones, First Minister of Wales

Energyand Climate Change
Notwithstanding the unusual
harmony between the main party
leaders pledging action on climate
change, uncertainty is plaguing the
industry and investors. The party
leaders have committed to working
across party lines to seek a “fair,
strong, legally binding, global climate
deal which limits temperature rises
to below two degrees centigrade”.
However, whilst they share the
same objective, they differ on their
respective approaches in keeping
the lights on and the UK’s energy
security in the face of rising tensions
between Russia and the West.
In a bid to reduce the UK’s carbon
footprint and pave the way to a
low-carbon future, both the Labour
Party, Conservatives and Liberal
Democrats seek a ‘broad energy mix’;
a combination of nuclear, renewables,
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
and potentially domestic shale gas -
though opinion varies of how much
of each technology.
David Cameron’s Conservatives have
been widely criticised for abandoning
their ambitions to be the ‘greenest
government ever’, and one would
be hard pressed to find green finger
marks on their energy policy. Among
the Conservatives, there is greater
appetite to develop a strong nuclear
industry at the expense of Britain’s
largest, cheapest source of renewable
energy, onshore wind turbines,
having committed to dramatically
cutting subsidies in the area and
giving local communities the power
to block all new developments. Hinkley
Point, the first nuclear power station
being built in Britain in a generation, is
set to be the most expensive nuclear
reactor in the world producing some of
the UK’s most expensive electricity at
roughly twice the price that Finland will
pay with a similar, but cheaper reactor.
Labour, whilst cautious over nuclear
power have offered their support for
the project.
In the same stead, the Conservatives
have expressed enthusiasm for the
controversial practice of hydraulic
fracturing or “fracking”, and Labour
whilst supportive, are taking a more
cautious approach. Simultaneously,
whilst the parties have committed
to a low carbon future their actions
might be thought to tell a different
story. Against mounting pressure,
in Osborne’s March 2015 Budget he
provided £1.3bn worth of tax breaks
to help save and secure the future of a
struggling North Sea oil industry. In a
more generous than expected support
package for the North Sea, the Office
for Budget Responsibility assessed
that these combined tax cuts will boost
production by 15 per cent by the end of
the decade and drive £4billion of
new investment over the next five
years. The next government may well
be kept busy in fending off threats
from energy companies to sell their
North Sea assets – something the
SNP will have a particular interest in.
There was little money earmarked
for renewables in the March Budget
but, at the insistence of his coalition
partners, the Chancellor announced
the commencement of formal
subsidy negotiations for the ambitious
£1bn Tidal Lagoon project.
The Labour Party is generally more
positive towards renewables than the
Conservative Party, however it is yet
to set out what that preference might
mean in practice. Labour seem to be
focused on energy prices, but whilst
bringing down energy prices is certainly
a vote winner with an electorate, a
modern energy and climate change
policy is about finding a balance
between prices, climate change and
energy security.
In his ‘cost of living crisis’ targeting of
the energy companies Miliband plans to
pass emergency legislation forbidding
energy firms from increasing domestic
prices until 2017 and cut energy bills
by up to 10 per cent next winter if
elected. As part of Labour’s‘One Nation’
policies, the Party will seek to intervene
in the energy market by giving the
independent energy regulator Ofgem
price-cutting powers, if it is shown that
individual firms are not passing on cuts
derived from falling wholesale prices.
Labour has also confusingly pledged to
scrap Ofgem and replace it with with a
tough new energy regulator.
Both major parties have relegated
energy issues to (at least) the second
rank in this election, despite the fact
that 1970s style power rationing is a
real possibility in coming winters.
In June 2014, National Grid began
recruiting businesses to switch off
at times of peak demand in order to
keep household’s lights on. Whilst
these were measures of last resort,
further winter blackouts haven’t
been ruled out, with ‘significant
new interventions’ needed.
“Onshore wind is part of a broad mix, but
it’s a key part. And it’s the cheapest, large
scale, at the moment.”
Ed Davey, Liberal Democrat Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

Transport
The provision of transport across
the UK remains central to a number
of cross party election themes –
namely securing Britain’s economic
prosperity, rebalancing growth
across the country and minimising
the cost of living.
In a clear play to the business
community Miliband has defined
the need to implement a system of
infrastructure planning to ensure the
UK is better equipped to meet its long
term needs in power generation,
communications and transport.
As a key part of this the Party has
announced plans to establish a
National Infrastructure Commission,
in line with the Armitt Review.
The Infrastructure Act came into force
in February of this year and will allow
for the creation of Highways England,
which the coalition has estimated
could save the taxpayer at least £2.6
billion over the next ten years.
Policies designed to appeal to the
individual voter have been central
to campaigning efforts, with Labour
promising an annual cap on rail fare
increases and George Osborne’s
commitment to extend the freeze on
fuel duty, making it the longest duty
freeze for 20 years. The Lib Dems have
suggested replacing Air Passenger
Duty with a ‘per plane’ duty and the
incoming government will be under
pressure to review all current air duties.
UKIP has pledged its opposition to tolls
on public roads while insisting speed
cameras are used as a deterrent and
not as a source of revenue.
Transport provision featured
heavily in the Chancellor’s final Budget
of this parliament which emphasised
the need to upgrade transport links in
the north of the country and attempted
to close the gap in planned infrastruc-
ture investment between north and
south, almost £2,000 per person.
The High Speed railway between
London and Birmingham, HS2,
has been one of the most criticised
schemes of this parliament, but
Labour has given its backing to its
completion (although Miliband has
stated that his party would not sign
off on a “blank cheque”). The project
has highlighted the difficulties of large
scale infrastructure development in the
UK and the problems that government
faces in implementing such significant
infrastructure programmes.
The need to increase airport capacity
remains one of the most contentious
issues in the debate around transport
and infrastructure and has continued
to be a political sticking point.
The decision to release the results of
the Davies Commission has removed
the issue from the immediate election
agenda, but the new administration
will be under pressure from business
leaders to make a swift decision and
steer the necessary legislation
through parliament.
Both Cameron and Miliband have
made public u-turns on their
opposition to a third runway at
Heathrow, while Nick Clegg made a
failed bid to convince his Party of the
need for expansion. In the event of
coalition talks the Liberal Democrats
may be forced to reconsider their
position in the face of party
membership opposition, a move which
could serve as a stark reminder of
the tuition fee scandal of 2010.
Policies designed to appeal to the
individual voter have been central
to campaigning efforts

Education
There has been an entire overhaul of
the education system in the UK since
the coalition formed in 2010. From
the accelerated expansion of the
academies and free schools
programmes, to the tripling of
tuition fees for higher education,
this government has left its mark.
Regardless of who wins the election,
the education system will be subject
to continued change over the
coming years as a result of the
coalition’s work.
Disparaging of the coalition’s
approach to higher education policy,
particularly on the matter of fees,
Ed Miliband has pledged to cut tuition
fees to £6,000 – a policy many in the
tertiary education sector have
opposed. But this remains the only
costed policy and a more tangible one
than the promised Liberal Democrat
review of higher education financing
or the potential for further rises
from the Conservatives.
David Cameron set his sights on
schools, protecting the budget from
reception to GCSEs in cash terms,
though pre-school budgets and
post-sixteen education would not
see the same protection. The Liberal
Democrats offer the same protection,
but from “cradle-to-college”. The
Conservatives pledge to continue
with their academies programme,
converting a further 3,500 schools
into academies exempt from local
authority control. Schools that do not
perform well on literacy and numeracy
standards would be forced to convert
to academies too. This compounds
a promise to drive up standards by
supporting parents and communities
to establish 500 more free schools.
Criticised as “Kafkaesque” by Labour,
the reforms led by former Education
Secretary Michael Gove will be
continued by his successor, Nicky
Morgan, who is “undimmed” in
her commitment to progress the
establishment of free schools.
UKIP have set out policies to increase
the number of grammar schools,
while some Conservatives are
hinting that the “foot is hovering over
the pedal” on the same commitment,
which the Party champions for
reflecting excellence and achievement.
Capitalising on the disquiet arising
from teaching unions, Labour
promises to reverse the academies
and free schools programmes,
returning oversight to local authorities
and axing the Department for
Education from directly managing
schools. Labour also promises to
radically transform vocational
education by offering increasing
numbers of apprenticeships and
reintroducing the Qualified Teacher
Status (QTS), the standard that was
unpopularly removed by Michael Gove.
The Liberal Democrats share in this
commitment to reintroduce the QTS, a
qualification they believe will drive up
standards across schools.
The Cabinet reshuffle last year
which saw Nicky Morgan take over
as Education Secretary was a move
by the government to reconnect with
the teaching community, who generally
felt that Gove’s reforms were extreme.
Morgan promises to improve the
working conditions for teachers and
work to promote academic rigour
and strength through a focused
national curriculum.
The National Curriculum is important
for the Conservatives, who would
continue to focus on the core subjects,
maths and science, and would continue
to develop initiatives to increase the
number of children choosing career
routes in these areas. The Liberal
Democrats are keen to ensure the
core curriculum is set by independent
experts and mental and sexual
health education is provided in
state schools, academies and free
schools, a cornerstone of their
election priorities. The pupil
premium would continue under a
Liberal Democrat government, offering
more money for disadvantaged children
and the implementation of the free
school meals would continue. Labour
proposes to double Sure Start childcare
places and cut class sizes.

Local Government and Housing
Over the past six months the UK
government has led major
developments in devolution in the
United Kingdom with city devolution
and regional growth emerging as
mainstream political themes in the
wake of the Scottish referendum.
Despite much talk of localism, the
coalition has not proven particularly
friendly to local authorities, in part
because of an inherent mistrust based
on the misdeeds of a few authorities
and ancient difficulties which have
coloured The Secretary of State for
Communities and Local Government
Eric Pickles’ views. Local government
has also taken a hit in the reduction
of public spending in this parliament.
However, Manchester will elect a new
Mayor with extensive localised
powers over issues including housing,
transport and policing in 2017, and it’s
likely the same will follow in Leeds,
Liverpool and Birmingham. This only
adds to the existing pressures from
local authorities for more power and
control over their finances.
In the devolution debate Labour
appears to be prepared to pass over
more powers and money than the
Conservatives. Both parties will
continue to cut local government
spending but it is believed that the
Labour Party will be less severe.
The biggest difference between Labour
and the Conservatives is on taxation.
In London, Boris Johnson’s finance
commission argued for devolution
of more of London’s tax take to the
Mayor, specifically property taxes
and possibly a sales tax. Labour
appear more open to this idea than the
Conservatives who are very resistant to
passing over any tax take. One thing the
Conservatives have pledged is
a review of the business rate
system, following on from changes
put in place by Eric Pickles earlier
this parliament.
There are some outcomes which
seem inevitable whatever the General
Election result. On public service
reform, the main parties appear to
agree on public sector reform allowing
more joined up working between
bodies receiving government support,
particularly around areas such as
integrating health and adult social
care, skills and employment, housing
revenue account borrowing, families
with complex needs and probation.
With regard to planning, a continuation
of one size fits all country wide policies
are expected. Finally, it is clear that
both major parties believe there are
too many local authorities, particularly
in rural areas where an area can be
covered by county, district and
parish councils.
One area of policy that’s always felt
at a local level is housing. Various
pledges have been made across the
political spectrum with regard to house
building. Under the Conservatives first
time buyers in England under the age
of 40 would be able to buy a house at
20 per cent below the market rate, with
100,000 starter homes to be built for
them. There’s also potential of a revival
of ‘Right to Buy’. Labour have
proposed to build 200,000 houses a
year by 2020, including new towns and
garden cities, while giving greater
powers for councils to reduce the
number of empty homes.
For renters they will cap rent
increases and scrap letting fees to
estate agents. The Liberal Democrats
will build 300,000 a year, with up to five
new garden cities in Cambridgeshire,
Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire
and Oxfordshire.
SNP and Plaid Cymru both oppose
the’bedroom tax’ or ‘spare room
subsidy’ while UKIP’s policies include
the establishment of a UK Brownfield
Agency to incentivise the building of
affordable homes on brownfield sites by
handing out grants, tax breaks and low
interest loans.
The Greens will abolish the‘Right to
Buy’,build 500,000 social rented
homes by 2020,paid for by scrapping the
buy-to-let mortgage interest tax
allowance and give councils the power to
borrow money to build houses or
buy them on the open market.They also
propose a rent cap to prevent exploitation
by private landlords and will set up a living
commission to work out how to bring
rents back in line with incomes.
There are some outcomes which
seem inevitable whatever the
General Election result

General Election Briefing 2015 by FTI Consulting

General Election Briefing 2015 by FTI Consulting

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à General Election Briefing 2015 by FTI Consulting

Similaire à General Election Briefing 2015 by FTI Consulting (19)

General Election Briefing 2015 by FTI Consulting