Free from poverty on a liveable planet: Wellbeing and the party manifestos 

MP inboxes bulge with correspondence from people in need; into their surgeries will flow constituents in difficulty; and people and organisations will outline their trials and tribulations during local visits and events.

And that’s before they’ve read a briefing paper, switched on the radio, participated in an inquiry or debate, or spoken to local members.

So, when political parties devise their manifestos, you would expect that the intelligence gathered by elected members in their day-today work results in documents that reflect the state of the nation and the collective wellbeing of citizens.

Do they? And what’s missing?

The cost of living 

Last week Rachel Reeves tweeted: “I hear up and down the country that families are still struggling with household bills and the weekly food shop.”

Image taken by documentary photographer, activist and filmmaker, Kirsty Mackay.

As Carnegie UK has pointed out, the cost of living emergency hasn’t gone away. Our research also highlighted that the sacrifices that people have been making over the last couple of years are likely to have a long-term impact on their life prospects.

The cost of living has regularly topped the polls as the top issue for voters this General Election. And that filters through to manifestos with the Labour party pledging action on energy prices and quality of work, the SNP and Lib Dems arguing for a range of welfare reforms, and the Conservatives arguing that economic growth and tax cuts will relieve pressures on households.

But for an issue that’s dominated the headlines for years, it hasn’t found top billing in either the various manifesto documents or the public debate, at least directly.

Does that reflect the fact that the largest parties don’t feel like they can squarely address this huge problem? Or do they feel that, now inflation is falling, the problem is under control?

Either way, a huge challenge for the next UK Government when faced with emergencies like spiralling prices will be developing reactive policies which protect the most vulnerable. Even more importantly, Ministers and officials will need to work with partners and communities to try and systematically boost the resilience of the most vulnerable in society.

Democracy in crisis

Carnegie UK’s Life in the UK Index revealed that our faith in politics and democracy is in crisis.

The research found that almost three quarters (73%) of people in the UK feel that they cannot influence decisions that affect the UK as a whole. Further, more than half of people disagree that they can influence local decision-making and a similar proportion have a low level of trust in the UK Government.

While the SNP, Lib Dems, Conservatives and Labour party all pledge political or constitutional reforms in one form or another, the proposals on offer rarely centre directly on building back trust.

There might be merits to proportional representation, further devolution to the Scottish Parliament, empowered metro mayors or changes to the House of Lords. But you could argue – as we have in our engaging democracy programme – that unless we create more opportunities for people to engage with decision-making beyond the ballot box then we’re likely to continue to see low-levels of democratic wellbeing.

While Sue Gray talked up citizens’ assemblies earlier this year, we haven’t seen citizen engagement with decision-making as a major feature of this election campaign.

However, at Carnegie UK we would argue that it is close to impossible for any administration wresting with the biggest challenges of our time like tackling climate change or addressing poverty to work alone.

A focus on delivery requires cross-departmental and public sector working. But as outlined in Carnegie UK’s Enabling State work, we need a systemic change in approach which also empowers individuals and communities.

A switch to a more participative governmental model should deliver on two fronts:

• increased levels of trust in government and institutions
• public policy and practice that’s better shaped and informed by the people affected by it and, as a result, has a better chance of success.

Mission to a liveable planet free from poverty 

In the section of their manifesto looking at international development, Labour details their proposed mission “to create a world free from poverty on a liveable planet” echoing the new mission statement of the World Bank.

With temperatures rising and one if five people in the UK living in poverty, this mission wouldn’t have been out of place at the centre of their domestic policy.

Instead,[1] these might look like your classic pledge card commitments for a party looking to curry votes. That’s because – to a certain extent – they are.

But we also see the party adopting the language of missions-based public policy. In a recent paper reflecting the work of Prof. Mariana Mazzucato, [2] the party said:

“A mission-driven government works relentlessly towards long-term national goals that are measurable. Missions ensure the government is focused on outcomes that matter to citizens and society, not on short-term political gain or on vested interests.”

Later, Carnegie UK will explore the links between wellbeing and missions-based public policy. But with an emphasis on prevention and a focus on the ends government is seeking, rather than the means, there’s clear compatibility.

Measuring what matters 

Across the party manifestos, we see commitments to try to deliver a prosperous economy. We also see a range of political and constitutional reforms that one could argue are designed to restore trust.

And in Labour’s agenda, we see proposals to radically change how the UK government operates.

However what’s not spelled out in any of the parties’ manifestos is that improved wellbeing should be the ultimate goal all of our public policy.

This week, I noted that the Australian Government is strengthening their first national wellbeing framework to “to support policy development and better align our economic and social goals in communities right across the country.”

Unfortunately, there simply doesn’t seem to be the same appetite for such a systematic approach from the parties who could form the next UK Government.

This risks a piecemeal approach to UK policymaking. As our CEO said in a letter to The Guardian this week: “Ministers need to complement GDP data with a broad basket of figures about the reality of our lives and our impact on the environment.

“Only when [these] datasets are used to underpin policymaking will governments have any hope of properly tackling the biggest problems of our time.”

[1] Labour Party Manifesto: Change Labour Party Manifesto 2024

[2] Mission Critical 1 – Statecraft for the 21^st Century – https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/sites/bartlett_public_purpose/files/mission_critical_-_statecraft_for_the_21st_century.pdf