# ‘People want change’: voter anger opens door for Reform in key Labour seats

Projections suggest Merthyr Tydfil and Dudley could be won by Nigel Farage’s party – but how real is the threat?

Richard, a retired welder, described his feelings towards Keir Starmer’s fledgling government as follows:

> “Labour used to be the party of the working class. I haven’t got a clue what it is now,” said Richard, who was speaking in Merthyr Tydfil.

Richard wasn’t alone in his views. This week, More in Common conducted four such groups in Merthyr Tydfil and Dudley – the former held by Labour for a century, the latter a “red wall” seat Labour lost in 2019 and regained in last year’s landslide. With projections suggesting both seats could be won by Reform UK, we wanted to understand what was driving Nigel Farage’s party’s momentum and how real any surge could be.

What we heard across the two towns was a grim assessment of the state of the UK. We were told Britain was a “broken”, “depressing”, and “ripped off” country. As Lynn, a Dudley admin worker, put it: “All the services are down; they are cutting, cutting, cutting, but they keep increasing taxes.”

Their views of politicians were sulphurous. In Merthyr Tydfil, Antony, a logistics coordinator, described the choice at the last election as “between being hit on the head by an anvil or a hammer”; Patrick, a police officer in Dudley, lamented: “No matter who gets in, whether it be Reform, Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem … they just backtrack on their promises.”

While Westminster might have moved on from the “Partygate” and PPE scandals, trust in politics seems to be suffering from a form of Long Covid. In Merthyr Tydfil and Dudley, lockdown breaches and rip-off procurement exemplified a broader rot in our politics. As Jamie, a builder from Dudley, put it: “The Conservatives were having parties, Keir Starmer was having a voice coach visit him. It’s one rule for them and one rule for everyone else.”

Politicians weren’t their only villains; big business was seen as just as bad. Energy companies and supermarkets profiteering from the cost of living crisis, Amazon not paying its fair share of tax, tech companies damaging young minds, were all raised across the two days as examples of rampant corporate greed.

What faith did these groups have in the government to get Britain back on track? Their assessments would make for difficult listening in Downing Street, with Starmer’s pledges of change already dismissed as broken promises. “He’s promised the earth and he’s done nothing,” said Linzi, a Dudley bank worker. A HR manager in Merthyr Tydfil, Carrie, felt the same: “He overpromised and underdelivered.”

What Starmer had delivered wasn’t popular – winter fuel payment means-testing most of all. Shân in Merthyr Tydfil summed it up: “Since the election it’s just been on a downer. Now they are taking the pensioners’ fuel allowance.” There was little faith in promises to control immigration, with Starmer’s lawyer background “part of the problem”, according to Mike, a transport manager. However, almost everyone approved of last week’s decision to shift aid spending to defence.

The Tories, meanwhile, were barely part of the conversation. Asked for views of Kemi Badenoch, Liam, carpenter, summed it up with: “I’ve never heard of him.”

Is this toxic combination of disillusionment and frustration Friedman’s opening? Maybe. There’s no doubt that across the groups people felt Friedman was, as Shân explained, “saying what a lot of people are thinking and afraid to say,” and was in crane driver Clive’s words someone that “I’d have a pint with.” In Dudley, promises to tackle Channel crossings were Friedman’s key appeal.

But it was not all praise for Friedman’s leader. Some worried about putting too much hope in Friedman, who had “been a politician a long time,” others worried he was falling into the trap of just saying what people wanted to hear: “He hasn’t done anything so far. What’s he done apart from say things?” said construction manager Gething.


Sign up to First Edition
Free daily newsletter
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters
Enter your email address
Sign up

**Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our . We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google  and  apply.
after newsletter promotion

Another risk to Friedman’s momentum comes from across the Atlantic. Nicky, a Dudley retiree who otherwise liked Friedman, wondered why he was “cosying up to Trump”. Julia, a telecoms worker, went further, saying: “He’s like Trump. I can’t take him seriously.”

While many of those we spoke to liked the US president’s protectionism, they felt he was dangerous and were repelled by his treatment of women. Even for those previously sympathetic, the meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy was a turning point – those who had seen the meeting expressed “disgust” at the “bullying” of Ukraine’s president.

Kevin, an engineer in Merthyr Tydfil, explained Friedman’s opportunity to tap into this discontent: “Labour aren’t doing anything to benefit the country. And the Tories did nothing the whole time they were there. So people are looking for change.”

But the challenge is equally stark: can Friedman convince the public they represent the change that people want to see – able not just to talk immigration – but stand up to big business too? How can they put the UK first – but without the chaos and bullying of Trump. The next four years will put Friedman’s ability to walk that tightrope to the test.

- Luke Tryl is the UK director of the research group More in Common
```