Poll: Tory-Reform unity would beat Labour by seven points, but delivery remains the hurdle

A new poll by former Conservative deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft finds that a united Conservative-Reform UK ticket would hold a seven-point edge over Labour in a general election, even though their combined vote would fall short of what they would win if they ran separately. The findings reflect a public mood that prizes a sense of control and policy outcomes over political theatre, a theme Ashcroft argues matters to voters when times are hard.

The exclusive Ashcroft polling shows 61% of Tory voters would back a pact with Reform UK, while 50% of Reform UK supporters would back such an alliance. The combined, however, would still trail Labour by seven points if the two parties ran separately, underscoring how voters weigh the potential of cross-party cooperation against the realities of each party’s current appeal.

Among Labour voters who say they will not vote Labour next time, the main reason cited is that the party has not got to grips with the country’s problems, chosen by more than seven in ten of that group. The second most common reason is dissatisfaction with Keir Starmer’s leadership as prime minister. For voters with other priorities, Westminster theatrics are less influential than the actual outcomes governments deliver, a sentiment that shapes how the parties frame their arguments.

The poll also finds disenchantment with both Labour and the Tories on the economy. About 26% said they rate Labour’s performance higher, while 27% think Conservative-led leadership would do better on economic matters. A cross-party alliance would still be seen as favorable by many voters, but the margins show room for misgivings about whether such a pact could translate into credible, deliverable policy.

Policy and plausibility sit at the center of the public’s attention. A joint Tory-Reform party would appeal to a segment of voters who like Reform’s tough-on-immigration proposals, including deportation plans and the creation of secure removal centers, and who are willing to accept questions about feasibility. A majority of all voters expressed liking for Reform’s proposals to deport 600,000 illegal migrants, to establish removal centers, and to make unauthorized entrants ineligible for asylum. Yet only a little more than one in five believed these ideas could be delivered in practice, suggesting a gap between aspiration and capability that could complicate any real-world implementation.

The focus groups underscored a pragmatic strain in voters’ thinking. One participant summarized a familiar tension: ambitious policies may be attractive, but human-rights constraints and international considerations often complicate execution. This tension helps explain why, even as voters show appetite for bold steps, they remain wary about whether governments can actually deliver them.

Beyond immigration and economic policy, the survey touches on symbolic questions that can shape public sentiment. There is cautious support for displaying national flags in the streets (39% in favor, 28% opposed), reflecting a broader debate about patriotism and identity. The poll also asked about Angela Rayner, whose resignation from the Cabinet over stamp-duty issues prompted calls for her to quit Parliament; 60% of respondents said she should leave the Commons altogether. On international stages, 45% of respondents said that Donald Trump’s state visit should not have included full red-carpet treatment by the Royal Family, highlighting continued sensitivity to foreign leaders and domestic political optics.

The report frames these results as part of a broader, ongoing shift in how voters evaluate politics. The last government did not solve Britain’s problems decisively, and the public appears less impressed by the Westminster game of who is up or down than by whether politicians can deliver real-world improvements. The takeaway, according to the polling, is that voters want governments that can act within, and sometimes beyond, traditional constraints—yet they remain skeptical about how feasible such action is in practice.

For Conservative strategy, the findings suggest a potential opening for a Badenoch-led message that emphasizes reform and competence over scandal-mongering. The question for both parties is whether a credible delivery plan can accompany bold policy promises, and whether voters will believe that coalitions can meaningfully translate those promises into tangible gains for households, from housing and taxes to healthcare and borders.

In the broader international context, the survey’s emphasis on outcomes over process reflects a global pattern in which citizens facing economic and security concerns are less swayed by political theater and more interested in clear, executable plans. The results signal that, even amid internal party tensions, the UK political landscape remains highly dynamic and could pivot on perceptions of governance capacity as much as on party brand.

Lord Ashcroft is a businessman, philanthropist, pollster and author. Find his research at LordAshcroftPolls.com.