Press Story

Widespread public support for stronger government interventions to improve health – challenging 'nanny state' myth and showing it could be a vote-winner, especially in key battleground seats
Majorities back interventions such as junk food advert bans and holding landlords to account for poor housing conditions that undermine tenants’ health
Strong appetite for action to hold corporations to account, with more placing responsibility for nation’s health on food industry than on NHS

A new report from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) and Public First challenges the idea that the British public is resistant to government action on public health. It reveals instead a strong appetite for intervention, particularly in communities that could decide the next general election.

The research reveals how voters really feel about public health, and how thoughtful, decisive action could deliver not only a healthier nation, but a winning strategy at the ballot box. Far from fearing state overreach, the public wants the government to step up – both with stricter regulation and increased support for families and children.

The research found especially strong support for government action in four critical areas:

Housing standards: 80 per cent support tougher rules for landlords to ensure healthier living conditions.
Workplace health: 71 per cent believe employers should be held accountable for staff wellbeing.
Food and drink regulation: 65 per cent back banning junk food advertising in public spaces.
Children and schools: 70 per cent want to see more investment in early childhood programmes like Sure Start and 67 per cent support free school meals for all state school pupils.

Polling and focus group data reveal that voters across political divides see health as a fairness issue – not just a matter of personal responsibility, but of the environments shaping people’s everyday choices. Notably, the public holds the food and drinks industry more accountable for the nation’s health than even the NHS: 84 per cent of adults believe the industry bears a “great” or “fair amount” of responsibility for public health, compared with 79 per cent who say the same of the NHS.

The data also shows a strong perceived link between health and the economy. Poor mental and physical health were the top public explanations for the UK’s slow productivity growth, ahead of Brexit, poor infrastructure or lack of investment. 83 per cent agreed that healthy people are more productive, and 66 per cent said investing in health grows the economy.

The report argues that health is a top-tier electoral issue, with voters ranking it just behind the cost of living as one of the most pressing challenges facing the country. Crucially, this interest is not just confined to traditional Labour voters – support for state action is strong in key marginal areas and among those whose support parties will need to win in 2029.

Sebastian Rees, principal research fellow and head of health at IPPR, said:

“These findings dismantle the long-held assumption that bold health policy is politically risky. In reality, voters across the political spectrum see improving public health as a top priority and want the government to do more to allow them to live healthier lives.

“The vast majority of people don’t see getting tough on the causes of illness as ‘nanny-statism’, but as a downpayment on the nation’s future health and wealth. Taking on powerful interests who undermine health – rogue landlords, toxic employers, and junk food advertisers – is seen as both fair and necessary to this cause.”

ENDS

Amy Gandon, the report’s author, and Sebastian Rees, head of health at IPPR, are available for interview

CONTACT

David Wastell, Director of News and Communications: 07921 403651 d.wastell@ippr.org

Rosie Okumbe, Digital and Media Officer: 07825 185421 r.okumbe@ippr.org

NOTES TO EDITORS

The IPPR and Public First paper, The health mandate: the voters’ verdict on government intervention by Amy Gandon and Yasmeen Sebbana, will be published at 0001 on Thursday April 24.
It will be available for download at https://www.ippr.org/articles/the-health-mandate
Methodology and details of polling: to understand how voters feel about public health interventions and their political implications, Public First conducted a nationally representative poll of 2,010 UK adults alongside four in-depth focus groups in key electoral battlegrounds. Polling took place 23rd to 28th January 2025. Focus groups targeted two distinct voter groups in constituencies that will be pivotal to any party’s success at the next general election:
- Conservative to Labour switchers in marginal seats: held in two Conservative-Labour marginals (Cities of London and Westminster and Redditch), these groups were formed of people who voted Conservative in 2019 but backed Labour in 2024.
- Labour voters now open to Reform: Conducted in two Labour-held seats where Reform came second (Bolton South and Walkden and Derby South), these groups were formed of people who voted Labour in 2024 but are now considering voting Reform.
Alongside these qualitative insights, the nationally representative 2,010 sample poll tested public attitudes at scale, quantifying the level of support for government intervention, the factors that drive or reduce backing for health policies and the electoral salience of public health as an issue. Full data tables are available at: https://www.publicfirst.co.uk/new-polling-for-the-institute-for-public-policy-research.html
Public First is a global strategic consultancy that helps organisations better understand public opinion, analyse economic trends, and craft new policy proposals. It is a member of the British Polling Council and a company partner of the Market Research Society, and adheres to their rules and guidelines.
IPPR (the Institute for Public Policy Research) is an independent charity working towards a fairer, greener, and more prosperous society. We are researchers, communicators, and policy experts creating tangible progressive change, and turning bold ideas into common sense realities. Working across the UK, IPPR, IPPR North, and IPPR Scotland are deeply connected to the people of our nations and regions, and the issues our communities face. We have helped shape national conversations and progressive policy change for more than 30 years. From making the early case for the minimum wage and tackling regional inequality, to proposing a windfall tax on energy companies, IPPR’s research and policy work has put forward practical solutions for the crises facing society. www.ippr.org