Framing a Minimum Income Guarantee

Qualitative research findings

Perceptions and understanding of poverty

Experience of financial insecurity

Almost all respondents had personal experience of financial insecurity, either currently or in the past, or through people they knew such as family/friends or through experience at work (e.g. in education or policing). Personal experiences tended to be linked to job losses, family breakdown, being unable to work due to health issues/disability or caring responsibilities, issues with debt, and (more recently) rising living costs. Most people had some experience of ‘counting the pennies’ and some were currently struggling:

“The thing is not being able to save, just living from hand to mouth really. Everything is expensive. And food, bills going high. Just not being sure what tomorrow will bring really.” Female, 25-44, DE

What is poverty

When asked what the word poverty meant to them, almost all respondents focused on descriptions of people who were ‘struggling to make ends meet’, not having enough money to live on or to cover ‘the basics’ – i.e. food, heating, clothing and shelter. Respondents commonly mentioned people struggling to pay bills and having to use food banks in order to feed themselves and their families.

There was also a recognition that poverty could affect those in work, not just those who were unemployed or unable to work – the key problem was said to be people not earning enough to meet their basic needs. Some also mentioned not having any kind of safety net or anything to fall back on ‘when things go wrong’.

Some respondents raised wider issues of not being able to participate fully in society, e.g. through lack of access to transport, WiFi/mobile phones, not being able to take part in social activities (e.g. children not being able to go on school outings/activities etc.), or to afford treats. A couple of respondents focused on people being made homeless, but for the majority, poverty meant something wider than this.

“They don't have enough money to feed themselves and their family, the basic like three meals a day. They don't have any heating, money for heating, hot water. They maybe don't have enough clothes to suit the season, holes in their shoes. Yeah, they don't have any extra cash for any maybe additional luxuries or classes that the kids might go to. They don't have a car. And yeah, they're probably quite unhappy trying to make ends meet or just the sort of basic things that you take for granted that you have.” Female, 45-64, C1

It is worth noting that very few people talked about global poverty in this context – a couple did mention things like tv adverts for charities working in developing nations, but they also brought the discussion back to local issues fairly quickly.

“I think that's where my mind initially goes is to the adverts on the tv, Christian Aid etc, sort of Children in Need… But I think it's changed a lot in recent years and really it is far closer to home than you really think.” Female, 25-44, AB

This may suggest that recent experiences such as the cost-of-living crisis have made poverty more of a pertinent, top-of-mind issue for people when thinking about their local communities, not just foreign countries. This provides an opportunity for communication about a Minimum Income Guarantee to tap into this recognition that poverty is relevant in Scotland today.

Linked to the descriptions of what poverty meant in terms of lack of income to meet basic needs, people commonly talked about the impacts on individuals when thinking about poverty – highlighting the stress and anxiety it causes; the sense of instability and worry that people experience when they cannot afford the basics. While this is also covered in the section on impacts of poverty, it is worth highlighting that this was top-of-mind when respondents were asked about poverty more generally.

Who is most vulnerable

Respondents were asked who was most vulnerable to being affected by poverty, and the groups commonly mentioned were:

• Older people, particularly those relying on the state pension
• Children/families with young children (especially larger families, as children are expensive!) – children were also a group that gained particular sympathy since they were not responsible for their situation
• Single parents having to look after children on one income
• Those with health issues/disabilities which means they are unable to work (people also mentioned mental health issues here)
• Those who are unemployed, on low incomes/minimum wage, in poorly paid jobs or on benefits
• People living in deprived areas (some highlighted a perceived generational issue of people being raised in a ‘benefits culture’ in certain areas, while others felt those raised in poverty began at a disadvantage and would struggle to achieve financial security themselves)
• People living in rural areas, or island communities where costs are higher for imported goods
• Younger people e.g. they are unable to get on the housing ladder or build up savings
• People lacking in education/skills
• People with addiction and/or other mental health issues
• While few mentioned minority ethnicities specifically, some did mention migrants to Scotland who may have language barriers affecting their ability to work, and immigrants struggling on minimal financial support.

Some did also note that anyone could be affected, and that poverty is now being experienced by a greater proportion of society:

“There used to be that it was only people on very deprived backgrounds, very... How do I say it? Low socio-economic status. But now it's filtering into families where there's people working. And it's really only those top tier of people that are earning a lot of money that seem to be getting by without having to ask for help or use, as I say, I know a lot of people that use food banks now that I would never have thought would.” Female, 45-64, AB

“You've got thousands in your bank account or 20p in your bank account. Within a split second, that can all change and it really can.” Female, 25-44, DE

Causes

When asked what they thought the main causes of poverty are in Scotland, a range of individual and wider societal factors were highlighted.

Respondents were most likely to talk about issues affecting the economy and society as a whole. They were very aware of the recent cost-of-living crisis/price increases, and generally had high levels of sympathy with those struggling – several mentioned that even those with ‘good’ incomes are now finding things difficult, so it must be even worse for those on the very lowest incomes.

“I notice even such a difference in my shopping bills and I live alone, and my gas and electricity bills. I live alone and I work two jobs. I should really be a bit flush, but I'm still living month to month. So I dread to think what people on a far lower income or just a pension alone are bringing in and how they're coping.” Female, 25-44, AB

The most commonly mentioned social causes were:

• The cost-of-living crisis, high/rising costs of food, bills, housing/rent, energy, childcare etc.
• Low wages/not being able to earn enough even for those in work
• Insecure work (e.g. zero hours contracts/lack of stable work available)
• Lack of jobs (generally, and specifically well paid or highly skilled jobs; loss of traditional/skilled jobs due to de-industrialisation)
• Lack of skills/education
• Living in a community with high levels of poverty (where there may be fewer jobs/opportunities, and/or where a lot of people are out of work etc.)
• Low levels of benefits/lack of support for those who need it, and inflexibility of the benefits system
• Global corporations not paying taxes.

“And I think the wages, there's all these zero contracts kind of things. People they don't have security in their jobs as they used to.” Female, 45-64, AB

“Lack of housing, high rents, probably low paid jobs. What else? There's probably lots of people on benefits that maybe aren't... I don't know. You hear about benefit cheats, but there's people that are on benefits and maybe their benefits aren't enough to pay their bills and high costs in supermarkets and stuff like that. I don't know, I think there's probably quite a wide range of people that I'm not aware of. You know it's probably not something you think about until you're maybe in that situation yourself.” Female, 45-64, AB

While the majority mentioned structural factors, a substantial minority also mentioned individual factors that could cause people to be affected by poverty. These tended to blame individual laziness/unwillingness to work, and/or focused on people ‘cheating’ the benefits system, having children in order to receive support or housing etc. People with addictions, gambling issues and who were ‘bad at managing money’ were also mentioned in this context. Some said that this has become a generational problem of children growing up ‘knowing no different’.

“There is sometimes people that, dare I say, could help themselves through going and getting a job. Because there is people that just don't want to work, but they want everything given to them.” Female, 65+, DE

“I think that it is almost a domino effect that if you don't have the right role models there or that you've grown up in a certain way, that that becomes your personality and that you think that's how you should live because you've always done that. I think it's hard to sometimes break that cycle as well of actually being successful after a rough up bringing.” Male, 18-24, DE

These findings support previous research^[18] which suggests that people often hold contradictory positions when thinking about poverty – there was evidence of some doubts about those in financial hardship being ‘deserving’ of help, although there is also sympathy and a recognition that the problem is real when people think about cost of living increases and wider social issues such as housing and employment.

Impacts

The effects of poverty were recognised to be serious for those experiencing it, with respondents tending to focus on the impacts on mental health resulting from the stress and anxiety associated with a lack of finances. People talked about it being ‘mentally draining’ constantly worrying about money, and some noted that the mental health impacts can be serious enough to lead to self-harm or suicide.

“Just being insecure, not knowing what's coming next. Worrying about everything every day.” Female, 25-44, DE

Shame and guilt were also mentioned, particularly for parents struggling to provide for their families/children. There was a recognition that there was a stigma attached to poverty which can prevent people from seeking help.

“Oh my God, that has a massive impact mentally. And it can be physical as well, like causing anxiety, stress, which can make you ill. But mentally, people would be blaming themselves. Like, I should be able to provide for my family, I need to go out and get another job.” Female, 45-64, C2

“I don’t really know how to ask for help because I am of the opinion that people will judge me… I’m just thinking of the impact, people might go into depression, might not want to talk.” Male, 25-44, DE

Hunger and homelessness were also mentioned as likely impacts of poverty – and hunger was particularly mentioned in relation to children e.g. if they were unable to access school meals during the holidays, or a school lunch was their only proper meal of the day. Being unable to afford food, and not being able to heat homes properly, were also linked to physical health outcomes.

Some people mentioned impacts on quality of life more generally (e.g. for those struggling to heat their homes, or who cannot afford to socialise) – a feeling that people are ‘left to rot’ rather than being able to live a good life, and a general lack of hope/aspiration for those in long-term poverty.

While respondents were less likely to spontaneously mention wider social impacts than the impact on individuals, some did recognise that poverty can affect things like educational outcomes, health services, levels of crime and substance use, and implications for taxes/public finances to support those in need. Some mentioned lack of opportunities e.g. if people cannot access things like transport, education, IT etc. which could lead to longer-term impacts on education and employment.

“The more people that are in poverty, the more the tax will go up as well for other people, because the more houses that are going to be needed for all these people in poverty that can't afford that. It's going to really affect everybody, even the more wealthy ones as well.” Female, 18-24, DE

“In these poorer places you probably see higher crime rates and people more willing to do anything to get by, whether that's burglary or shoplifting and stuff like that.” Male, 18-24, DE

Solutions

There was a perception among some respondents that the problem was too big to solve and there is no ‘easy fix’. People recognise that this issue is complex, there are a lot of interlinked factors that need to be addressed, and there is no simple solution.

“How do you stop poverty?... I feel like that's a question that everybody asks themself every day all the time. If it was that easy to just answer, then it probably would've been done by now.” Female, 18-24, C2

However, respondents did identify potential ways to improve things. Reflecting the mixture of causes and impacts identified, suggested solutions to the issues raised included a range of Government level policy/actions (aimed at both providing support to those who need it, and encouraging individuals to help themselves), and local/community based solutions. It is worth noting that a lot of the spontaneously proposed solutions include things that a Minimum Income Guarantee would be designed to achieve, e.g. reducing costs, improving services and ensuring access to well paid work.

A range of actions that Government/local councils could take were suggested, including:

• Increase the minimum wage (although some noted this needs to be balanced against the needs of business/employers)
• Investment in education/training, so people can access better/more skilled jobs
• Provide cheaper/more affordable childcare
• Extend free school meals for children
• Actions to deal with rising costs, e.g. having a better energy cap, reducing the cost of essentials (this was of particular importance to those living in island communities who mentioned the high cost of imported goods)
• Address housing problems e.g. reducing council housing waiting lists, addressing the high costs of housing/rents generally
• Increase taxes (particularly for the most highly paid) to fund the services required
• Improve access to health and mental health support
• Improvements to the benefits system:
  • For some, this focused on making the system more flexible when people’s circumstances change or if they are able to access temporary work, making the system more accessible (e.g. if people do not have internet access/mobile data), and/or improving benefits e.g. removing the two-child benefits cap, increasing Universal Credit
  • For others, particularly those who tended to blame individuals for their circumstances, this focused on reducing benefits to encourage people to work, and/or providing incentives to encourage people to work
• Some suggestions focused on providing ‘better jobs’ and making ‘better work opportunities’ available, although people tended to be fairly vague about how this could actaully happen or who had the ability to improve employment opportunities.

People also mentioned a wide range of community-based solutions, including donating to food banks, provision of free breakfast/after school clubs, and using services such as Olio to access free food while reducing waste etc.

Response to the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee

A brief introduction was read out to respondents to introduce the concept of a Minimum Income Guarantee. This aimed to outline the key aspects of the policy in as neutral language as possible, to gain initial reactions to the idea before moving on to considering the different framing options in more detail.

Very few respondents had heard of the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee before (e.g. one thought they had heard John Swinney MSP (First Minister) mention the idea on tv, and a couple of others thought they had heard of it but could not remember where). Those who were aware of the concept had only a fairly vague understanding of it – as expected, nobody had detailed knowledge in this area.

Most people were broadly supportive of the idea on first hearing about it, with key positives including:

• It would ensure the most vulnerable are supported/nobody falls below a certain standard of living – providing a level of financial security for everyone
• The holistic approach, i.e. including both good quality work and services, not just social security benefits, was liked
• It felt quite aspirational i.e. the focus on improving lives/living a dignified life (e.g. “A dignified life is a life where you can stand up tall, and feel comfortable, and feel confident, and feel like you've got something to fall back on.” Female, 25-44, DE)
• It could have wider benefits for society as well as individuals, if public services are improved, and if people are able to improve their own situation and then ‘pay it back’ by contributing to wider society.

Positive responses included comments such as:

“No [I haven’t heard of that] but if they're able to get that up and running, I think it would probably benefit a lot of households... I think it would probably give people a wee bit more financial stability to know that they're going to have a minimum income.” Female, 25-44, DE

“It's just so that we don't sink too low. It's a bottom line that nobody should go below… I think it's a good idea. I think we've got a benefit system in place for a reason. If we could top that up to a certain level and it wouldn't just be about benefits, it would be about work as well. And you know, people are doing zero hours contracts and people not guaranteed a certain amount of work they would be guaranteed these 200 quid a week or whatever it is. I don't know what the figure is, but I think it'd be a better thing for everybody.” Male, 46-64, DE

However, respondents had questions about how a Minimum Income Guarantee would actually work, and some expressed doubts that it was ever likely to be achieved. Many commented that the idea sounds good in principle but that they would need to know much more about how it would work before being able to say if they supported or opposed it. The main questions people had related to:

• How it will be funded/paid for (“The money has to come from somewhere. So, if they're going to do all these things, where's the money coming from? That's what I want to know.” Female, 65+, C1)
• Practical questions about how it will be administered, e.g. whether it will be means tested, how eligibility will be determined and who would be eligible – particularly if there are different levels of Minimum Income Guarantee for different types of household
• What the minimum threshold would be and how it would be calculated
• How to ensure it was not abused (“I do think that maybe people would take the mickey out of it.” Female, 25-44, DE)
• How to ensure the minimum levels set did not disincentivise work.

When asked who would benefit from a Minimum Income Guarantee, most people mentioned those on the lowest incomes, and the groups already identified as being most affected by poverty. Few assumed that they themselves would benefit – if anything, they thought their taxes would probably increase to fund the policy.

Among the minority who were less positive about the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee, the main issues raised related to queries about how it would be funded; concerns that people could cheat/abuse the system or that it may act as a disincentive for people to work; and issues around fairness – e.g. people who are in full-time work and just above the minimum threshold would not receive support, whereas someone working less may receive a top-up payment.

“I think that there are far too many people… that would manage to manipulate and be getting top ups from the government… I would be a little pissed off if it was maybe like I was earning maybe say a £100 a year over the minimum and then there's somebody that's below it that's getting all this extra money, and all I need to do is work maybe ten hours less a week or something like that and I'd be getting this free money that this person's getting as well.... I feel like some people would be like, 'Well, f**k it, I'll just quit my job too. I'll just have six babies under the age of 25 and then I can never work because I'm just going to say that I'm looking after my kids'.” Female, 18-24, C2

Those who were on benefits/low incomes themselves also had queries about how it would affect their personal situation practically, e.g. one had experienced the change to Universal Credit and had found this very difficult, describing the ‘absolute fear’ of not being sure what was going to happen to her income levels.

Finally, those who were in the most financial hardship currently also noted that there is an urgent need for support – they queried the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee being introduced incrementally over the longer term, arguing that action is needed now.

Response to the framing options

Following the initial introduction of the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee, the four framing options were shown to respondents in turn. The order they were presented was rotated across interviews to avoid any order effect on responses. Moderators explored people’s understanding of each description and what they thought of each way of communicating about a Minimum Income Guarantee.

This section presents responses to each of the options; a summary is included later to draw together findings about the most effective way of talking about a Minimum Income Guarantee, taking into account both the themes tested here and the proposed benefits that respondents were also shown (see the next section).

Reassurance/safety net

The cost-of-living crisis has demonstrated that no one is entirely protected from financial hardship, and that we must go further in providing a safety net. Anyone might need a helping hand at some point in their life, and a Minimum Income Guarantee would be there as a reassurance for all – no matter your current position in life or what might happen in the future – you are promised a minimum standard of living.

This frame received a positive response. Respondents described it as reassuring, non-judgmental, and could apply to anyone – it rang true, since people recognise the impact of the cost-of-living crisis and believe the message that anyone could need support at some point.

“I think the safety net is really applicable for a lot of people because a lot of people don't have, what's the word I'm looking for? Don't have savings and things to fall back on. So that's really nice to know that if they were ever in that position, they know that they're going to be essentially reassured or saved by this action.” Female, 25-44, DE

“[It is saying] Listen, although you are safe just now, it's shallow water. You don't know what's going to happen in five minutes, five years, from now. We've got you and there is this help if you need it, and this is where you find it.” Female, 25-44, DE

Reference to reassurance ‘for all’ also resonated strongly, since the message was targeted at everyone, not ‘talking down’ to those in financial hardship or singling out those in poverty.

“I would say it was quite broad. I would say it would appeal to almost everyone because they're basically saying no matter what walk of life you are from, we're going to have a safety net for all of you.” Female, 25-44, DE

Very few respondents found any negatives in this statement. Some did feel it is describing what the current welfare system is already supposed to provide, so it did not feel like a particularly new idea to them:

“Well, I mean that more or less describes the current benefit system, or how it should be working anyway you know. They've always said that it's the safety net… so I don't think that's terribly revolutionary.” Male, 65+, DE

However, this also reflected the fact that some people felt the description did not provide enough information about what a Minimum Income Guarantee actually is, so it seemed a little vague. Please note this relates to the content of the statement shown rather than the theme/concept itself – some of the other framing options included more detail about the elements of a Minimum Income Guarantee.

Most felt that mention of a ‘helping hand’ felt sympathetic and reassuring, although one said this was patronising and made her think of charity donations:

“It's almost patronising... Anyone might need a helping hand at some point in their life? I don't know, it sounds like some charities, like door-to-door charity coming to ask you to send donations or something like that.” Female, 18-24, C2

Only one respondent expressed anything negative in relation to the ‘safety net’ idea: she associated a net with something that things could slip through, and preferred the term ‘security’:

“If anything bad happens, don't worry we won't let you fall. But sometimes these things, they get missed and you do fall through that net.” Female, 25-44, DE

Security for everyone/global events

Global changes, such as climate change, conflicts around the world and technological advances, mean we are likely to see more turmoil in the global economy. Everyone in Scotland, particularly those who are at a greater risk of poverty and insecurity, would have a much more robust safety net with a Minimum Income Guarantee, ensuring their ability to live with dignity and afford the essentials is not jeopardised by far-away events beyond their control.

This frame did not test particularly well. While some respondents did note that it was correct/factual, and said it was true that global events and climate change affect us all, most struggled to connect this concept to the idea of financial hardship in Scotland.

The most positive comments about this way of thinking about a Minimum Income Guarantee focused on the fact that it communicates the idea that we are ‘part of something bigger’, and that it feels protective of Scotland and people in local communities, regardless of what happens globally. A couple of people also mentioned the impact of the war in Ukraine on energy prices and felt that the message rang true.

However, respondents generally found it confusing to link global and local issues in this way, and most did not see any obvious (strong) link between global events and the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee or how that could address individual/local issues related to poverty.

“I think it's telling me two different things... I mean climate change and poverty. Okay, maybe climate change and heating, but I know there's global changes and I know there's obviously conflicts in the world. Everyone in Scotland, those that are at a greater risk of poverty? No, I just don't really see that. I just don't think… it makes that much sense to be honest... No, I just don't see that really kind of links together to be honest.” Female, 45-64, AB

Some also felt the message was not really believable – nobody can provide guarantees about what will happen internationally or to do with climate change, so people raised queries about whether this promise could be met.

“It's nice to try to offer people a robust safety net with minimum guarantee. And, I don't know if that's possible. Say that, suddenly there was another war and oil supplies were affected, could the government guarantee that we wouldn't have to pay more for electricity and gas and oil and would they be able to subsidise that? I mean, that's nice if they could, but I guess there's some things that are out with Scottish, British control isn't there?” Male, 45-64, DE

There was also a feeling that, for those most likely to need to know about the Minimum Income Guarantee, global issues are not their main concern, and the focus should be on Scotland. For those struggling to make ends meet, the focus is on day-to-day needs, not far away events.

“The people that are in that situation that have got these financial problems that we're trying to resolve right now… won't be giving a damn of what's happening someplace else. They're giving a damn about what's happening in their pocket.” Male, 65+, C1

“If someone was reading this who didn't have enough money to have all the essentials, I don't think they would necessarily pay attention to climate change and how that's going to impact them in the future. They're just sort of trying to cope day-to-day on their own conflicts and their own struggles.” Female, 45-64, C1

A fairer society for everyone to live in

Inequality and poverty are a blight on our society, that is damaging not only for those at the sharp end of it, but for everyone. Inequality can be linked to social problems such as violence and ill health – causing strain on the NHS, more drug abuse and higher rates of imprisonment. These in turn lead to lower levels of trust and weaker community life. By introducing a Minimum Income Guarantee, delivered through a combination of fair and accessible paid work, high quality services and adequate social security, we will not only be improving the living standard for those who need it most, but also for society as a whole.

This framing prompted a mixed response. It worked well in terms of linking the impacts of poverty on society to the need for a Minimum Income Guarantee. People responded particularly well to mentions of impacts on the NHS, and the positive focus on using a Minimum Income Guarantee to address wider social issues. The message communicated by this statement was generally felt to be true – people do recognise the effects of poverty on things like violence and ill health.

“I would love to see community life increase. I like the idea of improving society as a whole. That we are all helping one another. And it seems that the thoughts behind it.... focusing on getting rid of inequality, getting rid of poverty, or trying to diminish it.... I like the idea that these are all linked in very well. And it's a more of a social way of putting things.” Female, 45-64, AB

“That is basically going right to the heart of what can come out of people being in poverty. You hear all the time on the news about violence, and ill health, and how the NHS is struggling, so it kind of gives you the advantages. I think that's the main thing I take away from it is the advantages that are going to come out of this fairer society as well.” Female, 45-64, C1

The explanation of the Minimum Income Guarantee in this statement also worked well (e.g. compared to the ‘safety net’ frame which did not include a description of the Minimum Income Guarantee components). Respondents highlighted the combination of all aspects – i.e. it included fair, accessible work and high quality services as well as social security.

Less positive responses to this frame tended to focus on its perceived negative focus – this is perhaps because the wording is couched around inequality, rather than equality, and the negative/damaging impacts of the issues identified, rather than the positive change a Minimum Income Guarantee could bring. Some also felt the statement placed blame on those affected by poverty, implying there is a causal link between poverty and social problems, when there are other causes of violence, drug abuse and crime.

Others noted that it was unlikely that a Minimum Income Guarantee would completely resolve social problems and inequality, so this statement may be seen to be overpromising/unrealistic.

“I think I’ll be blunt and just say I don’t think it’s possible. I think there is going to be inequality no matter what, and that’s a trait of the human race. We’re always looking to achieve things, and we’re always looking at our neighbour and thinking that they have things that are better, and so on. If I thought that [a Minimum Income Guarantee] was going to solve everything, it would be great. I think you’re still going to get the people who won’t apply for everything and won’t know that they can and that will slip through that net.” Female, 65+, C2

“I don't know how believable it is to be fair. Because there's always like, you're tackling the employment side of things, whereas mentioning like violence and drug abuse and even mental health issues that the NHS aren't coping with at the moment. I don't think that [a Minimum Income Guarantee] will reduce that. I think there's still going to be, I mean, you don't have to be living in poverty to have an addiction problem, but still it affects everybody. Regarding the NHS and waiting times and things like that, by doing this, is that going to stop all that? I don't know.” Female, 45-64, C2

Freedom/opening opportunity

There are people in our communities who do not get the opportunity to live decent, healthy and financially secure lives, and are, for example, being forced to choose between whether ‘to heat or to eat’. This is unacceptable in our modern society, and something that we need to collectively rectify. The Minimum Income Guarantee, delivered through social security benefits, fair work/good jobs, and the provision of key basic services, would ensure a minimum standard of living to all, allowing people to pursue life’s opportunity and live fulfilling lives.

This frame tested well, with most respondents agreeing with the premise behind it. This statement focuses on the individual level, which resonated with respondents, and was probably the most effective of the frames at describing the experience of poverty: the idea of having to choose whether ‘to heat or eat’ was understood, accepted as being true for some people, and fostered a sense of empathy.

“It's horrible to know that still in this day and age, there is a lot of people that are struggling to either heat their house or be able to have a meal and they shouldn't be left in that situation. Whether it's been to ill health or financial difficulties, things like that, just shouldn't be happening in this day and age, I believe.” Female, 25-44, DE

The positive tone of pursuing opportunity and living fulfilling lives also worked well, with people commenting that it offers some hope.

“It's giving you a bit of a hope, a bit of security.” Female, 45-64, DE

This statement worked particularly well with those who saw education and training as being key to addressing poverty. It also worked well with those who had made earlier comments about individuals taking responsibility to ‘better themselves’ in order to access better jobs etc.

“And it does state about your social security benefits and what I said again about your work and jobs and training and your key services or your childcare things and providing, when I say providing, I mean providing opportunities for people to go and train. There's nothing wrong with that at all.” Female, 45-64, AB

Some also noted that it reflects the idea of society as a whole taking action:

“But I do like the idea that we need to collectively rectify it. It's requiring all people from all everywhere to come together and do something.” Female, 45-64, AB

As with the previous frame, the fact it mentions jobs and services as well as social security resonated with people (though again, this relates to descriptions of what a Minimum Income Guarantee is rather than how to frame it).

“It's hit the nail on the head I think because it's telling you that it's fair work and stuff, but it's saying the basic services, which ensures a minimum standard of being able to live for everyone because it says to be able to pursue life's opportunities and having the money to be able to not have to pick between the two and being comfortable.” Female, 25-44, DE

The only negative responses to this statement tended to be based around perceptions of the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee being ‘money for nothing’:

“It's really telling me that people are not going to have to work because they're going to get a minimum amount of money anyway… It's like utopia, everybody's going to have a minimum standard of living. That's not the way life works. It works if the harder you work, the more money you make. And if this is it, they want everybody to be the same.” Female, 65+, C1

For a minority, mentioning the ‘heat or eat’ choice suggested that the policy was only aimed at the very poorest and/or those on benefits. One respondent also did not like the idea of ‘collectively’ rectifying the issue as she felt the problem is due to the government and they should be responsible for solving it.

Advantages of a Minimum Income Guarantee

A range of anticipated benefits of a Minimum Income Guarantee were presented to respondents, for both individuals and for community/society as a whole.

Advantages for individuals

It is hoped that this policy will help individuals by:

Allowing them to live a decent and dignified life, not worrying about things such as whether to ‘heat or eat’

Providing them with greater freedoms in life, to seize opportunities, choose a career, enter education, to pursue the life they want to live, rather than living ‘hand to mouth’ with no time or income to make these choices

Improve health outcomes as poverty has a strong link with poor health, both physical and mental

Greater financial security, when things happen in people’s lives that are unavoidable or out of their control, e.g. relationship break down, losing your home, being made redundant, onset of long term health issues (through an accident, cancer, other chronic disease, etc.), etc.

Overall, the advantages of a Minimum Income Guarantee for individuals were what people found most relatable and persuasive, and all four of the points listed were identified as being positive things to aim for.

The ‘greater financial security’ bullet point stood out to most – this reflects the ‘reassurance/safety net’ framing, and the specific examples given of what could happen to affect people’s finances were especially effective, since everyone knows somebody who has been through a relationship breakdown/illness etc.

“Because I feel it's quite realistic. That is probably where most people are going to need financial help after a relationship breakdown, if you're losing your home, made redundant. Those kind of things are all very realistic and I think they can happen to anybody at any time.” Female, 18-24, C2

The links between poverty and health (particularly mental health) were also widely recognised, so improving health outcomes was highlighted as a key benefit of a Minimum Income Guarantee for individuals.

“I think probably the health side of it because if you’re not physically or mentally able… you’re not able to live a good life, look for work, or enjoy retirement or your childhood, I think. Everything is connected to your health. To remove the pressures of being worried when you are living hand-to-mouth would be a huge thing for some people, I think.” Female, 65+, C2

People also responded well to the ‘greater freedoms’ point, as it felt hopeful and positive. This was particularly the case for those who were more likely to see poverty as being caused by individual rather than social/economic factors.

“The issue that people normally have with this is that it's people that don't want to work or they don't want to grasp opportunities. They just want things for free. Whereas I think that if you're explaining to them that it's giving them that opportunity to get a job or to educate themselves more, they're not going to be a stain on your society.” Male, 18-24, DE

“I like the way that they've also seen that to seize opportunities that some people never do. Whether it be going down education, getting a new job, traveling the world. It's given you hope. It's showing you that there's loads of different ways and how we can help. I really like this.” Female, 25-44, DE

References to a ‘decent and dignified life’ were emphasised by some as being important in communicating about a Minimum Income Guarantee, although this tended to be lower down the list of key advantages compared to the others, and a couple felt that this was not the right wording as it implied that people in financial hardship currently were not dignified.

“Well, the first statement, allowing them to live a decent life and dignified life. Because I know, like I said, a lot of people that are in poverty can't afford like clothes and things that they'll get second-hand or hand me downs or whatever. So that sounds good. Like a decent and dignified life and not actually worrying about heating your house or eating... It's a positive statement that I think it would give people hope with that.” Female, 45-64, C2

Overall, the benefits for individuals were generally felt to be more realistic and achievable than the advantages for society as a whole (see below).

Advantages for society

The key advantages for communities and society would be:

Reduction in crime and anti-social behaviour

Better public services

Less pressure on NHS, as people’s health will improve

The reassurance that there is a financial safety net that everyone is entitled to, if and when they need it – any one of us could need this at some point in our life

A general improvement in the wellbeing of society, knowing that we have a fairer society that supports everyone.

While these advantages of a Minimum Income Guarantee did receive a positive reaction generally, they were judged to be less realistic and achievable than the benefits for individuals, and therefore the messaging was less persuasive/ convincing as a way to encourage support for the idea.

While most agreed that things like easing pressure on the NHS were important, several people commented that issues with the NHS and other public services should be addressed anyway, and/or that it was unlikely a Minimum Income Guarantee would be able to do enough in this area.

“Less pressure on the NHS because you're going to give people more money to obviously buy better food, to have better living conditions. It's good in a sense. But for example, cancer, you can't stop that. The most wealthy person can get it… I don't really think it will have less pressure on the NHS, so that's probably the only one I'll disagree with.” Female, 18-24, DE

Others also found it difficult to see the direct link between poverty and crime reduction, and also felt that this tended to place blame on those in financial hardship – i.e. people other than those in financial hardship commit crimes, and not all people struggling financially resort to crime.

“I think that a reduction in criminal and anti-social behaviour, I don't know how you getting top up on your income and being able to afford things would reduce that. Because it's a certain type of person that does these things and I don't think it matters like money-wise how they behave, you get some people that are just... And there's always going to be crime... I don't think there would be a massive reduction.” Female, 45-64, C2

While some people noted that improving wellbeing in society was a good aim, others felt this point was a bit ‘woolly’ and a less tangible benefit than some of the others listed.

Overall, the points about benefits for society tended to remind respondents of the questions they already had about how the policy would work, and prompted a general sense that this was just ‘more talk’ rather than action:

“I think we've heard the same thing for nearly like 20 years now. We need to see action in investment in public services and getting the police on the streets. That's the first thing. Better public services, we would all love that. I think most of us would be happy to pay more tax if we get something from it. Less pressure on the NHS… I think all these problems resonate with people… but once again, how are we going to do it? Wellbeing society. That's great. A fairer society that supports everybody. Yep. That's brilliant. But once again, who deems what's fair? A financial safety net. I'm cool with that. It's just how we're going to implement it. These are things we hear all the time. It's just a case of like, let's get it done now.” Male, 25-44, AB

Most effective framing options

At the end of the discussion, respondents were asked how supportive they felt about the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee now that they had heard more about the concept. For most respondents, their feelings were relatively similar upon first hearing the idea and by the end of the discussion – most were broadly supportive, although they had questions about how it would work in practice and how it would be funded.

Discussion of the elements of a Minimum Income Guarantee related to work and services, as well as social security, was successful in tackling concerns about ‘hand-outs’.

“I think I would [support a Minimum Income Guarantee], and I think just purely for that fact that it's not about handing out free money, it's about developing people and making our country better for the people who live here.” Male, 18-24, DE

“Yes, I would be supportive depending on how it's set up. That's the most I can say given that there's a lot of idealistic policies are thrown around. How would it work in real life? But yes, ideally as an idea, I would say I am supportive… And making a fair society for all is of huge importance to me. But it kind of leaves me with more questions, but I guess that not a bad thing!” Female, 25-44, DE

It is also worth noting that a substantial minority (roughly one in three) respondents had a more positive view of a Minimum Income Guarantee having discussed the idea in more detail and considered the potential benefits. While these people still had questions about the policy, they were more convinced than they had been on first hearing about it. The frames that worked particularly well with this group of respondents (and could therefore be seen to be the most persuasive) are noted in this section as well as considering the most positively received frames overall.

Reassurance/safety net

The most effective framing option across the sample as a whole was the concept of ‘reassurance/safety net’ – and this worked particularly well with respondents who were in a more financially secure position right now but recognised that they could be less secure in the future as a result of something outside their control. Of the seven people who were more positive about the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee by the end of the discussion, six responded positively to this frame.

The concept of a safety net was also spontaneously mentioned by respondents throughout the discussions about poverty more generally, suggesting this is an effective metaphor to use in communicating the benefits of a Minimum Income Guarantee.

Freedom/opportunity

The theme around ‘freedom/opening opportunity’ also worked well, and was thought to be appealing across all age groups as it could apply to working people, families, etc. – anyone who wanted to improve their situation. This was also seen as a more hopeful/positive message, talking about aspiration rather than the social problems related to poverty. While this frame was slightly less effective than ‘safety net’ among the total sample, again six of the seven who were now more positive about a Minimum Income Guarantee also highlighted this as a positive frame – the same number among this group as had felt ‘safety net’ was effective. This suggests the ‘freedom/opportunity’ message may be particularly effective in persuading people of the benefits of a Minimum Income Guarantee.

The idea of opening up opportunity also came up spontaneously in discussions about how to tackle poverty, particularly among those who stressed the importance of education/training as a way to improve people’s opportunities to find better employment.

Fairer society

The ‘fairer society for everyone to live in’ frame has potential for broad appeal, although in its current wording it is perhaps felt to be a little negative, focusing on social problems rather than a hopeful message for the future, and some felt it placed the blame on those in poverty for social problems.

Respondents did commonly talk about the wider impacts on society of individuals improving their circumstances (e.g. improved health outcomes and less crime/social problems), and the idea of fairness was also raised when considering groups who were most vulnerable to poverty – particularly children, who are unable to control the circumstances they are born into. This suggests there is potential for this frame to be used effectively with some adjustments.

Global events

This theme was the least successful framing. While some felt it may appeal to those who are most engaged in the news/global events, nobody reported it resonated particularly well with them personally or found it an easily understandable explanation of why a Minimum Income Guarantee is important.

Global events were also very unlikely to be mentioned spontaneously during the interviews, suggesting this is not a readily accessed way of thinking about these issues.

The name ‘Minimum Income Guarantee’

Finally, respondents were asked their views of the name ‘Minimum Income Guarantee’ to describe the proposed policy, and a few alternatives were tested: Living Income, Living Income Guarantee, Scottish Citizen Income and Scottish National Income.

People tended not to feel particularly strongly about the name – some felt it generally described the policy well and was clear enough, although a few issues were raised and some suggestions made for improvement.

• Some respondents did not like the word ‘minimum’ as they felt it implies something very basic or ‘the bare minimum’. Some initially assumed it might relate to the minimum wage. Overall, people tended to prefer ‘living income’ to ‘minimum income’ as it communicated that it was the required income to live a good life.
• There were mixed views on including ‘income’ in the name – some felt this is all-encompassing and works as a term to think about all the resources coming into a household, but more often people thought this referred only to wages/work, rather than a holistic policy including wider services as well.
• Most respondents liked using the word ‘guarantee’ as it means there is a promise to deliver it (reflecting the ‘safety net’ theme that it would be guaranteed for all), although a few associated it with banking/insurance or consumer products. Some preferred ‘assurance’ or ‘support’ to guarantee.
• Nobody liked the inclusion of ‘Scottish’ in the name – it was not felt to be necessary, and people noted that not everybody who lives in Scotland sees themselves as Scottish/there are other nationalities living here.

“Minimum sounds like you're giving like the least you can do. For me, the word minimum is like minimum. That's like the lowest of the low. So living income guarantee, it sounds more promising.” Female, 18-24, DE