Brexit and Public Opinion 2019
(This report was published on 22
January 2019)
“Introduction. Public opinion has
always been central to democratic politics. All the more so when the most
important public policy decision of our time is being taken on the basis of a
plebiscite, which returned a verdict different to that desired by a majority of
our elected representatives. ‘The will of the people’ has become a catch-all
phrase bandied about by all and sundry, as a means of legitimising whatever
claim they care to make.
What, then, is the reality? What do we
know – and equally what do we not know – about the state of public opinion when
it comes to Brexit and issues related to it? This is what we seek to ascertain
in the various contributions that follow.
Our contributors present findings which
point to an electorate reshaped by Brexit. Bobby Dufy points to the
dysfunctional nature of the debate on Brexit and the fact that it has limited
cut through with the public. Similarly, Noah Carl uncovers evidence of
‘motivated reasoning,’ whereby voters across the Brexit divide select options
that are most psychologically comforting for them. He also underlines that
there is no evidence to suggest that Remain voters were better informed than
their Leave counterparts.
Paula Surridge cautions against premature
claims the traditional left-right division in British politics is no longer
relevant. She also makes the point that the relationship between values and
political behaviour depends on the context of the vote in question. That being
said, as Evans and Schafner report, there is strong evidence of the enduring
power of ‘Brexit identities’.
Indeed, the social and emotional
intensity of these is far higher than those for parties. Moreover, Brexit
identities effect how voters see the world. In Hobolt and Tilley’s fascinating
contribution, they say that those on either side of the Brexit debate interpret
new information in ways that reinforce their pre-existing views. This echoes
the point, made by Bobby Dufy, about the limits ‘new facts’ serve in convincing
anyone of anything.
Brexit is not the only source of
division. Heath and Richards point out that the nations of the UK are
themselves divided, with national identity shaping attunes towards Brexit.
Place also maters, as Jennings, Stoker and Warren remind us in their revealing
analysis of cities and towns.
Moreover, public attunes are both more
subtle and more fluid than many imagine. Sunder Katwala reports the results of
the National Conversation on Immigration, and finds that most people are
balancers – acknowledging both the positive and negative impacts of immigration
–while being distrustful of both the government and the media when it comes to
this issue.
Meanwhile, Rob Ford detects a major
shift in public sentiment over immigration since the referendum of 2016,
measured both in terms of its salience and perceptions of its economic and
cultural impact. sense, they are representative in that, as Wager and Cowley
report, each party mirrors the divisions in society at large. Albeit that – as
Bale, Polet and Webb underline – the positons of the leadership, particularly
on Brexit, diverge from those of their own members. Less often discussed, but
equally interesting and important, Coree Brown Swan underlines the dilemma that
Brexit poses for the SNP: making the case for independence more compelling,
whilst potentially making that independence more difficult.
These represent, as I suggested above,
merely a taster of the rich analyses that follow. John Curtce underlines claims
of widespread support for another referendum must be taken with care.
Innovative ‘stated choice’ experiments set out to understand the trade-offs the
public are willing to make in defining a new relationship with the EU.
Fascinating insights into the geography of public opinion – in the four
nations, and the EU – are sketched out. What follows is both comprehensive and
hugely informative. Perhaps the best and easiest thing for this introduction to
do is, simply, to commend what follows to you.”
Friday 15th February 2019
Jorge Emilio Núñez
Twitter: @London1701
No comments:
Post a Comment