Views on Europe | The view ahead

The  outcome from the vote on the 23rd June to decide the future of the UK’s EU membership can be viewed as a clash between two world views: that of the cosmopolitan-liberal vs. the post-industrial communitarian, in short the 'haves' and the 'have nots' from the process of globalisation.

We've interviewed two leading social scientists Professor Will Jennings and Professor Patrick Sturgis to get their instant reaction on what has surprised them, what are the possible drivers for the outcome of the vote and what could happen next.

Public Policy|Southampton: Are you surprised by the result of the vote?

Patrick Sturgis: Yes, the result has been a big surprise and again the polls got it wrong. The only poll that was relatively close to the final outcome came from TNS. Similarly to the 2015 General Elections, the misrepresentation of people’s preferences in the poll may have been due to skewed samples but it is too early to tell at this point. Interestingly, the online polls, although somewhat off, were more accurate than polls conducted over the phone.

It is also surprising that the betting markets and the financial markets remained so exuberant in their belief that the UK would remain in the EU. The pills were a better indicator of the result than the betting markets.

Turnout was generally high throughout the country, certainly higher than in general elections. But Scotland and London, where voters generally backed remain, had lower turnout. At this stage it is difficult to infer the reasons for that, but it might be due to a less ‘enthusiastic’ leave campaign and citizens being less mobilised.

Will Jennings: The result of the vote was not a complete surprise. Although the final polls for the most part got it wrong, during the campaign we thought that it was going to be close and when it’s close then it can easily go either way. The geographical and demographic patterns that we observe largely correspond to what was evident in the referendum polling. Low turnout among young people and in areas like Greater London and Scotland may have been a factor in the weaker remain vote.

The polarisation of opinion is striking in terms of its geographical pattern, but this also extends right down to the family and community level. It will be important for politicians to set the right tone in bringing people back together. At the same time, the expectations of many leave voters, such as limits to immigration, more investment in the NHS and sovereignty claims, may be disappointed in the short-term as politicians grapple with these complicated issues.

Public Policy|Southampton : How can the government implement the necessary negotiations in view of leaving the EU in this context?

Will Jennings: This will not at all be a straightforward negotiation process and will be accompanied by a lot of economic turbulence and uncertainty. On the one side you have disappointed cosmopolitans (educated, socially liberal, professionals) and on the other the angry disenfranchised part of the population whom have not benefited from globalisation. Furthermore, the government (regardless of who will be Prime Minister) has a small majority and will be facing major economic challenges and renegotiation, alongside domestic political challenges – such as in Scotland. There are many reasons why a full Brexit may not materialise.

Public Policy|Southampton: How will this vote affect the political landscape in the UK?

Will Jennings: The main political parties are incredibly divided. Both Labour and the Conservatives are ripe for major realignments. Certain MPs on both sides have more in common in terms of their liberal-cosmopolitan values, than they have with other wings of their own parties.

Early elections are very likely given the current situation. These could benefit Labour if they somehow manage to regain the centre ground under a new leadership – and find a way to bridge the disconnected working class with the cities where their support is strong. It could also present an opportunity for the smaller parties like the LibDems. And it will also be interesting to see how UKIP rebrands itself after their victory. Who are they challenging now and what do they come to stand for after Brexit?

Public Policy|Southampton: What will happen next and what are the consequences for future UK-EU relations?

Will Jennings: Whoever will become the next Prime Minister will have to put together a team to negotiate withdrawal. He or she will want to delay the invoking of Article 50 of the EU Treaties in order for the economic situation to stabilise and for the divisive climate to calm down. The EU will be playing hardball and asking for the Article 50 procedure to be triggered soon, wanting to avoid a contagion of other countries looking to leave. If the terms that the UK negotiates are not good, there might be pressure for another vote. The economic consequences of leaving might also be so dire that an opposition party might campaign on a platform of undoing this decision.

For the EU this is a major blow, but it could go either way. It could lead to contagion with pressure for more referendums across EU member states and progressive disintegration of the Union, or on the contrary, it could force a fundamental reform of the EU institutions and its functioning and could even be beneficial to the EU in the long run.

Public Policy|Southampton: How do you assess the consequences for UK Higher Education and the University?

Will Jennings: At this point, it is very difficult to say what consequences the Brexit vote will have on UK Universities. This largely depends on what deals the UK is able to secure from the EU, for example on Erasmus, immigration of EU citizens to the UK and access to EU research funding. However, in general, we know that in the long term it is unlikely to be positive. Uncertainty is bad for the economy and for government funding of research. Universities thrive on international collaborations and freedom of movement. We might face difficulties in student and especially staff recruitment. More generally an economic downturn may both reduce available funding through the Research Councils and reduce incomes and employment, which in turn would have a negative impact on student numbers.

Facebook Twitter