Brexit ‘driven by those left behind’
Reasons UK voted to leave EU
Workers on lower wages with poorer skills were the key to Britain’s decision to leave the European Union, a new analysis reveals.
Voters were far more likely to back Brexit if they earned less money, had poorer qualifications and lived in low-skilled areas, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has found.
WORKERS ON lower wages with poorer skills were the key to Britain’s decision to leave the European Union, a new analysis reveals.
Voters were far more likely to back Brexit if they earned less money, had poorer qualifications and lived in low-skilled areas.
The research, for the Yorkbased Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), provides detailed evidence to support the view held by many since the June referendum that those ‘left behind’ helped tip the balance in favour of the Leave campaign.
JRF chief executive Julia Unwin said: “With energy focussed on the process of leaving the EU, there’s a danger the concerns of people at home are ignored. This analysis should act as beacon for politicians who often talk about representing the concerns of ordinary people.
“The rapid pace of change in the economy has left too many people without the skills and opportunity to get on in life. We must act to ensure prosperity reaches all corners of the country, and provide everyone the chance to earn a good wage in a secure job.
“Theresa May has made the right noises to overcome this and heal the divisions with a promise to make Britain work for all.
“The priority is making good on this promise.”
The research by the highly respected Professor Matthew Goodwin, from the University of Kent, found average support for Leave among those earning more than £60,000 was 35 per cent compared to 58 per cent among those earning less than £20,000.
More than 70 per cent of people with no qualifications backed Brexit, those with postgraduate degrees voted Remain by the same margin.
The research also found voters with all levels of qualification were more likely to have backed Brexit if they lived in an area that overall had low skills levels.
Yorkshire voted by 58 per cent to 42 per cent to leave the EU in the referendum.
Prof Goodwin said: “This research reveals how the referendum was not simply about our relationship with the European Union, but also shed light on the deep divides that exist in our society.”
The Remain campaign has been criticised for failing to reassure those on lower wages and with worries on issues such as EU migration that their concerns would be addressed if Britain voted to stay.
But Remain supporters have argued the Leave campaign played on those concerns. Yorkshire MEP Richard Corbett said: “The Leave campaign deliberately and ruthlessly took advantage of the issues identified in this research, peddling lies about issues from immigration to Turkey to target precisely those people who will be most disadvantaged by Brexit.”
In a speech in Manchester later today, Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron will claim that “malevolent forces” are using the referendum result to fuel racism and hate and call for protection for EU citizens in the UK.
He will argue the anger of those who feel left behind is “justified” and the political class has “abandoned people disastrously to their fate”.
Mr Farron will say: “We have those who worked as pillars of their community all their lives, running small businesses, managing farms, making a difference, only to see themselves gazumped by salaries ten or a hundred times as much by cash-hungry bankers in their 20s.
“In short, we have an underlying, aching discomfort which goes to the heart of the reasons for the immediate crisis.”
AS THERESA May summons her Cabinet ministers to Chequers for a special away-day to discuss Brexit, and the potential opportunities for Britain, attendees would be advised to read today’s telling research for the Yorkbased Joseph Rowntree Foundation which sheds new light on the motivations behind the landmark Leave vote on June 23.
It concludes that a determining factor was the extent to which low-earning and low-skilled workers felt ignored, even betrayed, by successive governments which turned a deaf ear to concerns about migration – and the sheer number of opportunities being taken by EU migrants – as official figures reveal how more people from Poland are moving here than from any other country.
This is significant. It is a reminder to Mrs May that the electorate, particularly in the neglected North, feels disenfranchised and that voters will punish the Government if she is unable to preside over changes to the economic so the interests of all take precedence over the “privileged few”. It is clear that David Cameron’s policy aides thought proEU support in London, a city synonymous with both multi-culturalism and globalisation, was shared across the whole of the UK. Their judgement could not have been more erroneous.
Yet the challenge for Mrs May and her team is making sure that Britain still attracts sufficient international investors to provide sufficient opportunities for future generations. Although consumer confidence does not appear to have been dented by the Leave vote, the new PM’s definition of ‘Brexit’ is awaited with keen interest – especially by the business community.
In the meantime, the imminent start of the new academic year is a timely reminder that the issue of skills has never been more important to people of all ages, all abilities and from all walks of life. The Government can’t be expected to do this alone – individuals have to accept their share of personal responsibility – but this is one area where Ministers can take the lead and show that they have listened and learned.