The
journalist John Cassidy, writing in The New Yorker the day after the EURef
result, cut through the confusion with a clarity some of us may have struggled
to muster. Even so it would be interesting to delve deeper and discover quite
what Cassidy meant.
He began his
explanation of the results as follows
‘The
EU has never been particularly popular with ordinary people in the UK,
particularly England.’
I wonder who
he means by the term ‘ordinary people’. Does he mean people aged 18-65 who go
to work every day? Does he mean folks in social housing or in privately-rented
accommodation? Perhaps he means couples with two children with a financed-car
and a mortgage. Or does he mean 50% of the population in
twenty-thirty-years-olds who don’t possess a university degree? Presumably
‘ordinary’ doesn’t mean yacht-owning, privately-educated well-to-do men and
women. Other points he makes refer to
deindustrialisation.
· ‘Most
commentators … were assuming …prudence and risk aversion would generate a swing
in favour of Remain
·
The
Remain vote was particularly weak in the West Midlands and the Northeast of
England, two areas that have been hit hard by deindustrialisation.’
I was brought
up in the West Midlands at a time when there was full employment. Since the
days of Margaret Thatcher unemployment has risen and the area has never fully
recovered from the demise of the great steel works. When I was growing up our
high street had restaurants, Marks and Spencer and high-class boutiques. My
family was protected from deindustrialisation as dad was a grammar school
headteacher and my brother has worked as partner in a well-established
Midlands’ law firm for decades. Friends of mine who still live in my home town
talk about the numbers living there who are now on benefits. I never knew
anyone on benefits when I was at grammar school in the Midlands. I only met
benefits-users in my fifties - and that’s since I started living in prosperous
Bath. But, yes, people living in post-industrialised regions have been finding
life hard, probably since the 1980s.
Cassidy
echoes points made by Prof Curtice of Strathclyde University as referendum
votes were counted:
·
‘The
Guardian has published some telling
charts … they show gaping class divisions. Those with college degrees tended to
opt for Remain…The older and poorer you are, the more likely you were to vote
Leave.
·
The
British working classes and lower middle classes, particularly those living in
the provinces, have delivered a stinging rebuke to the London-based political
establishment’
Back to the
West Midlands, again.
On another
tack I believe Cassidy sums up the Farage-effect well:
·
‘Although
much of the immigration into the UK comes from outside of the EU the Leave
forces were able to focus attention on the freedom of movement for workers,
which is one of the founding principles of the EU
·
…economic
anxieties … underpinned the political anger that fuelled the Leave vote. Nigel
Farage … (was) able to exploit these economic worries, directing them against settlers
and other easy targets.’
If life is
hard you have to have someone to blame. Farage harnessed this need to accuse.
Let’s hope
Theresa May, our PM for less than twenty four hours, genuinely believes her own
words. As she addressed the nation she spoke up for those householders who are
‘just managing’ in financial terms. Her speech outside no.10 yesterday, a few
minutes after being asked by the Queen to form a government, sounded as though
she would seriously consider those who were in insecure jobs. It appeared those
who were struggling financially would be at the heart of her government’s
policies. Cassidy, back in June, commented on inequality in Britain:
·
‘…decades
of globalization, deregulation and policy changes that favoured the wealthy
have left Britain a more unequal place … the legacy of increased national
inequality in the 1980s’
Back to
Margaret Thatcher who, some would say, defined 80’s Britain. Cassidy also
believes Cameron made mistakes:
·
‘…the
Remain campaign was uninspiring in the extreme
·
…it
can be argued that Cameron’s mistake occurred as far back as 2013, when, in an
effort to satisfy the Eurosceptics inside his own Conservative Party, he
pledged to hold a referendum …before 2017
·
Steve
Hilton, a former political adviser to Cameron, said “People have expressed real
anger at being ignored by the system, and I think this is at the heart” of what
happened
·
To
get people to turn out and vote in your favour, you also have to give them something positive to
rally behind’
Instead of
saying how awful it would be outside Europe the Remain campaign didn’t help
themselves by making clear the positive advantages of Remaining.
Personally I
am very pleased to see a woman in no.10. I don’t vote Tory but the current
state of the Labour party means Theresa May might have little opposition, even
with a tiny majority of 12, in the House of Commons. Come on Labour! I am so
glad to see the destroyer of schools - Michael Gove - out of her cabinet. One
can only hope that May will appoint Secretaries of State for Education and
Health who do more than criticise hard-pushed professionals. John Cassidy has
summed up the reasons the Brexit vote won. I hope Theresa May helps
hard-working teachers, doctors, nurses, teaching assistants, carers, office
workers, shopkeepers, bus drivers. These are the people I define as ‘ordinary’.
Some of them will be doing more than ‘just managing’. Others will be suffering
after years of “Austerity Britain.”
Everyone who
works hard can do without the toxic criticisms of Gove, Hunt et al. My only worry
is that, as Home Secretary, Theresa May rubbed up the police force the wrong
way. If she considers them to be part of the non-elite and she wants to help
them, plus others who work hard, she’ll have to put some of the compassion at
the heart of Christianity into her politics. Her father was a vicar. Was he a
compassionate Christian? If so has any of it rubbed off on her?