A sceptic’s view? How the EU Referendum will advance a right-wing agenda, whatever the outcome.

Posted on February 25th, 2016 by Chris Kirkland

The announcement of the preferred date for the EU referendum has increased the campaigning on both sides of the campaign. Just as in 1975 this referendum is not simply a case of whether the public or electorate feels Britain is better off inside the EU or outside the arms reach of Brussels, but a question which hides underlying domestic policies. In the case of 1975 it settled internal divisions within the Labour Party, in 2016 internal decisions in the Conservative Party have once again led to the question being presented to the British public. The question on the ballot paper, reported on BBC’s Daily Politics Show as being “should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union” will shape Britain’s relationship with the European Union. However, the decision to omit from the question Cameron’s renegotiation (which we were told was central to the referendum) signifies that wider issues are at play here.

Below I outline two possible outcomes of the referendum; if Britain votes to stay and if Britain votes to leave. In doing so I demonstrate how the vote, irrespective of outcome, could promote a right-wing agenda.

  1. If Britain votes to stay

Much of the rhetoric surrounding the renegotiation focused upon Cameron’s renegotiation, in particular the ability to limit welfare payments to EU migrants. Many other aspects of the renegotiation – such as ensuring Britain will never join the Euro appear to be mere rhetoric as no government can bind its successors. The rationale for this was that many payments are transferred out of Britain to families where the cost of living is lower. A victory for what would inevitably be described as Cameron’s negotiations would further enable the PM to continue to reshape or diminish the welfare state. This policy could further lead to differential benefit payments for British citizens depending on the regional cost(s). One (speculative) argument may go something like; ‘we have different regional wages, why not benefit payments too?’ Not only could this lead to lower benefit payments to individuals in certain areas, but also (further) challenge the universal aspects of the welfare state.

  1. If Britain votes to leave

As many have suggested, if on the 24th July we awake to discover that Britain had voted to leave the EU then David Cameron’s position as Prime Minister would come under increasing scrutiny. Not least that two of the favourites to replace him – Boris Johnson and Michael Gove – are being lined up to take a prominent position in the Leave Europe campaign. The replacement of Cameron with either of these would usher in a lurch to the right; Boris and Gove both are arguably further to the right of David Cameron.

Secondly, the wider party may also seek to shift to the right to attract UKIP supporters making it easier to amend social legislation hitherto guaranteed under EU law, but with no statute in British law. Without its specific incorporation into British law the government would be able to erode social protection such as worker rights further.

800px-Union_Jack_and_the_european_flag
Image courtesy of Dave Kellam via Wikimedia Commons

The timing of the referendum also offers ‘the right’ an opportunity to use the referendum to overshadow the local and devolved elections of May 2016. Elections which the governing party might expect to fare badly in (though given the Conservatives have been in government since 2010 this point might be overstated) and political opponents such as the SNP are expected to do well in. The latter might further increase speculation/calls for a second independence referendum, something the Tories are opposed to. The required ten week campaign would ensure that the campaign, for a referendum on the 23rd June would start on the 14th April.

Overall, from a personal view if I may, neither outcome overly excites me. At this stage I am certainly an undecided voter. Rather than seeing this as an exciting opportunity I see lurking beyond the wording of the question and short-term implications of the vote a path which leans significantly to the right. Perhaps this overstates things slightly? However, the challenge to the Labour Party and left-wing parties is to take ownership of the debate, and reasons why people vote in particular ways. Labour’s relative unity over the issue will be important to this (though the media’s focus on the splits within the Conservative party may hamper any efforts to do this). Central to this is the reasoning to, or narratives of, why people vote to say/leave the EU. However, given the media’s questioning of businesses at the expense of social groups or trade unions and the failure of Corbyn and the Labour leadership to assert their agendas within the media (for a variety of reasons, not all the fault of the Labour leadership) such ownership appears a long way off.

Biography

Chris Kirkland

Christopher Kirkland is an associate at The University of Sheffield, having completed his PhD in February 2015. His thesis explored issues of crisis and the role of agency, comparing two case studies from contemporary British Politics. Other research interests include British elections and voters, British political economy and the British Labour Party.

 

Note: this article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Crick Centre, or the Understanding Politics blog series. To write for the Understanding Politics blog, email us at [email protected]

Creative Commons license

Do you have a question? Would you like to be involved?

Contact us