Read more: Richard Dawkins—Boris Johnson for Prime Minister
I understand that for many "Remain" supporters, European Union citizens living in the UK, and international observers, Britain’s vote to leave the EU has caused concern. They should be reassured. This was not a vote to retreat from the world or turn away from the future. It was just a typically British assertion of independence and scepticism of over-mighty politicians.
In a globalised world moving at a giddying pace, the only control that ordinary voters have is the electoral Damoclean sword they hold over politicians. Since at least the Maastricht treaty of 1992, the EU has blunted it in area after area, placing the power over policies in the hands of a distant, unelected and unaccountable elite. Whoever voters put in or threw out of Downing Street, the EU Commission remained in place.
Prime Minister David Cameron claimed that his pre-referendum negotiations won Britain “special status.” Yet they contained no substantive reform—and crucially, there were no changes to the free movement of labour. Cameron joined a long line of British leaders who have returned from Brussels with fewer and fewer concessions and to louder and louder jeers. His failure explains the success of Vote Leave’s slogan: “take back control.”
Research shows that 49 per cent of "Leave" voters were motivated by “the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK” and 13 per cent by opposition to the expanding influence of the EU. The "Leave" campaign’s great success—from the first advert to the controversial battle bus—was to link the feelings of lost control to the everyday reality of funding and capacity pressure in the National Health Service.
Of course, immigration was also a major concern. It was the primary one for 33 per cent of "Leave" supporters (around 6m votes of the nearly 34m cast in total). However, the reasons for opposing EU-only free movement were a complex mix ranging from wanting to admit more highly skilled workers and students, to fairness for non-EU family members to—likely most significantly—concern about wage depression or the strain on public services.
My own campaigning experience, including debates around the country, hearteningly suggest that Britain remains an open, tolerant country. Vote Leave called for no change to the rights of existing migrants, supported by a clear majority of the public. Boris Johnson, the most popular choice for next Prime Minister among "Leave" supporters, advocated an amnesty for illegal immigrants. "Leave" won 30 per cent of Liberal Democrats and 25 per cent of Greens, and the support of nearly a third of ethnic minority voters.
There is no doubt that some "Leave" supporters voted in the hope of reducing unskilled immigration. I do not believe that listening to their concerns is inconsistent with building a more open, internationalist country. Adopting an Australian-style points system will allow an honest discussion on immigration that can only be good for tolerant voices and bad for the tiny xenophobic minority. We can debate the case for reducing unskilled EU immigration, to not count international students as migrants, or for more visas for scientists.
Over 1m Leave voters cast their ballot primarily in support of increased global free trade. DfID and allies can argue that sub-Saharan African countries should be at the front of the queue for free trade agreements, and that Britain should lead a campaign to reduce the tariffs and subsidies that hold back the vast potential of the developing world. There is a clear mandate for the NHS and scientific research to get increased funding, and an opportunity to argue for further devolution of power to professionals in our public services and individuals in their daily lives.
Britain’s vote to "Leave" the European Union was a vote against politicians and in favour of ordinary people. It was an act of defiance, but also a collective show of faith in each other to make the right decisions, whatever our age, background, ethnicity, gender and whether we voted "Leave" or "Remain." So let’s put the referendum behind us and use our new-found freedom to build a better future.
Now read: What to do about the referendum result?
I understand that for many "Remain" supporters, European Union citizens living in the UK, and international observers, Britain’s vote to leave the EU has caused concern. They should be reassured. This was not a vote to retreat from the world or turn away from the future. It was just a typically British assertion of independence and scepticism of over-mighty politicians.
In a globalised world moving at a giddying pace, the only control that ordinary voters have is the electoral Damoclean sword they hold over politicians. Since at least the Maastricht treaty of 1992, the EU has blunted it in area after area, placing the power over policies in the hands of a distant, unelected and unaccountable elite. Whoever voters put in or threw out of Downing Street, the EU Commission remained in place.
Prime Minister David Cameron claimed that his pre-referendum negotiations won Britain “special status.” Yet they contained no substantive reform—and crucially, there were no changes to the free movement of labour. Cameron joined a long line of British leaders who have returned from Brussels with fewer and fewer concessions and to louder and louder jeers. His failure explains the success of Vote Leave’s slogan: “take back control.”
Research shows that 49 per cent of "Leave" voters were motivated by “the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK” and 13 per cent by opposition to the expanding influence of the EU. The "Leave" campaign’s great success—from the first advert to the controversial battle bus—was to link the feelings of lost control to the everyday reality of funding and capacity pressure in the National Health Service.
Of course, immigration was also a major concern. It was the primary one for 33 per cent of "Leave" supporters (around 6m votes of the nearly 34m cast in total). However, the reasons for opposing EU-only free movement were a complex mix ranging from wanting to admit more highly skilled workers and students, to fairness for non-EU family members to—likely most significantly—concern about wage depression or the strain on public services.
My own campaigning experience, including debates around the country, hearteningly suggest that Britain remains an open, tolerant country. Vote Leave called for no change to the rights of existing migrants, supported by a clear majority of the public. Boris Johnson, the most popular choice for next Prime Minister among "Leave" supporters, advocated an amnesty for illegal immigrants. "Leave" won 30 per cent of Liberal Democrats and 25 per cent of Greens, and the support of nearly a third of ethnic minority voters.
There is no doubt that some "Leave" supporters voted in the hope of reducing unskilled immigration. I do not believe that listening to their concerns is inconsistent with building a more open, internationalist country. Adopting an Australian-style points system will allow an honest discussion on immigration that can only be good for tolerant voices and bad for the tiny xenophobic minority. We can debate the case for reducing unskilled EU immigration, to not count international students as migrants, or for more visas for scientists.
Over 1m Leave voters cast their ballot primarily in support of increased global free trade. DfID and allies can argue that sub-Saharan African countries should be at the front of the queue for free trade agreements, and that Britain should lead a campaign to reduce the tariffs and subsidies that hold back the vast potential of the developing world. There is a clear mandate for the NHS and scientific research to get increased funding, and an opportunity to argue for further devolution of power to professionals in our public services and individuals in their daily lives.
Britain’s vote to "Leave" the European Union was a vote against politicians and in favour of ordinary people. It was an act of defiance, but also a collective show of faith in each other to make the right decisions, whatever our age, background, ethnicity, gender and whether we voted "Leave" or "Remain." So let’s put the referendum behind us and use our new-found freedom to build a better future.
Now read: What to do about the referendum result?
