Public Opinion and Britain's Relationship with Europe

Lead Research Organisation: National Centre for Social Research
Department Name: Research Department

Abstract

Although they differ in their readiness to put the issue before voters, all of Britain's political parties now take the view that there should not be any significant change in the UK's relationship with the EU without the consent of voters as expressed in a referendum. As a result, no attempt to provide impartial evidence on the future of that relationship can be complete without taking public opinion into account. However, systematic impartial evidence can be difficult to ascertain both because the evidence itself is scattered across a disparate variety of sources and because protagonists in the debate prefer to promote the evidence of support for their views rather than a balanced account.
This proposal is for a set of knowledge exchange activities designed to overcome these obstacles, together with some academic writing and research that will help fill some of the gaps in the relevant knowledge base. In particular, we propose, (i) the development of a website facility that brings the existing survey and polling evidence on attitudes towards Britain's relationship with Europe into one place, accompanied by independent commentary, (ii) the provision of a set of briefing papers on specific topics, supplemented by oral presentations to those with a close professional interest in the subject, and (iii) the submission of two articles to academic journals, facilitated in part by the collection of new survey data.
The website facility would bring together (i) all the key readings on public attitudes to Europe provided by commercial polling companies since 2010, and (ii) the key UK data from long running major academic and governmental surveys, (iii) access to key EU-wide attitudes where these are systematically available from cross-national sources for the period since 2004. The database would contain key methodological details for each poll/question and use the latest data visualisation and graphical facilities to make the statistical material as accessible as possible.
In addition the website facility would provide a regular commentary (blog) on various aspects of public attitudes towards the EU. The writing of a blog would be initiated either (i) the release of a new output by the project itself (ii) on the occasion of events and media stories to which public opinion is pertinent, or (iii) the publication of new polling/survey evidence. The commentaries would be supplied principally by the applicant but guest blogs would also be sought from those with relevant expertise. The facility would also provide a bibliography of relevant literature.
The briefing papers, of which at least six would be produced, will provide an introduction to the evidence on a particular topic. Attractively designed and written in an accessible style, they would be aimed at the non-academic professional and interested lay public. Presentations based on the findings of the briefings would be made at two off the record seminars held near SW1 and aimed at policy makers with a close professional interest in the subject. One or more similar seminars will also be offered to UK government officials.
The academic articles would focus on (i) the extent to which instrumental evaluations and cultural concerns interact with each other in shaping attitudes towards the EU in the UK and in so doing have helped created a social division between 'winners ' and 'losers', and (ii) the degree to which attitudes towards the EU may be contingent on party stances and on potential changes to the rules and competences of the EU. The latter of these two pieces of work in particular would be facilitated by the inclusion of a module of 20 questions on the 2015 British Social Attitudes survey, the fieldwork for which would begin shortly after the 2015 general election.This new data collection will extend one of the longest running time series on the subject as well as cover topics, such as attitudes to changing the competences of the EU, hitherto little addressed.

Planned Impact

Public opinion - and the interpretation thereof - has already had a substantial impact on policy towards Britain's relationship with the EU. Perceived public hostility as registered through the electoral success of UKIP has impelled the current Prime Minister to promise a renegotiation of Britain's terms of membership, to be followed by a referendum on whether the country should remain a member. Similarly, concern about levels of immigration from the EU has seen ministers propose an increase in the length of the time that someone should have been resident in the UK before being eligible for welfare benefits, as well as an end to the payment of child benefit in respect of family members not resident in the UK. Meanwhile, although they have adopted a less Eurosceptic stance, the opposition Labour party has backed these restrictions on welfare and accepted the provisions of legislation passed by the current government that requires a referendum be held before any further significant transfer of powers to the EU takes place.
This project will collate, make accessible and analyse the public attitudes that have already proven so influential and may eventually prove decisive. In so doing it will help identify what are the key considerations that impel people to support or oppose Britain's membership of the EU and the circumstances and conditions that might make continued membership more or less acceptable. Such information is likely to be regarded as invaluable intelligence by those on all sides of the argument in devising their strategies, as well as by those organisations whose future could well be significantly affected by the decisions that are eventually taken.
The community of those with a potential interest in the project is thus large and includes:
UK (and devolved) ministers, politicians and campaigners from all parties
The European Commission and European Parliament
Thank tanks with an interest in Europe such as Open Europe and the Institute for Public Policy Research.
Pressure groups with an interest in the future of Britain's relationship with Europe, including the CBI, the TUC, British Influence, the European Movement, the Campaign for an Independent Britain and Migration Watch.
The organisers of any putative referendum campaigns that may emerge after the 2015 general election.
Businesses, trade unions and investment institutions
Journalists both north and south of the border, together with journalists from outside the UK
Diplomatic representatives of overseas governments, and especially representatives or other European states.
Members of the general public with an interest in politics and/or the UK's relationship with the EU.

The project thus potentially has important implications for both the wealth and the culture of the United Kingdom. In so far as the project informs the strategies of key participants in the debate, it could materially affect the stances taken by both sides in any negotiations that take place between the UK government and the rest of the EU, as well as the arguments that are put before the public in any eventual referendum. Even in the absence of any steps towards holding a referendum, the project could be expected to inform the policy stances of the UK government and political parties towards Britain's future relationship with the EU. In so far as the findings on public opinion inform the investment decisions made by business, the project could also affect the future economic wellbeing of the UK. Meanwhile, the culture of the UK will benefit from enhanced media understanding and reporting of the evidence on attitudes towards the EU, thereby making journalists more effective at advancing public understanding of the debate about Europe.
It is anticipated this impact will primarily arise following the establishment of the proposed website after approximately 5-6 months and be advanced further through the provision of research briefings throughout the lifetime of the project.
 
Description 1. Voters' attitudes towards the EU were shaped by two principal considerations - what they thought the consequences of leaving would be for the UK's economy, and what impact they thought exiting would have on immigration. The former issue was the more strongly correlated with vote choice, but although a plurality thought Brexit would have a negative impact on the economy, this was insufficient to deliver a Remain majority as the group still only represented some two-fifths of all voters. The association between referendum vote and perceptions of immigration was weaker - largely because a substantial minority of voters who thought immigration would fall voted Remain nevertheless - but because well over half of voters anticipated that immigration would fall, voters' perceptions on this issue helped pave the way for a Leave majority.
2. All parties apart from UKIP struggled to persuade their supporters to back their recommendation as to which way to vote in the EU referendum. The ballot cut across the regular patterns of British electoral politics. That said, around two-thirds of 2015 Labour voters voted to Remain whereas around three-fifths of 2015 Conservative supporters voted to Leave. This divergence increased in the 2017 election. The Conservatives gained ground amongst those who voted Leave while they fell back amongst those who voted Remain. Labour gained more votes amongst those who voted Remain than it did amongst those who backed Leave. This pattern helped open up an unprecedented age gap in support for the Conservatives and Labour, thereby ensuring that once again Brexit was disruptive of the country's usual electoral patterns.
3. Because of the perceived indivisibility of the 'four freedoms' in the eyes of the EU, it is widely anticipated that, in the Brexit negotiations, the UK will face a trade-off between securing largely unfettered access to the single market and ending freedom of movement. However, the structure of public opinion does not align with the presumptions of the elite level debate. Nearly everyone in Britain (including nearly every Leave voter) thinks EU companies should be able to trade freely in the UK in return for British companies enjoying the same privilege in the EU. However, at the same time, around two-thirds of all voters (including at least a half of Remain voters) support imposing a limit on the number of EU migrants that can come to the UK. If the EU maintains its position, it will be difficult for the Brexit negotiations to achieve an outcome that will satisfy most British voters.
4. Although, unlike England and Wales, Scotland voted to Remain in the EU, the balance of opinion amongst voters north of the border on what kind of Brexit they would like to see is little different from that in Britain as a whole. Again, nearly everyone is in favour of free trade while nearly two-thirds back ending freedom of movement. The high Remain vote in Scotland was more a reflection of the SNP's advocacy of 'independence in Europe' than any marked enthusiasm for the EU per se.
Exploitation Route During the referendum itself this project provided insights into how people might vote in the referendum and why. These were communicated regularly to politicians, civil servants, those working in financial services and diplomats via both face to face briefings and the provision of information and analysis via the web and conventional media. However, this is clearly now all water under the bridge. However, an understanding of the reasons as to why people voted as they did may thought to be desirable for those participating in the Brexit negotiations, politicians (in the EU and as well as the UK) in general, and those whose business may be affected by the outcome - while the project's post-referendum work on public attitudes towards the kind of Brexit they would like to see certainly is. Again, with the support of the central staff of the 'UK in a Changing Europe' initiative, the project itself has been very active in communicating its findings on attitudes towards Brexit to these key audiences, and will continue to be so via the Brexit Urgency Grant that Prof. Curtice now holds. What, of course, these audiences do with the findings is for them to decide!
Sectors Financial Services, and Management Consultancy,Government, Democracy and Justice,Security and Diplomacy

URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/comment-analysis/
 
Description This project was a Senior Fellowship awarded under the auspices of the ESRC's 'UK in Changing Europe' (UKICE) initiative. It was originally awarded for a period of twelve months from May 2015, but was subsequently extended on three further occasions, eventually ending in June 2017. However, thanks to a grant under the Council's Brexit Priority Grant scheme, much of the work undertaken as part of the fellowship has continued since that date. Only impact that can be directly related to the fellowship are reported here, but it should be appreciated that the division of the activities and impact of the two projects is somewhat artificial. The original inspiration for this project, in line with the broader UKICE initiative, was to help inform the public debate about the UK's future relationship with the European Union by providing impartial information on public attitudes that were of relevance to referendum on the UK's membership of the EU. Following the majority vote to Leave the EU the project's focus then became the provision of similarly impartial information on public attitudes pertaining to the debate about what form Brexit should take. Both phases of the research were therefore ones in which engagement with non-academic audiences, and especially policymakers and the media, was a priority. The externally facing character of the project was reflected in the fact that in its initial phase the principal proposed output was a website, whatukthinks.org/eu, that would provide a comprehensive collection of polling data on attitudes towards Britain's relationship with the EU. That content could be searched via a variety of criteria and the results displayed graphically and downloaded as well as examined in tabular form. At the same time the site provided impartial commentary in the form of blogs and occasional longer analysis papers intended to advance public understanding of the evidence available. Launched in October 2015, the site rapidly became the go-to place during the referendum campaign for information on public attitudes pertaining to the forthcoming ballot. As well as continually updating the collection of polling data, the site also published 37 blogs between its launch and referendum day and another 23 in the period between the June 24 2016 and the end of June 2017. It also published a dozen longer analysis papers (see also further below). Some of the material and facilities provided by the site were, for example, replicated during the campaign by the Daily Telegraph and the Wall St Journal, and are known to have been used by the Communications Directorate of the European Parliament. Overall use grew rapidly from just over 10,000 sessions in January 2016 to over 900,000 in the month of the referendum itself. Since the referendum, the site has continued to be used regularly, attracting usage at a rate of 20,000 sessions per month as the lifetime of this project concluded in June 2017. The associated Twitter account currently has over 8,800 followers. As well as collating and analysing data collected by others, the project also collected and reported on its own data. Initially, this consisted of the inclusion of a module of 20 questions on the 2015 British Social Attitudes survey. Undertaken in the summer of 2015 before the referendum campaign got under way, this research provided some of the earliest evidence of the potential sources of support for leaving the EU, suggesting that what mattered was the presence or otherwise of an interaction between adverse perceptions of the cultural and economic consequences of EU membership. Later on in its life, the project made use of a new survey platform, NatCen's random probability mixed mode panel, which endeavours to combine the benefits of random sampling with the speed and cost-effectiveness of administering a survey online. First of all, we used the panel to conduct a survey during the last few weeks of the EU campaign, publishing the results shortly before polling day. Although the survey put Remain narrowly ahead, the result was not significantly different from 50-50 and suggested that much might turn on the level of turnout. It also confirmed that as had been anticipated a year earlier, the key determinants of which way people intended to vote were their attitudes towards the cultural and economic consequences of staying in or leaving the EU. After the referendum, further use was made of the panel to ascertain what voters hoped would emerge from the Brexit negotiations. A suite of 12-15 questions was administered via the panel in September 2015 and, again, in February 2016. A key feature of the research was that it did not assume that voters recognised the trade-offs, such as between maintaining free trade and ending freedom of movement, that were a key feature of the debate among policymakers. Indeed, the research found that a majority of voters backed both controlling immigration and maintaining free trade and that the public could not be characterised more generally as being consistently in favour of a 'hard' or a 'soft' Brexit. At the same time a similar exercise was conducted using a wholly Scottish version of the NatCen panel. This ascertained that, despite the different outcome of the referendum north of the border, the balance of attitudes towards the possible shape of the Brexit deal was not dissimilar to that in the rest of the UK. All of the original pieces of research were the product of an extended briefing paper that was published on the whatukthinks website and accompanied by a press publicity exercise, together with, in all but one case (the referendum campaign survey), a well-attended seminar for policymakers and commentators in the Palace of Westminster/Scottish Parliament. In many cases the seminar included a response from an MP/MSP who was playing a key role in the Brexit debate. The publication of each report was also accompanied by a successful press publicity exercise. Interviews were given, for example, to News At Ten, Sky News and the BBC News Channel, while the research was reported, inter alia, in The Guardian, The Independent, The Daily Telegraph, The Express, City AM, UK Business Insider, The Scotsman and The Herald. In addition, eight further analysis papers based in whole or in part on data from other sources were also produced and published and two of these - including one on the divergence that had emerged during the referendum campaign between the results of phone and internet polls - were also graced by seminars held in or near the Palace of Westminster. The original research undertaken in Scotland after the referendum was part of a widening of the remit of the fellowship so that it covered the implications of the Brexit decision for the future territorial governance of the UK, including above all the possibility of another independence referendum in Scotland. As a result, from August 2016 the project also took on responsibility for the running of the whatscotlandthinks.org website, which was originally created with ESRC funding in advance of the 2014 Scottish independence referendum and which provides much the same facilities and content in respect of its subject matter as the whatukthinks.org/eu site does for the Brexit debate. A total of 19 blogs were published on the site between August 2016 and June 2017. On average during this period the site hosted 30,000 sessions per month, while the associated Twitter account has 11.3K followers. Apart from the dissemination to non-academic audiences undertaken via the two websites and at the time of the initial publication of our original research, the project also engaged more generally with a variety of non-academic users during its lifetime. Prof. Curtice gave well over 50 talks and presentations to non-academic audiences. This included four keynote or similar presentations at conferences organised by the UK in a Changing Europe initiative, together with one or more presentations to officials at the Foreign Office, the Cabinet Office, the Department for International Development, the Bank of England, UK Financial Instruments, the Scottish Government, the London Office of the European Commission, and the Canadian Government. In Brussels, he addressed meetings at the European Committee of the Regions and the European Policies Centre and a conference of those responsible for the EU's Eurobarometer survey. He also gave evidence to the Europe Committee of the Scottish Parliament, spoke privately to a variety of financial and business organisations, spoke at seminars about Brexit at the Royal Institute for International Affairs, and was invited to private sessions at a number of embassies, including giving a lecture hosted by the Dutch embassy that was attended by diplomats from most EU countries. In addition, Prof. Curtice was a regular broadcaster, including as the lead psephologist in the BBC's coverage of the referendum results, and was an occasional contributor to a variety of newspapers and news sites (including BBC Online and the UK in a Changing Europe's own website). Of engagement with non-academic audiences there therefore was plenty. Demonstrating 'impact' in what was and still is a process with many players is inevitably much more difficult. It was not the purpose of the project to change anyone's mind about how they should vote in the EU referendum, or about what Brexit should now mean. We can, however, reasonably claim to have made some contribution to public understanding of the attitudes that underlay the Brexit vote, not least in having been among the first to discern and explain the importance and role of the two 'poles' in the Brexit debate - the perceived cultural and economic consequences of staying or leaving. Meanwhile, in pointing out in one blog and associated journal article that even in pro-Leave constituencies held by the party most 2015 Labour voters voted Remain, we certainly added to the debate about how Labour should respond to the Brexit vote (it was a subject about which we were quizzed by many Labour politicians), while our work also gave some guidance as to why phone and internet polls were reporting rather different results during the referendum campaign. These findings might all be felt to have made some contribution to the country's 'quality of life'. Meanwhile, the project has provided policymakers at official level, not only in Britain but also in the EU, with easy access to vital intelligence about what the UK - and Scottish - public wants from Brexit and how people's preferences do not map into the existing frame of policymakers. At the same time, those in the private sector were advised of the closeness of the referendum race and forewarned about the need for them to consider how to manage the risks that might arise if there were to be what they regarded as an adverse outcome. Of course, whether this knowledge has made a difference to the direction and the effectiveness of public policy or to the country's economic wellbeing is much more difficult to tell.
First Year Of Impact 2015
Sector Agriculture, Food and Drink,Education,Financial Services, and Management Consultancy,Government, Democracy and Justice
Impact Types Cultural,Policy & public services

 
Description Invited Witness, Scottish Parliament European and External Relations Committee
Geographic Reach National 
Policy Influence Type Gave evidence to a government review
URL http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=10389
 
Description ESRC Brexit Urgency Grants
Amount £300,000 (GBP)
Funding ID ES/R001219/1 
Organisation Economic and Social Research Council 
Sector Public
Country United Kingdom
Start 04/2017 
End 10/2018
 
Title British Social Attitudes 2015 
Description All of the data collected as part of the 2015 British Social Attitudes survey, including the responses to a module of 20 questions on attitudes towards the EU included as part of this project. 
Type Of Material Database/Collection of data 
Year Produced 2016 
Provided To Others? Yes  
Impact British Social Attitudes is one of the most widely used holdings in the UK Data Archive. 
URL https://discover.ukdataservice.ac.uk/catalogue/?sn=8116&type=Data%20catalogue
 
Title whateuthinks.org/eu 
Description Website that provides a searchable collation of all UK polling data on attitudes of relevance to the referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union (EU), together with selected relevant data from the rest of the EU. The site also provides graphical display facilities, occasional commentary in the form of blogs, and longer analysis papers. 
Type Of Material Database/Collection of data 
Year Produced 2015 
Provided To Others? Yes  
Impact The site is being widely used by journalists and policy makers in order to follow the evolution of public opinion in the run-up to the referendum, including not least by the Communication Directorates of the European Commission and the European Parliament in Brussels. 
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/
 
Title whatscotlandthinks.org 
Description A unique continuously updated collection of opinion findings (from 2007 onwards) and data from the Scottish Social Attitudes (SSA) survey (from 1999 onwards) of relevance to the debate about Scotland's constitutional future. The collection is fully searchable and contains a variety of tabulation and data visualisation facilities. The site contains a data explorer facility that enables the user to construct crosstabulations of the SSA data. There is also a blog that provides regular commentary on new poll results and academic research findings. 
Type Of Material Database/Collection of data 
Year Produced 2013 
Provided To Others? Yes  
Impact In the run up to the Scottish independence referendum in September 2014, the site came to be very heavily used and was frequently quoted by journalists, academics and other commentators who were seeking to follow and write about the forthcoming ballot. It thus made a major contribution to the public debate about and Scotland's constitutional future. 
URL http://whatscotlandthinks.org
 
Description A Tale of Two Referendums 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach Regional
Primary Audience Public/other audiences
Results and Impact Presentation comparing public attitudes in the EU and Scottish Independence Referendums, SOLAS Festival, Perth, 2018.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2018
URL http://www.solasfestival.co.uk/blog/2018/6/15/whats-on-when-day-by-day-breakdowns-are-here
 
Description Brexplanations in the dock 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Event to mark the publication of a new analysis paper that provided a synoptic, accessible overview of why people voted as they did in the EU referendum
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2016
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/comment-analysis/analysis/
 
Description Briefing, Palace of Westminster, December 2015 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Presentations by Prof. Curtice and Ms. Ormston of findings from an initial set of papers posted at the whatukthinks.org/eu website. Held in a committee room in the Palace of Westminster, the event was attended by peers, MPs, parliamentary staff and civil servants, as well as interested journalists and members of the public.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2015
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/comment-analysis/analysis/
 
Description Briefing, Portcullis House, February 2016 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Media (as a channel to the public)
Results and Impact Presentation by Prof. Curtice on the extent of Euroscepticism in Britain based on newly released data from the 2015 British Social Attitudes survey that were published that day at the whatukthinks.org/eu website, together with an analysis of 'soft' supporters of Leave and Remain presented by Prof. Matthew Goodwin (Univ. of Kent). Held in a committee room in Portcullis House, the event was attended by peers, MPs, parliamentary staff and civil servants, as well as interested journalists and members of the public.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2016
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/comment-analysis/analysis/
 
Description Can we believe the EU referendum polls? 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Presentation at Portcullis House of an analysis paper on the differences between the findings of telephone and internet polls of voting intentions ion the EU referendum
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2016
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/comment-analysis/analysis/
 
Description Does Scotland Want A Different Kind of Brexit? 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Presentation in the Scottish Parliament of initial findings of research into attitudes towards Brexit in Scotland and how these compare with those in the rest of Great Britain, together with a response from Patrick Harvie, MSP, Co-Convenor of the Scottish Green Party.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/ill-have-what-shes-having-scots-share-pms-vision-for-brexit-deal/
 
Description European Assciation of Political Consultants Annual Conference 2018 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach International
Primary Audience Professional Practitioners
Results and Impact Invited presentation on polarisation in the Brexit referendum given to an international audience of political consultants. Audience were particularly interested in the argument that Brexit uncovered a form of political polarisation that had hitherto been relatively unimportant in the UK.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2018
URL http://www.eapcevents.com/
 
Description Fringe Meeting, Conservative Party Conference, Manchester 2015 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Fringe meeting for delegates at the UK Conservative Party conference, Manchester, October 2015. Entitled, 'In or Out? What will swing the referendum?', the meeting was addressed by Prof. Curtice, Damian Green MP, Daniel Hannan MEP, and Toby Helm, Political Editor of The Observer, followed by a discussion of what were thought likely to be the key issues in the forthcoming EU referendum campaign. The meeting was designed, inter alia, to raise awareness of the forthcoming launch of the website facility being established by the project, whatukthinks.org/eu.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2015
URL http://www.natcen.ac.uk/events/past-events/2015/october/natcen-at-the-conservative-conference/
 
Description Fringe Meeting, Labour Party Conference, Brighton 2015 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Fringe meeting for delegates at the UK Labour party conference, Brighton, September 2015. Entitled, 'In or Out? What will swing the referendum?', the meeting was addressed by Prof. Curtice, Chukka Umunna MP, Graham Stringer MP, and Toby Helm, Political Editor of The Observer, followed by a discussion of what were thought likely to be the key issues in the forthcoming EU referendum campaign. The meeting was designed, inter alia, to raise awareness of the forthcoming launch of the website facility being established by the project, whatukthinks.org/eu.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2015
URL http://www.natcen.ac.uk/events/past-events/2015/september/natcen-at-the-labour-conference/
 
Description Hard - But Not Too Hard: Much more on what voters want from Brexit 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Presentation in the Palace of Westminster of initial findings from research into attitudes towards Brexit undertaken in February 2017, together with response from Pat McFadden, MP, former Minister for Europe.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/britain-on-brexit-hard-on-the-outside-but-soft-in-the-middle/
 
Description Public Attitudes to Brexit 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Presentation at Portcullis House of newly published findings on attitudes towards the European Union based from the British Social Attitudes survey
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2016
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/comment-analysis/analysis/
 
Description Public Attitudes towards Scotland's Challenges 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach Regional
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Invited presentation at the annual conference of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the collective representative body for local authorities in Scotland. Presentation covered public attitudes towards a range of policy challenges facing Scotland including the delivery of public services to an ageing population, the use of Scotland's devolved tax powers, Brexit and Scotland's constitutional status. This was a repeat invitation and recognises the perceived utility of the work by one of the key institutions in Scottish politics.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2018
URL http://www.cosla.gov.uk/events/2017/10/cosla-and-annual-conference-2017
 
Description Times Higher Annual Lecture 2018 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Professional Practitioners
Results and Impact Inaugural annual Times Higher Lecture. Talk compared the stance taken by Universities UK in the Scottish independence and EU referendum
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2018
URL https://www.timeshighereducation.com/video-times-higher-education-annual-lecture-2018
 
Description What does Leave mean? 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Event organised at British Academy in conjunction with the 'UK in a Changing Europe' initiative at which presentations were made by academic and non-academic speakers on why Leave won the referendum and how attitudes towards Brexit have evolved subsequently.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2016
URL http://ukandeu.ac.uk/event/what-does-leave-mean/
 
Description What. does Britain want from Brexit? 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Presentation at Portcullis House of new research into public attitudes towards Britain's relationship towards the European Union
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2016
URL http://whatukthinks.org/eu/comment-analysis/analysis/
 
Description Wilton Park Conference on The Future of the UK's Bilateral Relations in Europe 
Form Of Engagement Activity A talk or presentation
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach International
Primary Audience Policymakers/politicians
Results and Impact Invited speaker on why Britain voted to the EU and public attitudes towards Brexit at this international private conference of key stakeholders from across Europe organised by the Foreign and Commnwealth Office. Aim was to enable non-UK members to understand better some of the political backdrop to the Brext vote and prcess in the UK.
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2018
URL https://www.wiltonpark.org.uk/event/wp1603/