How Does Post-Brexit Britain Wish To Exercise Its Sovereignty?

One key feature of British politics during and since the referendum has been the strength of the division between those who voted Remain and those who backed Leave. The two sides have been inclined to take different views about what the UK's post-Brexit relationship with the EU should be. Now there is a possibility that they might take different stances about the choices that the UK now has to make as it takes on responsibility for those policy areas that are currently wholly or partly decided by the EU. If this were to be the case the polarisation - and intra-party dissensus - that has been a hallmark of recent British politics could continue well beyond Brexit itself.

However, using conventional survey methods to research public attitudes to post-Brexit policy choices is constrained by what to date has been a lack of public debate about the various options and trade-offs that will face policy-makers. This project will meet these constraints by using a deliberative approach to researching public attitudes, focusing on three areas of post-Brexit policy - on immigration, labour market regulation and food production and safety.

In particular, we will use an approach known as Deliberative Polling. Under this approach, a random sample of participants are given access to information and expertise about the poll's subject matter and take part in facilitated group discussions about the issues at stake charts. Participants' attitudes and knowledge are measured via a self-completion questionnaire both before and after the deliberation. As a result, the approach not only identifies whether the balance of public opinion changes in the wake of the deliberation, but also why and amongst which kinds of voters. This makes it possible to identify the arguments and considerations that are likely to prove persuasive as and when voters become better informed about a subject.

Using this approach, we will be able to ascertain the extent to which any prior differences of outlook between Remain and Leave voters are weakened or reinforced as a result of deliberation, and thus whether they are or are not likely to be perpetuated in future debates about public policy. At the same time, we will be able to inform policy-makers of the likely public reaction to the various policy choices that they are considering and advise the most effective way of presenting any particular policy option that they decide to pursue.

Deliberative polling has so far largely been conducted face to face. In this project, however, a face to face poll held at a central UK location will be preceded by both a pilot and a full deliberative poll undertaken online using video communication. Although conducted a year apart, the structure of the deliberation in the two exercises will be similar, thereby facilitating the first ever systematic comparison of the impact of video-enhanced online and face to face deliberation.

At each key stage, the project will produce briefings aimed primarily at non-academic audiences that outline its latest findings. The results of each poll will then be reported in greater depth in chapters published in the annual British Social Attitudes report and in presentations given to policy-makers. The full findings of the project will be reported in academic articles and in a book. The research will be guided throughout by an Advisory Committee of academics and policy-makers with a view to ensuring that the deliberation is balanced and secures the confidence of all stakeholders.

The UK now has to develop new set of public policies across a wide range of areas where competence for making decisions has hitherto largely lain in the EU. This project will indicate where public opinion stands on a number of the key issues, both before and after deliberation, and will identify the likely key drivers of public opinion as the debate about these policy areas develops. In so doing we anticipate looking, in particular, at attitudes towards (a) immigration policy (b) labour market regulation and rights, and (c) food production and safety. These are all topics of widespread interest and public concern.

Thus, most immediately the project will be of interest to those with interest in and responsibility for the development and administration of public policy in these areas:

UK government ministers and civil servants
Government ministers and civil servants in the devolved administrations
MPs and Lords of all parties
Members of the devolved parliaments/assemblies
Relevant executive agencies, such as the Food Standards Agency
Think tanks, lobbying organisations, businesses and trade unions, including the CBI, TUC, NFU, Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants and Migration Watch
Journalists with an interest in public policy
The interested public

In addition, overseas governments will also have an interest in some of the policy decisions that are made by the UK (and devolved) governments in these areas and thus the work of this project will also be of interest to diplomatic representatives from other countries, including not exclusively those from the EU and from the Commonwealth.

Public policy is, of course, never developed simply to reflect or to respond to public opinion. However, public policy is more likely to be effective if it is developed with an understanding of what may and may not be acceptable to voters. This is especially true of topics that are potentially highly contentious, as is the case for a number of the subjects about which the UK now has to make decisions. After all, the public's adverse reaction to the relatively high rates of net inward immigration experienced by the UK during the last 15 years has played a key role in the events that eventually led to the decision to leave the EU, contrary to the wish of the then UK government. Meanwhile one of the key requirements of any system of food safety is that it should secure the confidence of consumers, but debates about the safety of GM crops and, more recently, chlorinated chicken, continue and may well need to be addressed.

This project will provide policy makers and others with guidance as to which public policy stances on issues such as these might work with the grain of public opinion. Moreover, because the project will invite research participants to deliberate on some of the detail that policy makers will have to confront, the project will provide more detailed guidance about how the public might react to particular policy proposals than could be achieved via regular survey research. In addition, the project will help identify the arguments for or against a particular proposal that are likely to prove particularly persuasive in the eyes of the public. As a result, not only will policymakers be better equipped to identify options that are more likely to prove politically acceptable and to avoid proposals that might prove particularly contentious, but also secure guidance on how best to present policy so that it secures wider public acceptance.

That said, the project aims to inform rather than influence the decisions made and stances taken by policy makers and stakeholders. Its 'impact' will thus rest on the use made of the research rather than any particular policy outcome. However, the publicity attracted by and the interest shown in the work associated with Prof. Curtice's UK in a Changing Europe Senior Fellowship gives every reason to believe that stakeholders will wish to appraise themselves of the findings.