Resurgent Remain and a Rebooted Revolt on the Right: Exploring the 2019 European Parliament Elections in the United Kingdom

The 2019 European Parliament (EP) election took place against the backdrop of the vote for Brexit and the failure of Parliament to agree on a withdrawal agreement. Nigel Farage’s new Brexit Party topped the poll and the pro‐Remain Liberal Democrats, which called for a second referendum on EU membership, returned from electoral obscurity to take second place, while other pro‐Remain parties similarly performed well. In sharp contrast, the two main parties, Labour and the Conservatives, recorded their lowest combined vote share since they became the main representatives of the two‐party system. In this article, we draw on aggregate‐level data to explore what happened at the 2019 EP election in Great Britain. Our evidence suggests Labour suffered from a ‘pincer movement’, losing support in its mainly white, working class ‘left behind’ heartlands but also in younger cosmopolitan areas where Labour had polled strongly at the 2017 general election. Support for the new Brexit Party increased more significantly in ‘left behind’ communities, which had given strong support to Leave at the 2016 referendum, suggesting that national populists capitalised on Labour’s woes. The Conservatives haemorrhaged support in affluent, older retirement areas but largely at the expense of the resurgent Liberal Democrats, with the latter surging in Remain areas and where the Conservatives are traditionally strong, though not in areas with younger electorates where the party made so much ground prior to the 2010–2015 coalition government. Lastly, turnout increased overall compared with 2014, but individuals living in Leave areas were less motivated to vote. Overall, our findings suggest that those living in Remain areas were more driven to express their discontent with the Brexit process and more inclined to support parties that offer a second referendum on Britain’s EU membership.     

The promise of expertise: Walter Lippmann and the policy sciences

Walter Lippman addressed over his lifetime many of the questions raised still in the policy sciences about the proper role for the social scientist in the policy process, the potential contributions of various disciplines to an understanding of the issues, the kinds of circumstances most likely to nurture excellent policy analysis and the means whereby both a narrow elite and a wider public can be well informed about critical subjects and policy options. This article examines Lippmann's intellectual formation to deal with these questions and his reflections on institutions designed to foster policy analysis as well as the proper training of a policy expert. The article concludes with an examination of Lippmann's career as a practitioner in the policy world, and especially as a bridge between different communities.     

Establishing a joint agency response to the threat of lone-actor grievance-fuelled violence

The past year has seen a global upsurge of violent attacks by lone, mentally unstable individuals. The motivations for these attacks have varied and extremist ideological drivers are rarely ‘pure’, but mental health problems and personal grievances are common themes. Mentally ill and disenfranchised individuals may be vulnerable to extremist messages and propaganda because such beliefs can be a means of interpreting their social difficulties. Terrorist messages can also be adopted by psychotic people who are seeking to make sense of their symptoms. Most lone-actor attacks are preventable, if there is a system in place for identifying and intervening with antecedent behaviours, which include mental disturbances and the social problems that frequently accompany these conditions. Joint police-mental health models developed to assess and manage fixated persons can be applied to other forms of grievance-fuelled, lone-actor violence. This paper describes the establishment of such a service in Australia, and provides some preliminary data. It also discusses the role of mental health in the current security environment.     

The 2016 Referendum,Brexit and the Left Behind: An Aggregate‐level Analysis of the Result

Why did Britain vote for Brexit? What was the relative importance of factors such as education, age, immigration and ethnic diversity? And to what extent did the pattern of public support for Brexit across the country match the pattern of public support in earlier years for eurosceptic parties, notably the UK Independence Party (UKIP)? In this article we draw on aggregate‐level data to conduct an initial exploration of the 2016 referendum vote. First, we find that turnout was generally higher in more pro‐Leave areas. Second, we find that public support for Leave closely mapped past support for UKIP. And third, we find that support for Leave was more polarised along education lines than support for UKIP ever was. The implication of this finding is that support for euroscepticism has both widened and narrowed—it is now more widespread across Britain but it is also more socially distinctive.