Nigel Farage speaks during a public meeting held in the Sage building on April 23, 2014 in Gateshead. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Election success for Ukip in England could encourage Scottish independence

A strong performance by Farage's party could signal to Scotland that England may vote to leave the EU in a future in/out referendum. 

Anyone who ever said European elections aren’t interesting might want to reconsider that thought. While the latest polls show eurosceptic parties on course to make significant gains across the EU, new polling commissioned by IPPR and the universities of Edinburgh and Cardiff shows that next month’s outcome will likely differ as much between Britain’s home nations as it does between the EU member states.

European Election Voting Intentions, April 2014 (%)

Party

England

Wales

Scotland

Labour

30

39

31

Conservative

22

18

12

Liberal Democrats

11

7

7

Plaid Cymru/SNP

--

11

33

UKIP

29

20

10

Other

8

6

6

N of respondents

2846

793

782

In England, Labour is facing fierce competition from Ukip to finish first, with the Conservatives falling well into third place. Ed Miliband's party has much to be pleased about in Wales where it commands a resounding 19 percentage point lead over Ukip, which is battling the Tories for second. In Scotland, the SNP is running neck-and-neck with Labour to finish on top, while Ukip lags far behind.

Despite the "UK" in its name, Ukip is swiftly becoming the de facto English National Party - where at the moment it can count on nearly one in three votes. Its appeal, however, isn’t nearly as strong among Welsh and Scottish voters. In Wales, one in five voters intend to vote Ukip, while in Scotland support dwindles down to only one in 10 voters. Even though Ukip considers itself a British-wide party, the research shows English identity accounts for a large chunk of its support. Those who identify more strongly with England than Britain are more than twice as likely to support Ukip than those who more strongly identify with Britain.

European Election Voting Intention by National Identity, England, April 2014 (%)

 

English only/More English than British

Equal English & British

British only/More British than English

Labour

24

25

33

Conservative

22

31

18

Liberal Democrats

7

10

19

UKIP

42

26

19

Other

6

7

10

N of respondents

943

1160

546

Differing views between the home nations aren’t just restricted to next month’s European election. It’s very clear there are mixed feelings regarding the UK’s membership of the EU. When asked about a possible EU referendum, the Scottish view Britain’s membership much more favourably with a 16-point lead for "in", while in England  the "outs" lead by three points. In Wales, those desiring to remain also share a narrow lead.

Voting Intention in ‘In/Out’ EU referendum (%)

 

England

Wales

Scotland

Remain

37

39

48

Leave

40

35

32

Wouldn’t vote/Don’t Know

22

26

20

N of respondents

3695

1027

1014

Again, the data suggest that English identity is closely associated with an individual’s opposition to the EU. Those who see themselves as solely or mostly English are more likely to vote to leave the EU in a potential referendum while those seeing themselves as only or mostly British are more likely to vote to stay in. This contradicts attitudes in Scotland and Wales where national identity seems to have no impact with how one would vote in an in/out referendum.

EU Referendum Vote by National Identity in England (%)

 

English only/More English than British

Equally English & British

British only/More British than English

Remain

26

39

55

Leave

55

37

29

Wouldn’t Vote/Don’t Know

19

23

17

N of respondents

1171

1508

667

These differences in outlook towards the EU show that next month’s election could have a potential impact on the Scottish referendum debate. A strong performance by Ukip could signal to Scotland that England may vote to leave the EU in a future in/out referendum and possibly push more Scots into the "yes" camp.

Labour and the Conservative parties must also be cautious with how they choose to challenge Ukip. Striking a more eurosceptic tone to chase Ukip voters might simply play into the hands of Scottish nationalists. With the Scottish referendum less than four months after the European contest, Alex Salmond will certainly be watching next month’s election campaign south of the border.

 

Glenn Gottfried is research fellow at IPPR

GETTY
Show Hide image

Erdogan’s purge was too big and too organised to be a mere reaction to the failed coup

There is a specific word for the melancholy of Istanbul. The city is suffering a mighty bout of something like hüzün at the moment. 

Even at the worst of times Istanbul is a beautiful city, and the Bosphorus is a remarkable stretch of sea. Turks get very irritated if you call it a river. They are right. The Bosphorus has a life and energy that a river could never equal. Spend five minutes watching the Bosphorus and you can understand why Orhan Pamuk, Turkey’s Nobel laureate for literature, became fixated by it as he grew up, tracking the movements of the ocean-going vessels, the warships and the freighters as they steamed between Asia and Europe.

I went to an Ottoman palace on the Asian side of the Bosphorus, waiting to interview the former prime minister Ahmet Davu­toglu. He was pushed out of office two months ago by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan when he appeared to be too wedded to the clauses in the Turkish constitution which say that the prime minister is the head of government and the president is a ceremonial head of state. Erdogan was happy with that when he was prime minister. But now he’s president, he wants to change the constitution. If Erdogan can win the vote in parliament he will, in effect, be rubber-stamping the reality he has created since he became president. In the days since the attempted coup, no one has had any doubt about who is the power in the land.

 

City of melancholy

The view from the Ottoman palace was magnificent. Beneath a luscious, pine-shaded garden an oil tanker plied its way towards the Black Sea. Small ferries dodged across the sea lanes. It was not, I hasten to add, Davutoglu’s private residence. It had just been borrowed, for the backdrop. But it reminded a Turkish friend of something she had heard once from the AKP, Erdogan’s ruling party: that they would not rest until they were living in the apartments with balconies and gardens overlooking the Bosphorus that had always been the preserve of the secular elite they wanted to replace.

Pamuk also writes about hüzün, the melancholy that afflicts the citizens of Istanbul. It comes, he says, from the city’s history and its decline, the foghorns on the Bosphorus, from tumbledown walls that have been ruins since the fall of the Byzantine empire, unemployed men in tea houses, covered women waiting for buses that never come, pelting rain and dark evenings: the city’s whole fabric and all the lives within it. “My starting point,” Pamuk wrote, “was the emotion that a child might feel while looking through a steamy window.”

Istanbul is suffering a mighty bout of something like hüzün at the moment. In Pamuk’s work the citizens of Istanbul take a perverse pride in hüzün. No one in Istanbul, or elsewhere in Turkey, can draw comfort from what is happening now. Erdogan’s opponents wonder what kind of future they can have in his Turkey. I think I sensed it, too, in the triumphalist crowds of Erdogan supporters that have been gathering day after day since the coup was defeated.

 

Down with the generals

Erdogan’s opponents are not downcast because the coup failed; a big reason why it did was that it had no public support. Turks know way too much about the authoritarian ways of military rule to want it back. The melancholy is because Erdogan is using the coup to entrench himself even more deeply in power. The purge looks too far-reaching, too organised and too big to have been a quick reaction to the attempt on his power. Instead it seems to be a plan that was waiting to be used.

Turkey is a deeply unhappy country. It is hard to imagine now, but when the Arab uprisings happened in 2011 it seemed to be a model for the Middle East. It had elections and an economy that worked and grew. When I asked Davutoglu around that time whether there would be a new Ottoman sphere of influence for the 21st century, he smiled modestly, denied any such ambition and went on to explain that the 2011 uprisings were the true succession to the Ottoman empire. A century of European, and then American, domination was ending. It had been a false start in Middle Eastern history. Now it was back on track. The people of the region were deciding their futures, and perhaps Turkey would have a role, almost like a big brother.

Turkey’s position – straddling east and west, facing Europe and Asia – is the key to its history and its future. It could be, should be, a rock of stability in a desperately un­stable part of the world. But it isn’t, and that is a problem for all of us.

 

Contagion of war

The coup did not come out of a clear sky. Turkey was in deep crisis before the attempt was made. Part of the problem has come from Erdogan’s divisive policies. He has led the AKP to successive election victories since it first won in 2002. But the policies of his governments have not been inclusive. As long as his supporters are happy, the president seems unconcerned about the resentment and opposition he is generating on the other side of politics.

Perhaps that was inevitable. His mission, as a political Islamist, was to change the country, to end the power of secular elites, including the army, which had been dominant since Mustafa Kemal Atatürk created modern Turkey after the collapse of the Ottoman empire. And there is also the influence of chaos and war in the Middle East. Turkey has borders with Iraq and Syria, and is deeply involved in their wars. The borders do not stop the contagion of violence. Hundreds of people have died in the past year in bomb attacks in Turkish cities, some carried out by the jihadists of so-called Islamic State, and some sent by Kurdish separatists working under the PKK.

It is a horrible mix. Erdogan might be able to deal with it better if he had used the attempted coup to try to unite Turkey. All the parliamentary parties condemned it. But instead, he has turned the power of the state against his opponents. More rough times lie ahead.

Jeremy Bowen is the BBC’s Middle East editor. He tweets @bowenbbc

This article first appeared in the 28 July 2016 issue of the New Statesman, Summer Double Issue