The 2016 EU Referendum: Explaining Support for Brexit Among Would-Be British MPs

Abstract

The outcome of the 2016 referendum on European Union membership took many by surprise and has continued to define the political discourse in Britain. Despite there being a growing body of research focused on explaining how voters cast their ballot, we still know little about what motivated our politicians to do the same. In this article, we draw on individual-level survey data from the British Representation Study to explore support for Brexit among parliamentary candidates who stood at the 2017 general election. We find that candidates’ political views on immigration and democracy were key determinants of their decision to vote Leave. In addition, more optimistic views of how Brexit was expected to impact British economy and democracy are associated with greater likelihood of voting Leave. These findings highlight that, while politicians were less likely than voters to support Brexit overall, their motivations for doing so were quite similar. Interestingly, however, we also find that candidates contesting constituencies with higher Leave support were no more likely to vote for Brexit themselves. Taken together, these findings have important implications for elite representation of voters’ policy preferences on the issue of Brexit.

‘The personal touch’: Campaign personalisation in Britain

“…Given the conflicting pressures provided by the electoral context, we would expect to observe a great degree of variation in candidate behaviour. Such heterogeneity in behaviour is consistent with previous research showing that the policy platforms of British candidates frequently differ from those of their party (Buttice and Milazzo, 2011), even when it comes to the most salient issues of the day (Trumm et al, 2020). Moreover, recent analysis of campaign leaflets also suggests that there is considerable variation in the extent to which they emphasise the personal background and characteristics of individual candidates (Milazzo and Townsley, 2020).…”

Where is the party? Explaining positions on same-sex marriage in Europe among would-be members of parliament

“…The reverse is also true, with some states introducing more pro-LGBT laws sooner than predicted by the state of national public opinion. Given the central role of parliamentarians in advancing LGBT rights such as SSM in Europe, assessing the preferences and attitudes of aspiring legislators is important because it allows us to better understand legislative outcomes (Trumm, Milazzo, and Townsley 2020). The role of individuals, rather than political parties, is of particular importance when it comes to LGBT rights given the dilution of the party whip.…”

Mobilising support when the stakes are high: Mass emails affect constituent‐to‐legislator lobbying

“…Political representatives are both vote‐seekers and vote‐retainers (Downs, 1957; Riker, 1962; Strøm, 1990), and are therefore incentivised to advocate and vote for issues in Parliament that mirror the views of their constituents. Congruent with these theorised incentives, evidence shows that MPs, and would‐be MPs (Trumm et al., 2020), are indeed largely responsive to constituents’ policy preferences (Blumenau, 2020; Butler & Nickerson, 2011; Hanretty et al., 2017).…”

“…On the one hand, and this is our pre‐registered hypothesis, informing citizens about their MP's un‐aligned position could fuel discontent and increase attempts to lobby an MP to change their position. On the issue of Brexit, there has been considerable tension between the views of MPs, their parties and their constituents (Merrick, 2019; Trumm et al., 2020). Of note is that Brexit had become the most salient political issue both among the main political parties and the wider electorate.…”