LONDON—Support for the British National Party comes from areas of low education and limited skills not high immigration, according to a new report.
Poor education limits life and hampers the ability to get through everyday problems says the Institute for Public Policy Research. Low work skills narrows outlets and fosters disillusion with present political expression.
The report, Exploring the Roots of BNP Support, says in its summary: “The British National Party (BNP) frequently suggests that it attracts support because it is the only party to take into account communities’ ‘real’ experiences of immigration.
“Our findings suggest that areas that have higher levels of recent immigration than others are not more likely to vote for the BNP. In fact, the more immigration an area has experienced, the lower its support for the far right.”
The authors of the report looked at 149 local authorities taking into account such things as health, qualifications, crime, local influence, 2005 voter turnout, business survival, social cohesion, percentage non-white, migration change and region.
Even when the influence of other factors is controlled for, the higher the level of immigration is to an area, the lower the BNP vote.
After the European Parliament elections last year, in which the BNP won two seats, a number of politicians made statements similar to the ippr conclusions.
Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat leader, said: “We should not dismiss the reasons why people have voted for the BNP - the anger, the frustration, the sense of alienation, the sense of powerlessness.
“We must listen to that and must react to that, that much is obvious.”
Communities Secretary John Denham said that “an element” of BNP voters would have been racists, but most would have supported the party because they felt ignored and excluded.
He told BBC Radio 4’s The World At One: “We’ve got to make it very clear that we want to hear what those voters are saying.”
After the European elections, BBC correspondent Nick Robinson wrote on his Newsblog:
“In 2004, the BNP in the North West polled 134,959 votes. In 2009, they polled 132,194. So, why did he win?
“In short, because of a collapse in the Labour vote from 576,388 in 2004 to 336,831 in 2009. In Liverpool, Labour’s vote dived by 15,000; in Manchester by almost 9,000; whilst in Bury, Rochdale and Stockport, its vote halved.
“The switch away from postal votes for all in the last Euro election in the region also led to a fall in turnout.
“Thus, the BNP could secure a higher share of the vote whilst getting fewer votes. “
The IPPR report declares that “a low voter turnout does not just affect the proportion of votes going to the BNP in a simple mathematical way, it is also indicative of a wider trend which likely gives succour to the party.
“…Where people in an area have lost faith in politics some will disengage from the electoral process altogether, but others will turn to radical alternatives, such as the BNP.”
The IPPR report authors are urging politicians to “focus on building strong communities and strong education systems and to regenerate confidence and trust in democratic politics so that the marginalized people will not feel disconnected. This should enable them [the politicians] to both better serve the interests of these communities and undercut support for the BNP.”
Poor education limits life and hampers the ability to get through everyday problems says the Institute for Public Policy Research. Low work skills narrows outlets and fosters disillusion with present political expression.
The report, Exploring the Roots of BNP Support, says in its summary: “The British National Party (BNP) frequently suggests that it attracts support because it is the only party to take into account communities’ ‘real’ experiences of immigration.
“Our findings suggest that areas that have higher levels of recent immigration than others are not more likely to vote for the BNP. In fact, the more immigration an area has experienced, the lower its support for the far right.”
The authors of the report looked at 149 local authorities taking into account such things as health, qualifications, crime, local influence, 2005 voter turnout, business survival, social cohesion, percentage non-white, migration change and region.
Even when the influence of other factors is controlled for, the higher the level of immigration is to an area, the lower the BNP vote.
After the European Parliament elections last year, in which the BNP won two seats, a number of politicians made statements similar to the ippr conclusions.
Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat leader, said: “We should not dismiss the reasons why people have voted for the BNP - the anger, the frustration, the sense of alienation, the sense of powerlessness.
“We must listen to that and must react to that, that much is obvious.”
Communities Secretary John Denham said that “an element” of BNP voters would have been racists, but most would have supported the party because they felt ignored and excluded.
He told BBC Radio 4’s The World At One: “We’ve got to make it very clear that we want to hear what those voters are saying.”
After the European elections, BBC correspondent Nick Robinson wrote on his Newsblog:
“In 2004, the BNP in the North West polled 134,959 votes. In 2009, they polled 132,194. So, why did he win?
“In short, because of a collapse in the Labour vote from 576,388 in 2004 to 336,831 in 2009. In Liverpool, Labour’s vote dived by 15,000; in Manchester by almost 9,000; whilst in Bury, Rochdale and Stockport, its vote halved.
“The switch away from postal votes for all in the last Euro election in the region also led to a fall in turnout.
“Thus, the BNP could secure a higher share of the vote whilst getting fewer votes. “
The IPPR report declares that “a low voter turnout does not just affect the proportion of votes going to the BNP in a simple mathematical way, it is also indicative of a wider trend which likely gives succour to the party.
“…Where people in an area have lost faith in politics some will disengage from the electoral process altogether, but others will turn to radical alternatives, such as the BNP.”
The IPPR report authors are urging politicians to “focus on building strong communities and strong education systems and to regenerate confidence and trust in democratic politics so that the marginalized people will not feel disconnected. This should enable them [the politicians] to both better serve the interests of these communities and undercut support for the BNP.”
