Alienation not immigration boosts BNP backing – report

A report from the IPPR think-tank says that the real cause of support for the far right is not immigration

by Keith Richmond
Friday, April 23rd, 2010

A hard-hitting report from the Institute for Public Policy Research says it is alienation and low educational achievement – not immigration – which leads people to vote for the British National Party.

The IPPR study, which looked at 150 local authorities, contradicts the oft-held view that immigration is somehow to “blame” for pushing voters into the arms of the extreme right. The report, Exploring the Roots of BNP Support, reveals that, where people have experience of living side by side with immigrants, they are less likely to vote for Nick Griffin’s party. The report concludes: “It is not immigration but alienation and an inability to overcome social challenges such as isolation and low skills which are the main drivers for BNP support.”

The study reveals that nine out of ten local authorities with the highest proportion of votes for the BNP had lower than average levels of immigrants. It finds that good qualifications reduce the likelihood of people voting neo-Nazi. And social cohesion matters – where people believe the population in their area get along, despite different backgrounds, they are less likely to vote BNP. Voter turnout is also important. Areas with low turnouts have a higher proportion of people voting for the far right. This may, the report believes, reflect the fact that people in these areas feel alienated from mainstream politics.

IPPR co-director Carey Oppenheim said: “This research provides solid evidence for the need to take seriously the slow-burning mixture of frustration, isolation and sense of powerlessness people are feeling in some communities. These are the triggers which make the siren call of extremist parties so compelling. What our findings can finally lay to rest is the mistaken popular belief that it is experiences of immigration which leads to people voting for the BNP.”

* An ICM poll for the BBC Asian Network predicts that fewer men and women of Asian  heritage will turn out to vote than in 2005 – and those who do are more likely to favour minority parties than Labour, Conservative or Lib Dems. Turn out among Bangladeshis in 2005 was 70 per cent and among voters of Indian and Pakistani origin 67 per cent. But the poll says just four in ten intend to vote next month, despite the fact that 89 parliamentary candidates are of south Asianr heritage.

The only place you can read all of Tribune's articles as soon as they are published is in the magazine. To find out more about subscribing from as little as £19, click here.

About The Author

Keith Richmond is deputy editor of Tribune
  • Robert

    Well my area does not have low immigration believe me, and the rise in the BNP can be seen by talking not to councils but to locals.
    My country is changing and all I can do is sit and watch, why.

    Why are we allowing Muslim school, Muslim courts.

    an example is I cannot wear a cap or hood in my town it’s against the rules and regulations, the CCTV cannot see your face, but a Muslim can wear a face veil and be allowed whats the difference.

  • Robert

    Well my area does not have low immigration believe me, and the rise in the BNP can be seen by talking not to councils but to locals.
    My country is changing and all I can do is sit and watch, why.

    Why are we allowing Muslim school, Muslim courts.

    an example is I cannot wear a cap or hood in my town it’s against the rules and regulations, the CCTV cannot see your face, but a Muslim can wear a face veil and be allowed whats the difference.

  • terence patrick hewett

    This particular think tank does not seem to have thought very hard; the paper seems to be a questionable document since it starts to draw conclusions and make judgements at the onset of the second paragraph of the introduction; this hardly inspires confidence; any first year university student would quite rightly be spit roasted over a slow fire for pulling that stunt. The author’s use of regression analysis is unfortunate since that tool is notorious for giving misleading results in analyses of observational data: certainly any analysis should be tested to destruction from several different perspectives before any conclusions are drawn. This was not done so sadly the inference must be drawn that they have come up with the answer that they felt they needed.

  • terence patrick hewett

    This particular think tank does not seem to have thought very hard; the paper seems to be a questionable document since it starts to draw conclusions and make judgements at the onset of the second paragraph of the introduction; this hardly inspires confidence; any first year university student would quite rightly be spit roasted over a slow fire for pulling that stunt. The author’s use of regression analysis is unfortunate since that tool is notorious for giving misleading results in analyses of observational data: certainly any analysis should be tested to destruction from several different perspectives before any conclusions are drawn. This was not done so sadly the inference must be drawn that they have come up with the answer that they felt they needed.

blog comments powered by Disqus