Why risk a referendum? Reassessing the politics of the referendum in the UK.

为什么要冒全民公投的风险？

• 批准号: ES/Y007581/1
• 负责人: Joseph Ward
• 金额: $ 12.67万
• 依托单位: University of Sheffield
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Fellowship
• 财政年份: 2023
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2023 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FY007581%2F1
• 关键词: Why; risk; referendum; Reassessing; politics

In the years prior to the 2016 EU referendum, commentators consistently lamented the state of UK democracy. The electorate were routinely described as disaffected, disillusioned and detached from the political system (Hay 2007). Though both the campaign and the consequences of the referendum were highly contentious, some suggested the boost to engagement it inspired provided an antidote to this malaise. The high levels of registration and turnout (72%) led the UK government to note that 'the EU Referendum demonstrated that the British public retain faith that their vote does count and that our democracy can still change the world around us' (HMG 2017: 31). However, the parliamentary deadlock which characterized 2016-19 saw the rapid re-emergence of democratic dissatisfaction, with a raft of constitutional questions coming to the fore. Framed within this context, my PhD thesis provided the first systematic empirical account of why the referendum first emerged as a political tool in the UK. Based on original, in-depth, analysis of the first four cases of referendum implementation in the 1970s (Northern Ireland border poll, European Communities referendum, and referendums on devolution to Scotland and Wales), it argued that despite the motivations of successive governments to introduce the device as a means of defusing intractable governing problems, in so doing they intensified political pressures around them. Through sustained analysis of how the device emerged across the course of a decade, the thesis moved beyond accounts of direct democracy in the UK which have focused on party-politics and constitutional history, and highlighted how the constitution can, and has often been, a site of conflict and political manoeuvring. Whilst I have published several articles on the constitutional conflicts which plagued UK politics in the post-2016 period, I am yet to publish any findings from the PhD project itself. The principal objective of this fellowship, therefore, is to complete and submit a book manuscript which builds on the thesis and adapts the text for a wider readership. I have already discussed the project with OUP, to whom I intend to submit the proposal prior to commencing the fellowship. In adapting and updating the text, the research will also build on examiner feedback to advance the analysis in two directions. Firstly, the book will highlight the uniquely transformative effect of Northern Ireland (NI) upon the evolution of the UK constitution, drawing on evidence from the first UK referendum - the 1973 NI border poll. Secondly, it will revisit questions regarding the compatibility of parliamentary and popular sovereignty within the UK system, noting how the political pressures surrounding the emergence of the referendum were rooted in this tension. Two additional journal articles drawing on data collected for the thesis will also be submitted and presented at international conferences. The fellowship also incorporates two workstreams which seek to capitalise on opportunities for dissemination, policy impact and to increase my networks both within and beyond academia. In undertaking two min-ifellowships - one at the Bennett Institute (Cambridge) and one at the House of Lords - over the course of the year I will be exposed to a range of research and research-adjacent contexts, developing skills and contacts across the research-policy interface. Through the coordination of the workshop on the politics of the referendum in the UK, the fellowship will bring together pre-eminent academics in the field and key policy practitioners to discuss conceptual and practical policy-making questions, focusing in particular on the role of direct democracy within local government. This diverse workplan has been crafted to ensure I maximise the opportunities afforded by the fellowship, not merely devoting it to research and writing, but to the cultivation of a skillset which fully equips me for a future academic career.

在2016年脱欧公投之前的几年里，评论人士一直在哀叹英国的民主状况。选民通常被描述为不满、幻灭和脱离政治制度（Hay 2007）。尽管这场运动和公投的结果都极具争议，但一些人认为，公投所激发的参与度提升，为这种不安提供了一剂解药。高水平的登记和投票率（72%）让英国政府注意到，“欧盟公投表明，英国公众仍然相信他们的投票是有价值的，我们的民主仍然可以改变我们周围的世界”（HMG 2017: 31）。然而，在2016-19年的议会僵局中，民主不满情绪迅速重新出现，大量宪法问题浮出水面。在这种背景下，我的博士论文首次系统地从实证角度解释了公投为何首先成为英国的一种政治工具。基于对20世纪70年代实施全民公决的前四个案例（北爱尔兰边境民意调查、欧洲共同体全民公决、苏格兰和威尔士权力下放全民公决）的原始而深入的分析，本文认为，尽管历届政府都有引入全民公决作为解决棘手治理问题的手段的动机，但这样做却加剧了他们周围的政治压力。通过对这一机制在过去十年中如何出现的持续分析，本文超越了对英国直接民主的描述，后者关注的是政党政治和宪法历史，并强调了宪法如何能够，而且经常是冲突和政治操纵的场所。虽然我已经发表了几篇关于2016年后困扰英国政治的宪法冲突的文章，但我还没有发表博士项目本身的任何发现。因此，该奖学金的主要目标是完成并提交一本书手稿，该手稿以论文为基础，并为更广泛的读者改编文本。我已经与开发计划署讨论了这个项目，我打算在开始研究金之前向他们提交提案。在调整和更新文本时，研究也将建立在审查员的反馈上，以推进两个方向的分析。首先，这本书将强调北爱尔兰（NI）对英国宪法演变的独特变革影响，借鉴了第一次英国公投——1973年北爱尔兰边境民意调查的证据。其次，它将重新审视英国体系内议会主权和人民主权的兼容性问题，并指出围绕公投出现的政治压力是如何植根于这种紧张关系的。另外两篇基于论文数据的期刊文章也将提交并在国际会议上发表。该奖学金还包括两个工作流程，旨在利用传播、政策影响的机会，并增加我在学术界内外的网络。在这一年中，我将获得两个小型奖学金——一个在剑桥大学贝内特研究所（Bennett Institute），另一个在英国上议院（House of Lords）——我将接触到一系列研究和与研究相关的背景，在研究与政策的交叉领域培养技能和人脉。通过协调英国公投政治研讨会，该奖学金将汇集该领域的杰出学者和关键政策实践者，讨论概念和实际的政策制定问题，特别关注直接民主在地方政府中的作用。这个多样化的工作计划是精心设计的，以确保我最大限度地利用奖学金提供的机会，不仅仅是把它用于研究和写作，而是用于培养一套技能，为我未来的学术生涯做好充分的准备。