• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Peter Kellner"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Brexit and UK Politics"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Europe",
    "Western Europe",
    "United Kingdom",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "EU"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Europe

Younger Britons Are Happy for Britain to Be a “Vassal State”

For the UK’s younger generations, the dream of sovereignty takes second place to demands for prosperity to be protected.

Link Copied
By Peter Kellner
Published on Jun 2, 2018

Source: Financial Times

The slogan that defined the Brexit referendum campaign has lost its appeal. “Take back control” was a powerful message in the summer of 2016. Today, the dream of sovereignty takes second place to voters’ demands for prosperity to be protected.

This helps to explain a modest, but sustained, shift in public opinion since the vote to leave the EU. A new survey, conducted by DeltaPoll, suggests that another vote today would produce almost exactly the opposite result to the verdict in June 2016: a 5 per cent majority for Remain, compared with a four-point lead for Leave two years ago.

Another question explains what is happening — and illuminates a dangerously large gulf between those in early or mid-career, and those who are in or close to retirement. The poll asked people which of two statements about the current Brexit negotiations comes closest to their view:

“It’s vital for jobs, investment and living standards here in the UK for us to continue to trade as freely with the EU as we do today, even if this limits our freedom to decide our own business and trading rules.”

Or:

“It’s vital that Britain regains the right to decide its own business and trading rules, even if this reduces our ability to trade freely with the EU and risks being bad for jobs, investment and living standards.”

Almost half responded that they wished to protect jobs and living standards at all costs, while 38 per cent regarded British sovereignty as the higher priority. Stripping out the “don’t knows”, the verdict is 56-44 per cent in favour of economic strength.

The generation gap on the direction Brexit should take is significant. Among voters who are under 55 — and therefore likely to be directly affected by the impact of Brexit on jobs and investment — the margin is almost two-to-one: 65 to 35 per cent. But the over-55s regard sovereignty as more important, by 59 to 41 per cent.

Some fervently claim that any attempt to reverse the 2016 referendum result would provoke anger from those who voted for Brexit. Perhaps we should also consider the danger that younger Remain voters could rebel against the threat to future prosperity in the pursuit of a sovereignty they consider of secondary importance.

There is another argument that we need to consider. It is that the polling question poses a false dichotomy: that Britain does not have to choose between prosperity and independence, for we can have both. The problem here is that hardly anyone outside the ranks of the most committed Brexiters seems to share this view.

Leaked assessments by the government suggest that full control of our trade could lop 8 per cent off Britain’s economic growth over 15 years. The Institute for Fiscal Studies reckons that both growth and the public finances would suffer: there would be no chance of the much vaunted £350m a week extra for the NHS. The CBI and Institute of Directors have also voiced their concerns.

Only this week, a delegation of business leaders from Europe’s biggest companies met with prime minister Theresa May to warn of the dangers of the persistent uncertainties over Britain’s future relationship with the EU.

That is not all. The most optimistic projections of the Brexiters assume free and frictionless trade with the rest of the EU, as well as new trade deals with the rest of the world. With each passing week, it becomes clear that the price of frictionless trade beyond December 2020 — the end of the “implementation” phase — will be a requirement for the UK to apply the current customs union and single market rules, or something very like them, at least for food, components and manufactured goods.

The prominent Brexit supporter Jacob Rees-Mogg has said this outcome would turn the UK into a “ vassal state”. For the great majority of those with much of their working lives ahead of them, better that than one that threatens future economic prospects for them and their families.

This article originally appeared on the Financial Times.

About the Author

Peter Kellner

Former Nonresident Scholar, Carnegie Europe

Kellner was a nonresident scholar at Carnegie Europe, where his research focused on Brexit, populism, and electoral democracy.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    The Moment of Truth for a UK-EU Reset

      Peter Kellner

  • Commentary
    The UK Braces for a Change of Direction

      Peter Kellner

Peter Kellner
Former Nonresident Scholar, Carnegie Europe
Peter Kellner
EUEuropeWestern EuropeUnited KingdomIran

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Will Hungary’s New Leader Really Change EU Policy on Russia and Ukraine?

    Orbán created an image for himself as virtually the only opponent of aid to Ukraine in the entire EU. But in reality, he was simply willing to use his veto to absorb all the backlash, allowing other opponents to remain in the shadows.

      Maksim Samorukov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Moldova Floats a New Approach to Its Transnistria Conundrum

    Moldova’s reintegration plan was drawn up to demonstrate to Brussels that Chișinău is serious about the Transnistria issue—and to get the West to react.

      Vladimir Solovyov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What the Russian Energy Sector Stands to Gain From War in the Middle East

    The future trajectory of the U.S.-Iran war remains uncertain, but its impact on global energy trade flows and ties will be far-reaching. Moscow is likely to become a key beneficiary of these changes; the crisis in the Gulf also strengthens Russia’s hand in its relationships with China and India, where advantages might prove more durable.

      • Sergey Vakulenko

      Sergey Vakulenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Beyond Oil: Hormuz Closure Puts Russia in the Lead in the Fertilizer Market

    The Kremlin expects to not only profit from rising fertilizer prices but also exact revenge for the collapse of the 2023 grain deal.

      Alexandra Prokopenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Why Are China and Russia Not Rushing to Help Iran?

    Most of Moscow’s military resources are tied up in Ukraine, while Beijing’s foreign policy prioritizes economic ties and avoids direct conflict.   

      • Alexander Gabuev

      Alexander Gabuev, Temur Umarov

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.