In or out? It’s the question dominating political debate in the UK as the EU referendum edges ever closer. But what if you’re still not sure?
Of the electorate, 15%, are still undecided, according to the polls. And this bloc of voters could have a big impact on the final vote when polls open on 23 June.
We arranged a group of undecideds and asked how their views were shaping up in the final run-up to the vote. We asked them to watch Thursday’s ITV debate, which featured the Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, and former London mayor Boris Johnson, among other MPs, and tell us whether it swayed them one way or the other.
Nkechinyere Nwobani-Akanwo, 21, London: I am none the wiser and am staying comfortably on the fence
I’m hopelessly undecided. When the referendum was first announced my feelings were that Britain can’t duck out of the European Union just because it’s getting a little difficult – that’s cowardly. But when the slogan “lead not leave” came out it became clear that the remain side were far too ambitious. There is no way Britain can lead the EU when we ourselves are in such a dire state.
During the ITV debate, both sides clung to the same points and it became a talent show: the winner being the person who can tell the best story. Each side claims it will be better for the economy and the NHS. They say it’s the right decision for our children and grandchildren.
Throughout the debate I see-sawed. Just like Nicola Sturgeon, I don’t trust Boris Johnson. What’s more, I almost cheered when Wallasey MP Angela Eagle asked what the obsession was with blaming everything on immigration, and when Sturgeon said something to the effect of it being laughable for leave to talk about unelected officials, given the influence of the House of Lords at Westminster. But the lack of a clear plan for the future after David Cameron’s feeble attempt to renegotiate leaves me lacking confidence in remain. The final question from the audience pertained to the issue of trust. How can we trust what either side says? What I deduced from this debate is that there is no trust or harmony within the government or any one party. I am left none the wiser. So for now I’m going to get comfortable sitting on this fence. I’m beginning to lose interest over here.
Sarah Hatherill, 46, Rutland: The women for remain were not measured. I am now swaying more towards leave
Nobody seems to really know how leaving the EU will affect our daily lives. There are so many factors to think about, and it seems that whether you vote leave or remain almost comes down to how risk-averse you are.
However, having watched the debate on ITV I feel more likely to vote leave. The three women in favour of remaining were making a lot of noise, but not providing any hard evidence of why we should believe them. Conversely, the Conservative MP for South Northamptonshire, Andrea Leadsom, and Gisela Stuart, the Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston, seemed much more measured. They were both continuously pointing out their industry experience and knowledge of economics, whereas the “in” campaigners just seemed to be saying “we have to stay in as we’re too scared to go out”.
The “innies” also raised questions about how leaving would affect our ability to influence global decisions. They kept saying that nobody would listen to us any more. Amber Rudd, secretary of state for energy and climate change, was basing this on one example of how she influenced an EU decision on climate change. Surely you can’t base an argument like this on one situation? You don’t influence by joining everyone and doing the same thing. You have to stand up for who you are and plough your own furrow.
I’m swaying more towards out at the minute but who knows what might happen in the week ahead. Maybe a politician somewhere will tell the truth and present real facts about everything. The question is, will anybody notice?
Rawan Mohammed, 20, Manchester: I’m edging towards leave, despite apprehensions about my future
As a student I believe that the outcome of the EU referendum will most definitely impact my generation because it’s predicted that if we leave we could face another recession. I am worried what this might mean for the job market.
I can’t help but worry about my future and whether I will still have the same opportunities to work for European companies and travel freely. I also believe that the EU protects our working rights.
Having said that, leaving the EU sounds promising as it’s being argued that more money would be coming into the economy.
The main argument shaping my view is how the referendum vote will impact young people – after all, we will be the ones who will have to live with the decision.
The debate did sway me more towards wanting to leave. Boris Johnson made a good point that the EU consists of 28 member states with different views and opinions, which suggests that the social models in the EU differ from our own. I feel as though we have been in the EU for as long as required and as Labour MP Gisela Stuart put it, “Staying is dangerous [because it means] handing more money to bureaucrats and elitists.” The result is that we won’t be able to control our borders. So having considered the benefits statistically, economically and democratically I feel as though leaving the EU would benefit the UK, despite having some apprehensions about my future. It is time for Britain to take control and the referendum is a chance to do this.
Matt Monk, 20, Surrey: I am no longer undecided. I will now be voting to stay
This debate was another strong showing from Nicola Sturgeon. She completely walloped back Boris Johnson’s points by showing how hypocritical he can be. Johnson argued against fearmongering in one sentence, then claimed there are “terrorists on our streets” in the next.
I don’t care much for the economic arguments on either side. I didn’t understand them before this debate, and still don’t. There are completely contradictory claims flying about, making it impossible to judge, so it’s a non-factor for me.
I really don’t care about the immigration argument either. Why does anyone still care what country people originated from? If you’re here to contribute, it doesn’t matter where you started, or who your parents were. The solution to the problems blamed on immigrants doesn’t come from banning them, we’re not Donald Trump. If we invest in education as the population rises, there won’t be pressure on native wages.
Johnson claimed in this debate that there should be “democratic consent for immigration”. A vote to remain would be that consent, which is why I am no longer undecided: I’ll now be voting to stay.
Geoff Hinkley, 37, Essex: No, my mind wasn’t really changed. I’m not sure whose would be
I feel the cost-benefit analysis undoubtedly favours remain. I don’t think immigration is a problem. There are plenty of other things I’d rather be voting on. The reason I’m toying with leave is out of hope that a decision to leave the EU, or even a close vote on it, would shake up the ossified politics in the UK.
For me, all the debate did was to emphasise what is wrong and why we need something momentous to change our politics. The event was just careerists shouting their narrow talking points at one another. Remain only really spoke about the cash cost of leaving; and leave stuck to immigration. There was very little attempt by anyone to engage with the arguments of the other side. As such, it wasn’t really a debate at all.
The only (partial) exception to this I think was Gisela Stuart, who acknowledged that some issues need transnational cooperation but didn’t think the EU was the right framework for that. I imagine that to be Labour and leave requires a bit more introspection than the knee-jerk positions of the others.
So no, my mind wasn’t really changed. I’m not sure whose would be. Both sides seemed to be preaching to their respective choirs.
