Was the Brexit referendum a good reflection of "the will of the people"? Possibly not.

by Viva Avasthi

There's something both Leave and Remain supporters have missed. Discussing it matters for the short and long run of this country. 

Two weeks on, there is still furious debate among and between Leave and Remain supporters. Yet there appears to be consensus on one thing: that the referendum result was "the will of the people" and therefore "must be respected". Leave supporters are brandishing this as their infallible weapon against attempts by the Remain side to prevent or soften Brexit. Remain supporters, broadly conceding, are limiting their actions to lamenting the lies told by the Leave campaign and attempting to find (varying degrees of) obscure methods to prevent our leaving the EU. 

Both sides miss the point. 

There is a case for the referendum not being a good reflection of "the will of the people". The reasons come under two umbrellas. First, the problems with the information provided prior to the referendum; second, the problems with the structure of the referendum itself.

Missing: democracy featuring an informed electorate

For democracy to function well as a reflection of "the will of the people", it is essential that voters are well-informed. The first thing that the electorate should have been informed of was where to turn for an impartial and - crucially - thorough and accessible analysis. This did not happen. Instead, they were offered lies from the Leave campaign, list after list of influential figures backing the Remain campaign, and an extremely poor quality of public debate. Not a mix conducive to effective democracy.

The reader might justifiably wonder whether such impartial sources even existed. In fact, they included: The UK in a Changing Europe, a website based at King's College London and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council; fullfact.org, a non-partisan fact-checking charity; and, produced by the libraries of the House of Commons and House of Lords, this impartial analysis.

There is also some ground for criticising the BBC's role. In attempting to fulfill their remit of being non-partisan they gave roughly equal air-time to both sides on each aspect of the debate (the economy, immigration et al.). In reality though, if we take, say, the analysis on the economy, the sheer volume and quality of argument was on the Remain side. The BBC's coverage, therefore, may well have harmfully distorted the public's views by diluting some critical arguments.

All this matters immensely. Those who condemn Leave voters as "stupid" or "racist" do not appreciate how little information was actually provided to people to help them vote in an informed matter. They do not appreciate how little time people had to uncover and then analyse the intricacies of the UK's relationship with the EU once they'd come home from each hard day's work. Is it really a surprise, then, that large numbers of people brought sheer emotion rather than reason to the ballot box? Had people been aware of the facts, they might not have confused what lies within the remit of the EU and what does not; which problems were caused by our being in the EU and which were not; what our position might be outside of the EU and what it will not.

Then there is the issue of so-called "apathy" among young people. Rather than laziness, the very low turnout among 18-24 year olds was more likely a result of the paralysis stemming from simply not knowing which was the "right" side to vote for. Again, a sign of an uniformed electorate. That paralysis was possibly exaggerated by the fear created by the knowledge that the outcome would affect them for the longest of any of the voting categories. A low turnout necessarily means that such a referendum is only a limited reflection of the "will of the people".

Second, the electorate should have explicitly been made aware or reminded of the crucial difference between voting in a general election and voting in a referendum. This would have reduced the numbers of people voting Leave simply because they did not think we actually would (protest voting) and increased voter turnout - making the referendum a far better reflection of "the will of the people" than at present. Effective democracy depends on the electorate knowing how the system works. It is not acceptable to simply assume that the electorate surely must.

When is a referendum any good?

There's another angle. Even if we ignore everything said above, there are further legitimate reasons why we might not accept the referendum result as being a good reflection of "the will of the people".

First, the Condorcet paradox applies in the case of this referendum. In his fantastic (and accessible) article written prior to the referendum, Jonathan Portes outlines what the Paradox is and how it is relevant to the British case.

The introduction to his article reads:

The problem with referenda, writes Jonathan Portes – and especially this one – is that they often present binary choices which do not necessarily reflect voters’ true preferences. This can force politicians to implement policies that are at odds with the will of the majority. He uses the Condorcet paradox to illuminate the difficulty, and asks what it mean for Parliament after the referendum.

Second, we must not forget that the choice of referendum-winning majority was an arbitrary one. Cameron decided that a "win" for either side would require gathering over 50% of the vote. Other countries choose a best-of-three-referendums system, or a two-thirds majority system, for example. Was our choice necessarily the best one? As the Economist puts it:

[...] what about the 16,141,241 voters who endorsed remaining in the EU? The 52% of those aged 35-44? The 56% of Northern Irish voters? The 60% of Londoners? The 62% of Scots? The 62% of those aged 25-34? The 67% of Asian voters? The 73% of 18-24 year-olds? The majority of Britons in full- and part-time work who voted to Remain? And the large minorities of most other groups, as well? Not to mention the 1.1m Leave voters who, one poll by Survation suggests, now wish they had voted differently. Or the millions of Britons abroad who could not vote in Britain. Or the roughly 3m residents of Britain—who work, pay taxes and contribute to society like everyone else—who by dint of their foreign EU passports may soon be pawns in Ms May’s negotiation.

The long and short of it

The are two things to take from this.

If MPs have the chance to vote on triggering Article 50, as is likely, they have a difficult decision to make. Should they vote to Remain, which they overwhelmingly believe to be right, based on their expertise? Or should they honour "the will of the people" and vote to Leave, despite personally believing the opposite outcome to be best for the people they represent? If the referendum does not really reflect "the will of the people" this decision is no longer so difficult. Britain is a representative democracy and MPs should follow their professional judgement - as they have been elected to do.

In the words of Burke (1774):

To deliver an opinion, is the right of all men; that of constituents is a weighty and respectable opinion, which a representative ought always to rejoice to hear; and which he ought always most seriously to consider. But authoritative instructions; mandates issued, which the member is bound blindly and implicitly to obey, to vote, and to argue for, though contrary to the clearest conviction of his judgment and conscience,--these are things utterly unknown to the laws of this land, and which arise from a fundamental mistake of the whole order and tenor of our constitution. 

The second thing to take away is this: we as a society need to collectively reconsider how democracy can work best for us. We need to understand that there are different forms of democracy and that each of these forms is more or less appropriate depending on the context. We need to actively consider how to ensure that the electorate is provided with the vital information it needs to make decisions, and that young people aren't left confused or disinterested. In the context of an increasingly globalised world with the rise of technology in forming and shaping debate and opinion, we are likely to find that, upon observation, our democracy cannot and should not continue in its present form.

Fiscal Responsibility in the UK and the Role of the OBR

by Viva Avasthi

Why is it in all governments' interests to ensure that they and their policies are seen as credible? How is it that the British government manages to maintain a relatively high level of credibility?


These were the main questions raised and addressed by Professor Stephen Nickell at the lecture I attended on Wednesday which was organised by and held at the University of Birmingham.

Professor Nickell, who is a member of the UK Budget Responsibility Committee (find out more about him here) started his lecture by answering the first of the two key questions. He explained that if a government plans to spend only as much as it plans to tax, and it is believed to follow its plans fairly stringently, people will be willing to lend to that government (by purchasing its bonds, known as gilts). However, if the credibility of the government is weak, people will want to be compensated through higher interest rates for the risks they are taking in lending to that government.



How do you feel about plastic money?

by Karina Shooter

Australian Plastic Banknotes Photo Courtesy of realitypod.com

The Bank of England has announced that plastic banknotes may be introduced in the UK from 2016. The transition would begin with the new Winston Churchill £5 note, soon followed by the new £10 featuring Jane Austen. The Bank has been looking into the possibility of plastic banknotes for the past three years, and is now going into the final stage of the procedure - a roadshow across the UK to find out public opinion on the matter. In December a final decision will be made on whether plastic notes should be introduced. 

So why the sudden change? Plastic notes are a lot more durable than their 'paper' counterparts (which are actually made of cotton pulp combined with linen and other plant fibres). A typical £5 note currently lasts just over 6 months before it is so worn and torn that it is deemed unsuitable for circulation by the Bank of England and is shredded. A polymer note will last for 2.5 times longer, which will reduce money spent on the replacement and disposal of worn banknotes. It will also be more environmentally friendly, as less notes will have to be disposed of on such a frequent basis. 

The London 2012 Olympics: One Year On

by Pavandeep Virdee

It seems hard to imagine that it was only last year that people in Great Britain were celebrating the incredible sporting achievements of the Olympics. Whether it be the memorable moments of Mo Farah crossing the finish line, or the much-awaited triumph of Jessica Ennis- I think it’s safe to say that the Olympics brought many intangible benefits, for all of us.
But what about the economic benefits?

Did the Olympics succeed in its expectation to provide economic growth, or did it in fact fail to deliver? Well, with the official report on the economic benefits of the 2012 Games published on the 19^th of July this year, the 2012 Games were said to have ‘gone out of their way to show that the Olympics more than paid for itself’; by generating an approximate figure of £10bn- almost £1bn higher than its cost.

The report states that many of the benefits include the additional business that has been secured for UK firms and companies. For instance, some UK companies have won more contracts for other international sporting events, which adds up to the figure of £1.5bn, with £120m of this being business that UK companies have won, to help with the Rio Olympics.

Life of a Legend: the Iron Lady

by Shireen Avasthi

"Being powerful is like being a lady: if you have to tell people you are, you aren't." - Margaret Thatcher

There are three types of people in the world: people who are for Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness, LG OM PC FRS; people who are against her; and people who are on the fence regarding their opinion of the Iron Lady. Be that as it may, one thing we can all be sure of is that she was a legend whom the world will remember for many years to come.

"Defeat? I do not recognise the meaning of the word."   

          Thatcher was the longest serving British Prime Minister during the 20th century as well as the first and only female to have held office. A Soviet journalist presented her with the nickname "Iron Lady" because of "her uncompromising policies and leadership style."  In fact, Thatcher's time in office was so ground-breaking that her conviction politics, economic and social policies, and political style became commonly known as "Thatcherism."     

"I love argument. I love debate. I don't expect anyone just to sit there and agree with me - that's not their job." 

Despite the ongoing world recession in 1981, Thatcher and Chancellor Geoffrey Howe managed to raise taxes and cut government spending, therefore allowing cuts in interest rates. Economic revival began soon after this. In 1982 Thatcher led Britain to military success regarding Argentina's invasion of Falkland Islands. The Iron Lady continued her winning streak in 1983 due to her re-election in the landslide election.

Shrinking economy; Increasing waistlines

By Krupa Popat

Britain’s economy is shrinking but  its health problems are certainly not.

With 25.1% of women obese and 32.3% of women overweight, 24% of men obese and a staggering 42% of men overweight, weight problems are amongst the highest costs for the government to fund through the NHS.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, statistics show that between the years of 2006 – 2010 (during some of the hardest times due to the onset of the recession), the most obese were those who had the lowest income. This could be linked to the fact that unemployment was on the rise. As Marx’s theory said, “the reserve army of labour fight amongst themselves for scarce jobs at lower and lower wages”.  Inflation increasing didn't help, as people who are on job seekers allowance or have low disposable income cannot afford the rocket prices of food, which is inelastic. Many people are sacrificing being healthy because they can only eat what they can afford, which is more fatty foods.

 “Obesity is associated with a range of health problems including type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. The resulting NHS costs attributable to overweight and obesity are projected to reach £9.7 billion by 2050, with wider costs to society estimated to reach £49.9 billion per year (Foresight 2007). These factors combine to make the prevention of obesity a major public health challenge.” http://www.noo.org.uk/slide_sets

As the government is cutting back on spending to save money, it seems like they’re spending just as much because of it…

Let me know what you think and find out more at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/learningzone/clips/health-problems-facing-the-uk/5078.html

Are Human Rights Under Fire...Literally?

by Eyrie Clark

A Reaper Drone
Credit to The Guardian

A 16-year-old boy was murdered. He never did anything wrong. He never even saw his death coming. The crime was his father's, and he was executed because of association even after his father had been killed. Do you think this is wrong? It's already happened.

As technology progresses, humans find more and more ways to use such technology to satisfy their agenda - which usually means someone has to die.

And, sadly, that is the case now, as the public has recently found out about a secret government program, that was apparently so top-secret that former White House Press Secretary Gibbs was ordered to deny its existence.

This alone is obviously VERY alarming. Any program the government tries so hard to keep a secret obviously spells bad news.What is so bad that they're afraid of their own citizens knowing of its existence?

Well, that program is the 'Drone' program. It is a billion-dollar program to create and pilot unmanned, armed drones to use as scouts and, when needed, the middleman who carries out the sentence for the executioner. Someone in Florida could press a button and and blow up a wedding in the middle-east, all in real time.

2012 in the City

by Viva Avasthi

Now that we've (successfully) come to the end of another year (because the world hasn't ended), here's a useful overview of the major political and economic occurrences this year from The Week magazine.

Note that if you open the images in new tabs, you'll be able to read the text far more clearly.

Made In Britain: Book Review (Part 2)

by Viva Avasthi

Last time, we left 'Made in Britain' halfway through, with a detailed analysis of the first and second parts of the book. In this article, Part 3: Intellectual Property will be explored. Part 4: Services will be reviewed in the final of this series of  three articles.

To allow this review to make better sense, I think it is best to mention what intellectual property is. Intellectual property is a term categorising the ideas that are created by our minds and have some commercial value. Examples of intellectual property include films and music as well novels, architectural designs and scientific inventions. Developed countries tend to have a 'Harry Potter economy' which means that the creativity and originality of the comparatively well-educated public is used to create intellectual property, which helps the nation generate its income (as opposed to manufacturing which can be done by fairly basic economies).  That's not to say that manufacturing ceases to remain important, of course. In this section, Davis mentions that some forms of intellectual property effectively combine with manufacturing in the UK.

Clever Scheme or Immoral Scam?

by Karina Shooter

 Ironic? Jimmy Carr has already been in the media spotlight for his UK tax avoidance schemes, now Starbucks is following in his footsteps… Photo courtesy of London 24

Amazon, Facebook, Google, Starbucks, Ikea and eBay – just some of the major corporations who have been in the news recently because of their UK tax avoidance schemes. Although their clever tricks and cover-ups are absolutely legal, we are left wondering whether their actions are morally questionable. 

The Facts and Figures

• Over the past three years Amazon has generated more than £7.6bn of sales in the UK but has paid no corporation tax on the profits of these sales.
• Facebook paid only £238,000 in tax last year in the UK despite making an estimated £175m in sales. 
• It has been revealed that, despite earnings of £3bn in sales since 1998, Starbucks has only paid £8.6m in UK tax in the last 12 years. Last year it generated £398m in UK sales but paid no corporation tax.
• EBay’s UK division has paid just over £1 million of corporation tax, despite generating sales of almost £800 million in the UK.

Made In Britain: Book Review (Part 1)

by Viva Avasthi

Before I read this book I wasn't sure how the British economy plans to sustain itself, considering the fact that we are only just coming out of a double-dip recession and there are always complaints about how little we manufacture compared to China and Germany. Although it is quite clear that Britain had the clear economic advantage over other countries during the times of the British Empire, what Britain has exported after that had been fairly unclear to me, especially since the media portray the image that Britain does not export very much at all.

I found very well-explained answers in Made In Britain, by Evan Davis, which has provided me with an excellent overview of how Britain's economy is structured as well as how it has developed into what it is and what the outlook for Britain's future is.

The book is made of four main sections, and I will be stating my opinions on what the most interesting and relevant ideas in each section were. Please note that I will only be giving summaries and so I highly recommend that you read the book for yourself for a more detailed explanation of the ideas I mention. This review has been split into three parts and the first part stops at the end of half of the book. The second part of the book review covers Part 3: Intellectual Property and the third part of the review covers Part 4: Services.

Ageing: Why Are People Scared of It?

by Shireen Avasthi

Why do so many of us have a fear of ageing?

Having a phobia of ageing is nothing to be embarrassed of - lots of people are in the same situation. The question is: why do so many of us have a fear of ageing? 

What do you value most about youth? Is it beauty, intelligence, freedom, just having a good time and a laugh, or is it something else? Whatever it may be, chances are that there are multiple stereotypes pinned to it. More likely than not, one of these stereotypes is that you will be robbed of this quality as you grow older.

Who Are the Real Winners and Losers of the Olympics?

by Viva Avasthi


A very thorough video created by The Economist to provide a useful overview of the impacts of the London Olympics 2012. It is definitely worth watching the entirety of this video as it makes the impacts on many types of people very clear.

 In my opinion, the point made in this video about how there are no children's pools in the Olympics stadium is a particularly relevant one considering that schools are supposedly going to be making use of the Olympic venues in the future! Could this be seen as a sign that the legacy of the Olympics has not been very well planned by the government, despite what they say?


What do you think of the idea of The Teen Economists authors making their own videos in this way?


Please comment below and tell me if you would like to see more of these types of videos on the blog. 

Older Women in the Media

Luck of the draw or are older women not welcome on TV?

by Clemency Flitter

Female equality is something that many people would like to feel has finally been put to bed and women are now being seen on a par with men in most areas. However, it seems to me that the media has so far been a little slow to take up this ideal. Recently the BBC has been under fire over an ageism scandal after a former Countryfile presenter, Miriam O’Reilly, won an age discrimination case against the BBC after being dropped from presenting the TV show. While I agree that this may have been a clear case of age discrimination I can’t help but wonder if the same would have happened if Miriam was a man.

10 Impacts of the Olympics on the UK

by Viva Avasthi

With only ten days remaining until the opening ceremony for the London Olympics commences, here are ten ways that the Olympics have affected (or will affect) the UK.

The Social Contract: Part 2

by Viva Avasthi

Is the ideal society reflected in The Fable of the Bees?

Niall Ferguson argued in the first of this year's Reith Lectures that the social contract (which I explained in my previous article) needs to be restored between the generations. I agree with him to an extent, because it does appear to be the case that governments often don't work in the interest of improving conditions for both the present and the future generations, but to improve their chances of collecting votes. This leads to a vicious circle in one sense, because the government is forced to provide people with what they demand rather than to do what is ideally required to tackle a particular problem.

GoCompare: Major Hate or Clever Scheme?

by Shireen Avasthi


Many of the British readers of this blog will have noticed GoCompare's new billboard advertisements - they're everywhere! If you haven't seen them, they look like this:

Cultural Economics: Part 1

by Viva Avasthi

Since people are the driving force in economics, the question of how the economy can create attitudes and vice versa is one that I've been pondering over recently. After a bit of magic from Google, I've found out that this branch of economics is called cultural economics, where 'culture' is the shared beliefs and attitudes of particular groups.

I've decided to write a few articles on this subject. Although my primary focus will be on the British economy and culture, I will also be looking at countries around the world in my investigation and I would love for you to send in your personal opinions about how the culture of where you live might be influencing the local economy and how the economy could have helped to create that particular culture.

Let's start by exploring how culture and economics are closely interconnected through the use of a scenario...

Animal Testing: A Scientific Debate

by Clemency Flitter



Saturday the 28^th of April was the World Day for Animals in Laboratories. To mark the occasion there was a large protest and march in Birmingham and it was there where I found out more. When people think about these protests I can imagine many only think of the hard-core environmentalists and radicals. However, this didn’t appear to be the case from where I was standing. There were people of all types, all racial and social backgrounds. The speakers and leaders of the protest also made sure that it remained peaceful and even made a point of thanking the police presence; it was a far cry from some of the protests inner cities experience, where vandalism and violence are the order of the day.

The Unexpected City That Changed The World

by Viva Avasthi





Do you live in a democracy? Are you American? Are you a female? Are you of African or Caribbean origin? Do you live in a country that manufactures goods?

If you can say yes to any one of those seemingly random questions, then you've almost certainly been massively affected by Birmingham, a British city that you might never have heard of.