Searchlight on Religion

A major new source of public opinion data on religion and inter-faith relations has just become available in the form of a Populus poll for Searchlight Educational Trust.

The survey is of unusual importance in terms of the number of questions asked and the large size of the sample (5,054 adults aged 18 and over interviewed online in England on 28-31 January 2011).

The Trust is a registered charity formed in 1992 that works with communities to build responses to racism and hatred, dispel myths and develop greater understanding. It has just established the Together project to explore and tackle the rise of right-wing nationalism and extremism in Britain and Western Europe.

Only a small proportion of the poll’s statistics have been included in Searchlight’s Fear & HOPE report, based on the survey, which concluded that ‘there is not a progressive majority in society and … that there is a deep resentment to immigration, as well as scepticism towards multiculturalism.’

‘There is a widespread fear of the “Other”, particularly Muslims, and there is an appetite for a new right-wing political party that has none of the fascist trappings of the British National Party or the violence of the English Defence League. With a clear correlation between economic pessimism and negative views to immigration, the situation is likely to get worse over the next few years.’

At the same time, ‘there are also many positive findings from the report. Young people are more hopeful about the future and more open to living in an ethnically diverse society. The vast majority … reject political violence and view white anti-Muslim extremists as bad as Muslim extremists and there is overwhelming support for a positive campaign against extremism.’

The document is available, in a somewhat curious format, at:

http://www.fearandhope.org.uk/project-report/

For this post BRIN has ignored the report and drawn upon, but cannot claim to have summarized adequately, the 128 computer tables extending to 395 pages. These provide topline responses, the only ones used here, together with disaggregations by gender, age, socio-economic group, region, employment sector, ethnicity, religion, and a sixfold segmentation by identity ‘tribes’. These tables can be accessed at:

http://populuslimited.com/uploads/download_pdf-310111-Searchlight-Fear-and-Hope-survey.pdf

Two clusters of questions are briefly considered here, those which sought to enumerate the nation’s general verdict on and participation in religion, and those which assessed attitudes to and engagement with people from the various faith traditions in Britain.

RELIGION IN GENERAL

35% of adults professed no religious affiliation, while 54% were Christians and 7% non-Christians (table 7).

23% said that religion was important to them, with 55% disagreeing and 22% neutral (table 76).

Just 7% said religion was the most important element in their personal identity. This compared with 35% for nationality, 24% for country of birth, 16% for the city, town or village in which they lived, 7% for ethnicity, 6% for their immediate neighbourhood, and 5% for the country of residence, where different from that of birth (table 32). Religion was the second most important influence on identity for 8% (table 33) and the third most important for 10% (table 34).

55% never attended a place of worship in their local community. 8% claimed to go at least once a week, 5% at least once a fortnight, 6% at least once a month, and 26% less than once a month (table 63).

Only 23% thought that, by and large, religion is a force for good in the UK. 42% disagreed and 35% expressed no opinion (table 77).

68% agreed that religion should not influence laws and policies in Britain, with 16% disagreeing and 16% neutral (table 75).

On a scale of 1 (= do not trust at all) to 5 (= trust fully), the mean respect score for local religious leaders was 2.95. This was lower than for the respondent’s general practitioner (3.98), the local headteacher (3.44), women’s institute (3.43), the local scout/girl guide leader (3.41), the local branch of service organizations (3.31), and leaders of local clubs (3.15).

But it was higher than for the local chamber of commerce (2.81), a local trade union (2.72), the local mayor (2.62), the local MP (2.58), local councillors (2.57), and the local council (2.54). See tables 38-51.

INTER-FAITH RELATIONS

62% considered religious abuse to be as serious as racial abuse, but 38% viewed the latter as more serious (table 115).

28% thought religious abuse to be more widespread in Britain than racial abuse. 72% said the reverse (table 116).

71% assessed religious abuse to be on the increase in Britain, 29% disagreeing (table 117). 64% said that racial abuse was growing (table 118).

60% believed that people should be able to say what they wanted about religion, however critical or offensive it might be. 40% thought there should be restrictions on what individuals could say about religion, and that they should be prosecuted if necessary (table 119). Significantly more, 58%, were in favour of limitations on freedom of speech when it came to race (table 120).

44% regarded Muslims as completely different to themselves in terms of habits, customs and values. Just 5% said the same about Christians, 19% about Jews, 28% about Hindus, and 29% about Sikhs (tables 78-83).

42% said that they interacted with Sikhs less than monthly or never, 39% with Jews, 36% with Hindus, 28% with Muslims, and 5% with Christians. There were a lot of don’t knows for this question (tables 84-89).

59% did not know any Sikhs well as friends and family members, work colleagues, children’s friends or neighbours. 55% said the same about Jews, 53% about Hindus, 41% about Muslims, and 8% about Christians (tables 90-95).

32% argued that Muslims created a lot of problems in the UK. Far fewer said this about other faith groups: 7% about Hindus, 6% about Sikhs, 5% about Christians, and 3% about Jews (tables 96-101).

49% contended that Muslims created a lot of problems in the world. Again, this was much less often said about other faith communities: 15% about Jews, 12% about Christians, 10% about Hindus, and 9% about Sikhs (tables 102-107).

25% viewed Islam as a dangerous religion which incites violence. 21% considered that violence or terrorism on the part of some Muslims is unsurprising given the actions of the West in the Muslim world and the hostility towards Muslims in Britain.

49% thought that such violence or terrorism was unsurprising on account of the activities and statements of a few Muslim extremists. 6% dismissed accusations of violence or terrorism by Muslims as something got up by the media (table 126).

On hearing reports of violent clashes between English nationalist extremists and Muslim extremists, 26% would sympathize with the former who were standing up for their country and 6% for the Muslims who were standing up for their faith. 68% would view both groups as bad as each other (table 127).

43% indicated that they would support a campaign to stop the building of a new mosque in their locality, against 19% who would oppose such a campaign, with 38% neutral (table 124).

In the event of such a campaign turning violent or threatening to do so, by the action of either of the disputing parties, 81% would condemn such violence but 19% would continue to support one side or the other (table 125).

Interviewees were asked to react to the possibility of a new political party which would defend the English, create an English Parliament, control immigration, challenge Islamic extremism, restrict the construction of mosques, and make it compulsory for all public buildings to fly the St George’s flag or Union Jack. 21% said that they would definitely support such a party and a further 27% that they would consider backing it (table 122).

Quizzed about a new organization which would campaign against religious and racial extremism, and promote better relations between different ethnic and religious groups, 20% said that they would definitely and another 48% that they might possibly support it (table 123).

Hopefully, this gallop through a veritable mountain of statistics will give BRIN readers some insight into the range of questions posed in this Populus/Searchlight survey, and some sense of the research potential of the dataset.

Posted in church attendance, Religion in public debate, Survey news | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Clive Field on Attitudes to Islam and Muslim Attitudes in Britain

Last week, the Institute for Social Change (where BRIN is based) hosted a seminar by Clive Field, who co-directs this resource and blogs here assiduously. The title was “Muslim Opinions and Opinions of Muslims: British Experiences”. Clive provided a historical overview of Islam in Britain, followed by a “survey of surveys”, and culminating in an exploratory analysis of a survey of British Muslims sponsored by Harvard and Manchester.

The growing salience of Islam shows up in the number and subjects covered by surveys. Before the late 1980s, Islam and Muslims did not feature per se in national surveys; where diversity was considered it was qua ethnicity and nationality rather than religion. Imposing a survey ‘quality threshold’, Clive found that 15 surveys on Islam and/or Muslims were carried out over 1988-2000, 7 of them in 1990. However, 154 surveys were conducted between 2001 and 2010.

Clive then surveyed the headline findings emerging from such surveys, arguing that

‘[t]here is extensive negativity towards Muslims but no absolute level of Islamophobia, nor are views necessarily consistent between questions’.

More specifically, 9/11 and 7/7 spurred negative perceptions of Muslims’ integration, loyalty and radicalism. Knowledge of Islam and Muslims has improved somewhat but is still limited, and appears mostly to derive from (negative) media coverage). While direct social contact has grown, over one-half of non-Muslim Britons have no Muslim friends, and negative attitudes correlate with lack of knowledge and social distance. Double standards appear prevalent: Muslims are heavily criticised for failing to integrate, and yet little effort is made to bridge the gulf between the Muslim and majority communities.

Looking at surveys of Muslims, the first was conducted by Harris in 1989. It is expensive to survey minority communities and particularly those which are linguistically diverse. This means that such surveys often make methodological compromises, particularly with regard to sample size, which is typically 500 (which limits further breakdown by age or other category). Nevertheless Clive found 39 surveys of adequate quality conducted between 2001 and 2010.

The headline findings from these indicate that Muslims are much more religious than non-Muslims in Britain, and stricter on most aspects of morality. The overwhelming majority are attached to Britain, but there appears to be some ambivalence regarding a perceived clash between British and Muslim values, and a sense that Islamophobia is growing in British society.

Clive then provided an overview of findings from the Harvard-Manchester survey of Muslims, funded by the John Templeton Foundation, and conducted over February-March 2009. It was designed to complement the 2008 British Social Attitudes survey where the number of Muslim respondents was too small for analysis of responses. Ipsos MORI ran the survey, providing a questionnaire in English, Sylheti and Punjabi and sampling output areas that had a population that was at least 10% Muslim.

Interviews were conducted face-to-face with 480 British Muslims aged over 18. 85% were South Asian, and 55% aged 18-34 (namely a young demographic profile). There were significant rates of non-response to sensitive questions (for example, on sexual morality), while complex questions such as the position of Sharia attracted a high rate of ‘don’t knows’.

Regarding the questions themselves, seven in eight reported that religion was extremely or very important in daily life, compared with 15% in the BSA 2008 survey. 82% reported that religion was very important to their sense of identity (BSA 16%) versus 55% for ethnicity (BSA 29%). Two-thirds reported that they were very or moderately spiritual (BSA 34%). 84% endorsed a literalist view of scripture (BSA 10%) and 44% creationism (BSA 14%).

Weekly attendance at services was claimed by 30% of those aged 18-34 and 50% of those aged 35 and over (BSA 10%). Praying at least several times a day was claimed by 45% of those aged 18-34 and 60% of those aged 35 and over (BSA 5%). Two-thirds reported that they read the Qur’an at least weekly, compared with 11% of the BSA sample reporting that they read the Bible or equivalent holy book. 71% reported that they observe Ramadan fully, and 17% mostly.

Headscarves worn (by the respondent if female or close female relative if the respondent was male) by 58% of those aged 18-34, and 77% of those aged 35 and over.

Regarding religion and personal morality, 75% reported that there are absolutely clear guidelines about what is good or evil (BSA 37%). 60% of those aged 18-34, and 78% of those aged 35 and over, reported that pre-marital sex was always wrong (BSA 8%). 58% of those aged 18-34 and 74% of those aged 35 and over regard homosexual acts as always wrong (BSA 30%). 45% of those aged 18-34 and 58% of those of 35 and over oppose legal recognition of same-sex relationships (BSA 26%).

Regarding the position of Muslims on religion in politics and society, 60% agree that religion is a private matter which should be kept out of public debates on socio-political issues (compared with 71% in the BSA). 54% disagree that it is proper for religious leaders to influence voting of individuals (BSA 73%). 45% report that religion is very or somewhat important in making decisions on politics (BSA 19%).

With regard to religious diversity, two-thirds acknowledge basic truths in many religions, compared with 74% of respondents to the 2008 BSA survey. 38% agree, while 32% disagree, that Britain is deeply divided along religious lines (compared with 52% and 16% in the BSA).

With regard to national identity, 58% reported that they “very strongly” belong to Britain and 29% “fairly strongly”. 57% support a greater role for Sharia courts. 22% of those aged 18-34 and 14% of those aged 35 and over reported experiencing Islamophobia during the two years before the survey period. However, 87% reported that they were broadly satisfied with their lives as a whole (BSA 83%). These findings are interesting and deserve further research (although the sample size will prohibit very detailed breakdowns). Clive also called for further, methodologically-enhanced survey research to build the evidence base, and provided some thoughts on prospects for integration and accommodation.

When discussion was opened to the floor, seminar participants were keen to probe how far negative attitudes among non-Muslims to Muslims were driven by generalised prejudice rather than something specific to Islam; how far they reflected antipathy to the tenets of Islam but not Muslims themselves; and how far they reflected antipathy to the highly religious and religiously-distinctive. The reliability of media-commissioned opinion polls seeking to create stories as well as reflect public attitudes was also discussed more deeply. It was a lively discussion, indicating appetite and scope for further research.

Clive has published on Islamophobia elsewhere:

C. Field (2007), ‘Islamophobia in contemporary Britain: the evidence of the opinion polls, 1988-2006’, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, 18: 447-77.

C. Field (forthcoming), ‘Young British Muslims since 9/11: a composite attitudinal profile’, Religion, State and Society.

C. Field (forthcoming), ‘Revisiting Islamophobia in contemporary Britain: opinion poll findings for 2007-10’, Islamophobia in Western Europe and North America, ed. Marc Helbling, London: Routledge.

Accordingly, he is not planning to develop an academic article from this research but is happy for the slidepack to be available here at BRIN. For the full set of slides presented at the seminar, please visit this link: http://www.brin.ac.uk/figures/muslims-attitudes-and-attitudes-towards-muslims/

 
 

 

 

Posted in Measuring religion, Religion and Politics, Religion in public debate, Religion in the Press | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Archbishop of Canterbury and the Coalition Government

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, recently publicly criticized the Coalition Government’s plans to make the long-term unemployed take part in compulsory work placements, with those who refused at risk of having their jobseeker’s allowance stopped.

The Archbishop said that it would be wrong to put further pressure on the unemployed, thereby pushing them into a ‘downward spiral of uncertainty, even despair’. His intervention prompted memories of the Church of England’s conflicts with the Thatcher government in the 1980s.

On behalf of The Sun, which appears not to have reported the findings, YouGov asked a representative sample of 1,936 adult Britons aged 18 and over whether they agreed with the Archbishop’s remarks. Interviews were conducted online on 8 and 9 November.

Only 23% of the sample sided with Williams, against 64% who disagreed with him and 13% who expressed no opinion. Those who agreed were somewhat more likely to be men, aged 40-59, manual workers (C2DEs), Londoners and Scots.

However, the widest variation was by voting intention. Just 5% of Conservatives and 14% of Liberal Democrats (the two parties in government) shared the Archbishop’s opinion, compared with 47% of Labour supporters. 88% of Conservatives and 76% of Liberal Democrats disagreed with him.

Regardless of their views on this particular issue, respondents were also asked whether it was right or wrong for senior clergy to comment on political matters. A slight majority (54%) wanted the Church to keep out of the political arena, including two-thirds of Conservatives.

By contrast, 34% of the whole sample (45% of Labourites and 41% of Londoners) considered that the Church has an important moral contribution to make in the political world, with 12% undecided (including 23% of those aged 18-24).   

The full data table may be consulted at:

http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/YG-Archives-Pol-Sun-CompulsoryWork-091110.pdf

Posted in Religion and Politics, Survey news | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Religious Affiliation and Political Attitudes: Findings from the British Election Study 2009/10

Ben Clements, University of Leicester.

The British Election Study (BES) 2009/10 has recently made available online for wider usage survey datasets relating to the May general election. The BES has covered every general election, and thus gauged the political choices and attitudes of nationally-representative samples of the British electorate, since 1964 and more information on both the current and previous studies is available at: http://bes.utdallas.edu/2009/. Also, detailed analyses of evidence from recent the BES 2001 and 2005 have been published in two books:

Clarke, H. D. et al. (2004), Political Choice in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Clarke, H. D. et al. (2009), Performance Politics and the British Voter.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The components parts of the BES 2009/10 have involved both a multi-wave internet panel survey (pre-, during and –post-campaign waves) and a more traditional face-to-face component (itself comprising campaign and post-campaign surveys). This note reports a range of political attitudes held by the British electorate at the most recent general election broken down by religious affiliation (all data are appropriately weighted). Specifically, religious affiliation is divided into five broad categories to assist with clarity of presentation: Church of England/Anglican, Roman Catholic, other Christian denomination, other religious affiliation (note that this is a ‘catch-all’ including, for example, non-denominational Christians), and no religious affiliation. A more detailed set of categories was used to record a fuller range of religious affiliations in the BES survey process.

As well as reporting whether these groups voted at the election, and, if they did vote, their party choice, data is also provided regarding views on who would make the best Prime Minister, their attitudes towards the main parties and their leaders, and – pertinent to the current political landscape – their views on coalition government and satisfaction with democracy. The data provided here is taken from the pre-campaign and post-campaign waves of the internet panel survey, which has a very large sample size. Religious affiliation was measured on the pre-campaign wave and the political attitudes, including vote choice, are taken from the post-campaign wave. Respondents are asked about party preferences on earlier waves but this involves recording their vote intention, which could change during the course of an unfolding election campaign – potentially right up until polling day!

BEStable1

It is important to bear in mind that the BES sample traditionally has a higher level of turnout at each general election than the actual level in wider electorate (about 65 per cent for May’s general election). This is clearly reflected in the high proportions, across all categories, saying they voted at the General Election in May (see Table 1). Anglicans and those from other Christian denominations were slightly more likely to have voted than Roman Catholics, those from other religions, and those with no religious allegiance. More generally, those who are willing to participate in social and electoral survey research are more likely to have higher levels of awareness of and participation in the political process, i.e. turning out to vote at local and national elections.

The next table (Table 2) shows the breakdown of vote choice across major and minor parties by religious affiliation. There are some clear differences in voting behaviour. Anglicans, partly reflecting the old characterisation of the Church of England as the ‘Conservative Party at Prayer’, were most likely to vote for the Tories – 45 per cent compared to a quarter voting Labour and a fifth voting for the Liberal Democrats. Roman Catholics, traditionally a strong electoral heartland for Labour, were most likely to have voted for New Labour. Around two-fifths voted for Labour, about 30 per cent supported the Conservatives and less than a quarter – 23 per cent – cast their ballot for the Liberal Democrats. The vote of those belonging to other Christian denominations was more evenly spread across the three main parties: Labour – around 30 per cent, Conservatives – around 33 per cent; Liberal Democrats – 26 per cent. The Liberal Democrats picked up more support from those belonging to other religious groups (around 31 per cent) and those reporting no religious affiliation (about 33 per cent). Labour received similar levels of support from these two groups (around 28 per cent), while the Conservatives received around 31 per cent of the votes of those belonging to other religious groups and around 29 per cent of those with no religious affiliation.

BEStable2

Using BES data allows us to move beyond voting participation and party choice and look more widely at views of the parties and their leaders. Those surveyed were asked who of the main party leaders they thought would make the best Prime Minister (see Table 3). David Cameron was most popular amongst four of the five groups: Anglicans (half of this group rated him most highly), other Christian denominations, other religious groups, and those with no affiliation. Gordon Brown was rated most highly by Roman Catholics, though he was closely followed by Cameron (around 36 and 33 per cent, respectively). In contrast, Nick Clegg was not rated most highly by any group but did best amongst those belonging to other religious groups and those with no religious affiliation (19 and 20 per cent, respectively). Also worth noting are the small but significant minorities who respond ‘don’t know’ to this question (ranging from 16 to 24 per cent across the categories), despite the centrality of the main party leaders to the parties’ general election campaign and in the attendant media coverage, with the notable addition this time round of three leadership debates broadcast in prime-BEStable3time slots.

 

As well as judging the leader most capable of being PM, the British electorate also form more general impressions as to whether they like or dislike a particular party or leader. The BES gauges these views by asking respondents to rate how much they like (or dislike) a party or leader by scoring them on a scale from 0 to 10. Two tables show the average scores (by religious affiliation) for the three main parties and their leaders, respectively (Tables 4 and 5).

Labour is liked most by Roman Catholics and other Christians; it is least liked by Anglicans. The Conservative Party gets its highest rating from Anglicans and receives its lowest from those with no religion. The Liberal Democrats receive the highest scores for likeability across all groups except one – Anglicans (and even here they are pretty close to the Conservatives). Their highest score is awarded by those with no religion, closely followed by other Christians.

In terms of the leaders, as we might expect from the previous evidence David Cameron is most liked among Anglicans and least liked by those with no religious affiliation.  Gordon Brown is liked most by Roman Catholics and other Christians and least liked by Anglicans (receiving the lowest score of any category). What is striking is that Nick Clegg is rated most likeable across all the five categories, consistently getting scores over 5, but that does not equate to high proportions thinking he would be the best or most capable Prime Minister. Clearly, then, the Liberal Democrats and their leader do relatively well on the likeability factor across the board.

 

BEStable4

BEStable5

Particularly pertinent given the political circumstances which have unfolded since the election outcome, we can look at attitudes towards government formation (Table 6). BES respondents were asked whether they preferred single-party government (the norm in post-war British politics) or a coalition administration comprising two or more parties. Across all categories there was majority support for the traditional way of doing business at Westminster – governments formed by a single party. Support was strongest amongst Anglicans and Roman Catholics. The largest minorities in support of coalition administrations were found amongst those belonging to religions other than the main Christian denominations, and those with no religion. In each case a small minority responded “don’t know” – the proportions offering this response to questions of this sort may well decrease as views evolve and crystallise on the performance of the current Conservative-Liberal Democrat administration.

BEStable6

Taking a broader view, we can also see how these groups evaluate how the system of democracy currently works (Table 7). Specifically, they are asked their degree of (dis)satisfaction with British democracy. Across the board, respondents are more likely have a clear opinion on this question – very small proportions (6 per cent or less in each case) can’t choose either way. Those most likely to be ‘very’ or ‘a little’ dissatisfied with democracy are those with no religion – around a half of this category offer either of these responses. Those most satisfied, either ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ are other Christians (at 57 per cent) followed by Anglicans (53 per cent) and Roman Catholics (53 per cent).

BEStable7

Ben Clements is Lecturer in Politics at the University of Leicester, with interests in the study of elections, public attitudes to the EU, and the work experiences of the visually-impaired. He is currently working on a book on religious affiliation and political attitudes in Britain, to be published by Palgrave Macmillan. He can be contacted at bc101@leicester.ac.uk

To download these tables in Excel format, please visit http://www.brin.ac.uk/figures/BES200910.htm.

Posted in Religion in public debate, Research note | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

General Election Wash-Up

Prior to the general election we made a number of posts touching on the relationship between religion and politics/voting. Now that the results are in, we can report a few more snippets of information which touch on this theme.

On 10 May the Westminster 2010 Declaration of Christian Conscience, which has attracted almost 65,000 signatures (and about double that number of visitors to its website), issued a press release claiming that the general election had resulted in a House of Commons which was ‘better balanced on Christian conscience issues’. The release can be found at:

http://www.westminster2010.org.uk/news/election-results-in-more-mps-supportive-of-christian-conscience—mond/

Of the 491 MPs who were standing for re-election, 32% had been categorized by Westminster 2010 as being supportive of Christian conscience issues, in terms of their Parliamentary voting record. 412 of them were re-elected, of whom 36% had pro-Christian voting records. ‘So overall we lost 63 MPs with poor voting records but only 10 MPs with good voting records.’

The 237 new MPs were assessed in the light of their public statements, email correspondence and their willingness to make the Westminster 2010 pledge to ‘respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience’. On this basis 70 (30%) were judged to be supportive.

Overall, Westminster 2010 claims that 34% of the 2010 intake of MPs are supportive of Christian conscience issues, 37% are unsupportive and the views of the remaining 29% are unclear or unknown.

Westminster 2010 made light of the poor showing of the Christian Party, which polled fewer than 18,000 votes in total for its candidates. Rather it highlighted the successes of Christians standing for the main political parties, including the evangelical Nicola Blackwood who unseated the secularist Evan Harris in Oxford West and Abingdon.

Meanwhile, The Muslim News for 7 May reported that the number of Muslim MPs had doubled from four (in the 2005 Parliament) to eight, equivalent to 1.2% of all seats, less than half the proportion of Muslims in the population at the 2001 census (2.8%). The eight comprise six Labour MPs (three of them women) and two Conservatives. More than 90 Muslim candidates stood for election in all. The Muslim News has subsequently published tables of the performance of all Muslim candidates at:

http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/paper/index.php?article=4647

The number of Jewish MPs elected was 21, according to The Jewish Chronicle for 14 May. They represent 3.2% of the new House of Commons, more than six times the proportion of Jews in the country in 2001. The new MPs comprise 12 Conservatives, 7 Labour and 2 Liberal Democrats. The most famous unsuccessful Jewish candidate was Andrew Dismore, who lost his seat in Hendon to the Conservatives by just 106 votes. The Muslim Public Affairs Committee has claimed it campaigned for his downfall.

The Catholic Herald for 14 May stated that the number of Roman Catholic MPs had risen from 64 to 68 (17 of them newly elected), despite prominent figures such as Ruth Kelly and Ann Widdecombe stepping down. This is 10.5% of the new House of Commons, a similar figure to the number of Catholics in the adult population as measured by opinion polls. The 68 comprise 40 Labour MPs, 19 Conservatives, 5 Liberal Democrats, 3 Northern Ireland SDLP and 1 Scottish Nationalist. The pro-Labour bias of Catholics was demonstrated in Ipsos MORI data in the run-up to the general election, as featured by BRIN on its website on 4 May.

Posted in Religion in public debate | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Religion and Politics Among British Asians

The British general election may have come and gone, but detailed results of the opinion polls conducted during the campaign are still becoming available. One such with religious interest is the ICM poll for the BBC Asian Network, conducted by telephone between 26 March and 4 April 2010 among a representative sample of Asian people aged 18 and over in Great Britain. The data tabulations are available at:

http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2010_april_BBC_asian_poll.pdf

The questions all related to political matters, with the results disaggregated by religious affiliation. The sample included 263 Muslims, 138 Hindus, 39 Sikhs and 51 of other religions. Although these sub-groups are still quite small, the numbers are appreciably greater than are to be found in comparable polls among the entire British electorate which were fielded during the general election campaign.

Some of the more interesting findings from a religious perspective include the following:

  • 70% of all Asians said that their religion would not influence their decision about which party to vote for. The proportion was highest among Hindus (84%) and Sikhs (81%). It was lowest for Muslims (60%), 11% of whom said that their faith would play a major part in determining their voting and 24% a little.
  • 41% of Muslims said the Labour Party best comprehends Asian issues, compared with 6% selecting the Conservatives and 13% the Liberal Democrats. Hindus were far more positive about the Conservatives (23%), although 37% of them still thought that Labour has the best understanding of Asian issues.
  • Party honours were more even when the question turned to which of the party leaders respondents would most like to invite over for a curry. Although Gordon Brown was out in front (nominated by 33% of Muslims and 36% of Hindus), David Cameron was not far behind (27% and 32% respectively).
  • Muslims were primarily exercised about the economy, health, education and foreign policy (including the war in Afghanistan). Each of these four issues was identified as important by 17% or 18% of Muslims. For Hindus and Sikhs the economy was twice as significant and foreign policy of virtually no interest.
  • Asylum and immigration were a preoccupation for just 4% of all Asians, although 56% supported a tougher government line in future, the figure ranging from 47% for Muslims to 66% for Hindus and 75% for Sikhs.
  • Muslims (47%) were less optimistic than Hindus (31%) or Sikhs (38%) about the prospect of Britain ever having an Asian prime minister. However, one-fifth of them (about the same proportion of all Asians) thought there might be one within 20 years.

Overall, the survey provides no strong evidence for a distinctively Asian religious vote. Only among Muslims does religion impinge to a limited extent on politics, and this seems disproportionately to be a function of their concerns about British foreign policy in Afghanistan, the military involvement there (as in Iraq beforehand) being seen to be in some senses a war on Islam.

Posted in Survey news | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Catholic Vote

‘Labour would be returned for an historic fourth consecutive term with a very large majority if it were just Catholics voting at the general election on Thursday, as Labour holds a huge lead of 19 points over the Tories among Catholics.’

So writes Sir Robert Worcester, founder of MORI, in his article ‘Does your Cross Count?’ in The Tablet, the Roman Catholic weekly, for 1 May (only available online to subscribers).

His findings are based on an aggregation of Ipsos MORI’s four monthly political polls in January-April 2010. Data relate to 2,673 British adults aged 18 and over (including 322 self-identifying Roman Catholics) who said they were certain to vote.

The Labour share of the vote in these polls stood at 43% for Catholics, compared with 30% for the electorate as a whole. Conservative figures were 24% and 36% respectively, and for the Liberal Democrats 24% and 23%.

Catholic voting behaviour is also revealed as different from other (non-Catholic) professing Christians. The latter are 20% more likely to support the Conservatives than Roman Catholics and 18% less likely to vote Labour. The Liberal Democrats have a 4% lead among Catholics relative to other Christians.

As Worcester comments: ‘it is clear that a “Christian bloc vote” is non-existent – Catholics do not hold the same voting intention as other Christians’.

The Catholic bias towards Labour is of long standing, largely related to the Roman Catholic Church’s historical success in retaining the allegiance (at least nominally) of those elements of the working classes who were cradle Catholics. 

Some of the evidence for this can be found on the Ipsos MORI website where there are comparative data on voting by religion in the run-up to the general elections of 1992, 1997, 2001 and 2005. See:

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemID=2370&view=wide

These tables show that, at 43%, the Catholic Labour vote in 2010 has fallen from 53% in 2005 (the same proportion as at the 1997 general election) and 60% in 2001. In 2005 Roman Catholic support for Labour was 30% higher than among non-Catholic Christians, whereas in 2010 the gap is reduced to 18%.

Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have gained to a limited extent from the Catholic swing against Labour since 2005; indeed, the Catholic swing to the Tories is marginally above that in the overall electorate. However, the main change since 2005 is an increase in the number of Catholics intending to vote for other parties (2% in 2005 and 9% today).

Of course, the fieldwork for the 2010 polls has been spread over rather a long period. In particular, it may not fully reflect the electoral impact, especially for the Liberal Democrats, of the televised debates between the leaders of the main political parties.

It is also the case that the Catholic sub-sample in these surveys is relatively small. Likewise, no account is taken of the significant lapsation from Catholicism. Many of these professing Catholics will be quite nominal in their adherence to the faith. Ideally, such surveys should control for frequency of mass attendance.

Worcester’s article further reports the outcome of recent Ipsos MORI polling for Reuters in Labour-held marginal constituencies. Here the Conservatives trail Labour by a massive 28% among Catholics, whereas they have a lead of 6% among non-Catholic Christians.

Posted in Survey news | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Political Leanings of Britain’s Jews

‘There is no Christian vote’ ran the headline for Nick Spencer’s article on The Guardian’s ‘Comment is Free’ pages on 26 April, trying to assess how significant faith voting would be in next Thursday’s general election.

But is the same true of the Jewish vote? Thanks to the Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR), we now have some answers to this question for the first time since 1995 when the JPR collected data for a report on The Social and Political Attitudes of British Jews.

The latest data are extracted from an online survey of self-identifying British Jews aged 18 and over in January and February 2010, undertaken primarily to measure the attitudes and attachments of Jews to Israel. This study was commissioned by the Pears Foundation, conducted by JPR, with fieldwork overseen by Ipsos MORI.  

Although the full results of this survey have yet to be published, JPR has randomly selected 1,000 responses and analysed the answers to the question on party political preferences (as opposed to the more explicit current voting intention).

This subset of data was published on 29 April in David Graham’s paper The Political Leanings of Britain’s Jews, which can be downloaded from:

http://www.jpr.org.uk/downloads/Political%20Leanings%202010%20Final.pdf

There is also a much shorter news report in the Jewish Chronicle for 30 April: Simon Rocker, ‘Who Votes for Whom?’.

Overall, the Jewish population is evenly split between Labour (31%) and the Conservatives (30%), with 11% favouring the Liberal Democrats, 8% other parties and 15% undecided at the time of fieldwork.

Younger Jews are more likely to be undecided, and less likely to support the Conservatives, than older respondents. Conservative preferences rise from 24% for those aged 18-39 to 29% for 40-59 to 33% for 60+. Support for Labour does not vary with age.

Jewish men are considerably more likely (36%) than Jewish women (22%) to prefer the Conservatives. Women are more likely than men to be Labour (33% against 28% for men), Liberal Democrats (12% against 10%) and undecided (16% against 14%).

Jews who are married are more likely to prefer the Conservatives (34%) than never married Jews (22%) or cohabitees (12%). Single (never married) Jews are more likely to prefer Labour (34%) than married respondents (28%). Liberal Democrats draw disproportionate support (24%) from cohabitees.

Self-employed Jews are more likely to be Conservatives (39% compared with 29% for Labour), whereas full-time employees prefer Labour (38% versus 25% Conservative). Retired Jews also prefer the Conservatives over Labour (37% and 29% respectively).

Jews demonstrate different political leanings depending upon where they live. Respondents in Hertfordshire (54%) and West London (46%) are overwhelmingly Conservative. In North and East London 40% prefer Labour, as do 35% in Northern England.

Jews with a self-assigned secular outlook prefer Labour, those with a religious outlook the Conservatives. The Conservative leaning grows from 21% among the secular to 29% of the somewhat secular, 38% of the somewhat religious and 45% of the religious. The Labour leaning moves in the opposite direction (42% for the secular to 24% for the religious).

Conservative support is disproportionately to be found among Central Orthodox synagogues than Reform synagogues (48% against 28%). For Labour the reverse is true (22% versus 34%). Respondents who do not belong to any synagogue are most likely to support Labour (40%).

Since Jews only constitute approximately 0.5% of the electorate, these trends are unlikely to have a seismic effect nationally. However, the community is highly concentrated spatially (for example, in Greater London and the South-East and in Greater Manchester), so in particular constituencies, especially the marginals in the 2005 general election, the Jewish vote could be influential on 6 May. However, the beneficiaries are likely to be Conservatives and Labour in equal measure. So there is no distinctive Jewish vote, after all!

Posted in News from religious organisations, Survey news | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Voting Intentions and Attitudes to Religious Minorities

With just over a week to go before the general election, we are literally awash with opinion polls at present. Unfortunately, few of those conducted during the present campaign have featured faith-specific issues, while the relatively small sample sizes mean that we get few clues about the attitudes of people who support political parties other than the ‘big three’.

It thus seems appropriate to recall one very large scale survey which YouGov ran for Channel 4 in the lead-in to last year’s European parliamentary elections, when the ‘minor parties’ were expected to make a strong showing in Britain.

No fewer than 32,268 electors were interviewed online between 29 May and 4 June 2009, including 2,749 persons intending to vote for the Green Party, 4,306 for the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and 985 for the British National Party (BNP).

The findings, which have long been in the public domain at

http://www.yougov.co.uk/extranets/ygarchives/content/pdf/Megapoll_EuroElections.pdf

have attracted scant attention. For us, they are especially useful in highlighting opinions about religious minorities, specifically Jews and Muslims, by voting intentions.

10% of all voters considered that Jews suffered unfair discrimination in Britain. Green supporters were the most sympathetic (15%), with Labourites and Liberal Democrats on 12%, Conservatives and UKIP voters on 9% and the BNP on 6%.

6% overall thought the Jews benefited from unfair advantage in Britain. Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green supporters all stood at 5%, UKIP at 6% and the BNP at 12%.

Asked whether there was a major international conspiracy led by Jews and Communists to undermine traditional Christian values in Britain and other western countries, 17% said this was completely or partially true.

The proportion rose to 21% for UKIP and 33% for BNP voters, the other parties ranging from 9% (Greens) to 19% (Conservatives). Those who said the statement was completely untrue numbered 62% in the aggregate but only 48% in the case of BNP followers.  

Just 1% of the sample registered as holocaust deniers (and no more than 2% even for BNP voters). However, 8% of UKIP and 18% of BNP supporters thought the scale of the holocaust had been exaggerated.

Turning to Muslims, 21% of all voters held that they suffered unfair discrimination in Britain. The highest percentages were for the Greens (40%) and Liberal Democrats (33%), with Labour on 29% and the Conservatives on 15%. UKIP (8%) and BNP voters (3%) were least sympathetic to Muslims.

39% felt that Muslims in Britain enjoyed unfair advantages, and this figure rose to 61% in the case of UKIP and 70% for BNP voters. They were followed by the Conservatives on 44%, Labour on 27%, the Liberal Democrats on 26% and the Greens on 22%.

Still larger numbers agreed that, even in its ‘milder forms’, Islam constituted a serious danger to western civilization. 44% overall held this view, with 64% among UKIP and 79% BNP voters. Conservatives stood at 49%, Labour at 37%, Liberal Democrats at 32% and the Greens at 27%. Those in disagreement were 32%, with only the Greens achieving a majority (55%); among UKIP supporters the figure was 17% and for the BNP’s 7%.

Three conclusions emerge from these results. First, there is significantly more prejudice against Muslims than Jews. Second, the actual level of prejudice varies considerably according to the measure used and the wording of the question. Third, Green and Liberal Democrat voters are most tolerant (but by no means totally unprejudiced), and UKIP and (in particular) BNP supporters apparently most prejudiced against Jews and Muslims.

It should be noted that all the above data relate to the views of those intending to vote for one of the six political parties in May-June 2009. These views may not necessarily be current. Nor should they be confused with the official positions of each of the parties as set out in their general election manifestos or by their leadership.

Posted in Survey news | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Saliency of Political Issues

We have already noted one headline finding from the online Cpanel survey of 422 practising Christians conducted by ComRes for Premier Christian Radio between 30 March and 12 April 2010 (‘Christians and the general election’, 19 April).

Hot off the press, ComRes has now released the full findings, running to 84 pages of data tables, for this poll. They cover the attitudes of Christians to political issues, political party leaders and the prospects of a hung Parliament following the general election.

The tables will be found at:

http://www.comres.co.uk/premierchristiansapril2010.aspx

Space does not permit a complete analysis of the results, but it is useful to highlight here the saliency of particular political issues among practising Christians and the electorate as a whole (the latter data are taken from an Ipsos MORI poll of 1,503 adult Britons aged 18 and over interviewed by telephone on 19-22 March 2010).

The percentages of each of these two groups saying that a specific political issue was likely to be very important to them in helping to decide which party to vote for at the forthcoming general election were as follows:

  CHRISTIANS ELECTORATE
Economy

64

32

Families

63

Not asked

Healthcare

53

26

Education

52

23

Crime

42

8

Immigration

34

14

Environment

31

5

Taxes

27

12

Third world/international issues

27

Not asked

Climate change

19

Not asked

Transport

17

3

What is interesting from the above table is that, while the economy, healthcare and education are key priorities for both groups, practising Christians appear to be much more exercised about every issue than do electors in general.

When asked a different question, to choose from a list of issues which is the most important one facing Britain today, practising Christians gave the following answers: economy (42%), family and societal breakdown (13%), secularism (11%), immigration (7%), moral disintegration (7%), faults in the political system (5%), crime (3%), unemployment (2%) and religious freedom (2%).

The poll thus suggests that politicians courting votes would be well-advised to remember that practising Christians appear to be informed and concerned voters, often with specific political preoccupations.

Posted in Survey news | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment