So what happens now? This is not just a question for Britain. It is a question for the European Union also. The total disintegration of the EU is unlikely but there are very real fractures apparent in the EU and, as usual, Germany has to take the tiller and steady the ship.

Negotiations do have to start on British withdrawal but this need not be a total separation. If the EU is to rediscover its sense of unity (never apparent in Britain) then it does have to reform. The key is finding the mechanism to bring the decision-making of the EU closer to the people primarily by devolving power back to the individual countries while finding new ways of determining the wider trans-national issues in a way that can carry support within the continent of Europe.

One of my main arguments for staying in was that Britain has a remarkably successful history inventing new systems of government and law which have enabled our country to retain democracy and stability while all about were losing theirs. We should have given that lead within Europe and it is not impossible that we could still do so. A new structure of governance that moves beyond the traditional outline of federalism and that recognises identity of nation states and regions within them combined with a more global decision-making structure for Europe as a whole is necessary. Difficult – and currently only visible in outline, but it is in my view entirely possible. Our negotiations around such an approach might find a more willing audience in other EU countries then we currently suspect.

While we explore such an option the Labour party really does have to face up to our failure both to lead and to listen to the views of people who we once use to represent and who have now deserted us and show no sign of returning any time soon.

Had the referendum been entirely about the economy we would in my judgement still be a member. Sadly it was also about immigration, and was always likely to be so among our voters. To think we can win them back by arguing for tougher legislation on basic pay and recruitment policies by companies is to miss the real concern of our former voters. Their concern, like it or not, is about a perceived threat to their cultural identity.

I love our multi-ethnic diversity but that does not mean we should ignore the argument about identity. When first, second and third generation immigrants could be heard arguing for Brexit then it is important to recognise that it is not just the white working class who found the level of migration too high in their judgement.

In England the number of children in primary and secondary education who have English as an additional language (not their first) is one in six and eight in eight respectively. The figures for Scotland are far lower and that I believe accounts in large part for a lower level of disaffection in Scotland but this is an area needing more analysis. Does it matter? Yes, because like it or not we have to address that issue. As a party we have relied too much on this middle-class intellectual argument which resonates in London but makes people elsewhere in the country feel even more alienated from the government and the capital.

There is no quick fix to this one but we need to recognise it as a major issue for our former voters if we are then to find new policies that work for those voters and also work for our multicultural society.

Trying to present the problem of the disaffected as being about the ‘cuts’ or employment practices will not work. Nigel Farage gets through to our former voters because he doesn’t focus on cuts and employment practices but on ‘our country’. It is a dangerous argument but it works. We ignore it at our peril.

———————————

Clive Soley is a member of the House of Lords and a former chair of the parliamentary Labour party

———————————

Photo: theo_reth