logo
Underdogs: The Truth About Britain's White Working Class review – a complicated class portrait

Underdogs: The Truth About Britain's White Working Class review – a complicated class portrait

The Guardian15-04-2025

On 13 November 1968, a 35-year-old Labour politician got to his feet in the House of Commons and had a go at the ranks of Conservative members who faced him. Six or so months after Enoch Powell had delivered his infamously racist 'rivers of blood' speech in Birmingham, David Winnick – who was then the MP for Croydon South – had decided to attack the Tory fashion for bemoaning immigration to the UK from such countries as India and Pakistan and expressing faux sympathy with deprived communities in British cities. 'Many of those who act as the champions of the white person against immigrants,' he said, 'have not in the past gone out of their way to defend the interests of the white working class.'
As the Economist journalist Joel Budd points out in this nuanced, enlightening book about the people and places Winnick was referring to, this was the first time 'white working class' had been used to describe a certain kind of Briton. And in that sense, that small parliamentary moment was a prescient glimpse of a subject that would explode half a century later, when hostility to immigration fed into the result of the 2016 referendum on Brexit. At that point, the term 'white working class'' became more ubiquitous than ever, and an insurgent political right made up of Powell's political heirs – split between Tory Brexiters and the forces led by Nigel Farage – affected to speak for a kind of voter they claimed had been neglected and betrayed.
Underdogs is based on a powerful argument: that as those political changes happened, the media's understanding of whole swaths of the UK – and England in particular – was warped. In places that had backed Brexit, microphones tended to be pointed at irate older men who probably did not have that much to moan about, while younger, less angry, more economically precarious people were overlooked.
'The white working-class Britons with the problems,' Budd points out, 'are not the white working-class Britons with the complaints.' More specifically, 'a young woman living in a poor coastal town… who is now working in a shop and trying to raise a child without much help from her sickly mother or her erratically employed ex-boyfriend… has very severe problems. A retired miner who is in a stable marriage, who owns his house and two cars, has many fewer problems.'
To get nearer the truth, Budd tends to concentrate on such elemental themes as place, housing and work: his is the kind of journalism that works as accessible sociology. Early on in the book, he divides largely working-class communities into three broad categories. 'Heartlands' are old industrial centres, often seemingly locked into decline. An 'enclave' is the kind of place – sometimes on the periphery of a big city – 'that was once overwhelmingly white and working class but is becoming less so'. Most interesting, perhaps, are what he terms 'colonies', to which people have moved from other places. Some are archetypal new towns, but Budd explores Thetford in Norfolk, 'one of the oddest and most wonderful places in Britain' where local factories drew families from east London half a century ago, and many latter-day cliches quickly fall apart. When he talks to the locals, he finds that 'awareness of their own history as migrants takes the edge off xenophobic instincts … in half a dozen trips to Thetford, I have never heard anyone complain that immigrants are failing to assimilate'.
The book's best material is like this, all about the messy and often fitful ways that society progresses, and written in elegant, understated prose that acts as the proverbial window pane. The New Parks estate in Leicester, Budd says, was once kept largely white thanks to the reluctance of black and Asian people to try moving there, and plentiful instances of local young men committing shocking acts of racist violence. Now, by contrast, its population is increasingly diverse, and white residents offer level-headed opinions that would gladden liberal hearts: 'It's not good for Leicester to be split into whites, blacks, Asians, Chinese or whatever.'
Up close, even people with apparently reactionary instincts can turn out to have more nuanced thoughts, something highlighted by a sixtysomething resident of the same city whom Budd calls John. 'There's two sides now,' John says. 'There's the immigrants, and there's families that were born here.' But only a breath or two later, he offers the opinion that 'Britain's always been a racist country… the English working class thought they were a cut above the Irish, then above the Windrush [sic], then above the Asians.' Even people who might recently have been derided using the dread – and rather snobbish – insult of 'gammon' sometimes turn out to be more complicated than they first let on.
Everyday life, moreover, contains plenty of evidence of the quiet solidarity and small kindnesses people who live outside working-class communities barely see. In the south Mancunian neighbourhood of Wythenshawe, some people 'speak sharply about asylum seekers', but a community centre 'was flooded with pushchairs and other donations when word got around that newly arrived Afghan families needed them'. At one point, Budd wonders if the nastiness that defines some well-heeled rightwing politicians is often projected on to places where it runs a lot less deep, meaning that 'the prejudices of the suburban golf club are imputed to the council-estate boxing club… a kind of ventriloquised xenophobia.'
There's an occasional sense that these insights should have been developed further: when the narrative flow is disrupted by apparent reprises of Budd's past journalism about the rise and fall of armed robbery and the cult of so-called highly modified cars, it feels as if he is wasting space on things that barely touch his key themes. He also ends up making a series of half-cocked political points that sometimes verge on the risible: 'Britain does not need lots more social housing', for example, is a claim that would probably cause most of the people he encounters to loudly guffaw. But most of Underdogs vividly illustrates the point it was written to make: that in a political era as overheated and mendacious as ours, the plain truths of everyday life need to be heard and understood. In that sense, this book is not just well-timed but admirably powerful.
John Harris is the author of Maybe I'm Amazed: A Story of Love and Connection in Ten Songs, published by John Murray (£16.99)
Underdogs: The Truth About Britain's White Working Class by Joel Budd is published by Picador (£20). To support the Guardian and Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Reeves signs off on £14bn to build new nuclear plant Sizewell C
Reeves signs off on £14bn to build new nuclear plant Sizewell C

Rhyl Journal

time33 minutes ago

  • Rhyl Journal

Reeves signs off on £14bn to build new nuclear plant Sizewell C

The Chancellor is set to confirm the funding at the GMB Congress on Tuesday. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said new nuclear power capacity was needed to deliver a 'golden age of clean energy abundance'. Trade unions welcomed the move, which the Treasury said would go towards creating 10,000 jobs, including 1,500 apprenticeships. But the head of a campaign group opposing the plant criticised the decision to commit the funding, saying it is still not clear what the total cost will be. Nuclear plants are seen as increasingly important electricity sources as the Government tries to decarbonise Britain's grid by 2030, replacing fossil fuels with green power. The last time Britain completed one was in 1987, which was the Sizewell B plant. Hinkley Point C, in Somerset, is under construction and is expected to produce enough power for about six million homes when it opens, but that may not be until 2031. The Energy Secretary said: 'We need new nuclear to deliver a golden age of clean energy abundance, because that is the only way to protect family finances, take back control of our energy, and tackle the climate crisis. 'This is the Government's clean energy mission in action – investing in lower bills and good jobs for energy security.' It will get the UK off the 'fossil fuel rollercoaster', he separately told The Guardian. 'We know that we're going to have to see electricity demand at least double by 2050. All the expert advice says nuclear has a really important role to play in the energy system. 'In any sensible reckoning, this is essential to get to our clean power and net zero ambitions.' The joint managing directors of Sizewell C, Julia Pyke and Nigel Cann, said: 'Today marks the start of an exciting new chapter for Sizewell C, the UK's first British-owned nuclear power plant in over 30 years.' At the peak of construction, Sizewell C is expected to provide 10,000 jobs and the company behind the project has already signed £330 million worth of contracts with local businesses. The plant, which will power the equivalent of six million homes, is planned to be operational in the 2030s. The Government is also due to confirm one of Europe's first small modular reactor programmes and will invest £2.5 billion over five years in fusion energy research as part of plans to boost the UK's nuclear industry. The GMB union said giving Sizewell C the go-ahead was 'momentous'. Regional Secretary Warren Kenny said: 'Nuclear power is essential for clean, affordable, and reliable energy – without new nuclear, there can be no net zero. 'Sizewell C will provide thousands of good, skilled, unionised jobs and we look forward to working closely with the Government and Sizewell C to help secure a greener future for this country's energy sector.' Mike Clancy, general secretary of Prospect, said: 'Delivering this funding for Sizewell C is a vital step forward, this project is critical to securing the future of the nuclear industry in the UK. 'New nuclear is essential to achieving net zero, providing a baseload of clean and secure energy, as well as supporting good, unionised jobs. 'Further investment in SMRs and fusion research shows we are finally serious about developing a 21st-century nuclear industry. All funding must be backed up by a whole-industry plan to ensure we have the workforce and skills we need for these plans to succeed.' Alison Downes of Stop Sizewell C said ministers had not 'come clean' about the full cost of the project, which the group have previously estimated could be some £40 billion. 'There still appears to be no final investment decision for Sizewell C, but £14.2 billion in taxpayers' funding, a decision we condemn and firmly believe the government will come to regret. 'Where is the benefit for voters in ploughing more money into Sizewell C that could be spent on other priorities, and when the project will add to consumer bills and is guaranteed to be late and overspent just like Hinkley C? 'Ministers have still not come clean about Sizewell C's cost and, given negotiations with private investors are incomplete, they have signed away all leverage and will be forced to offer generous deals that undermine value for money. Starmer and Reeves have just signed up to HS2 mark 2.'

Family visa income threshold should not rise to skilled worker level
Family visa income threshold should not rise to skilled worker level

Rhyl Journal

time34 minutes ago

  • Rhyl Journal

Family visa income threshold should not rise to skilled worker level

Skilled workers are only eligible to come to the UK if they earn a salary of £38,700 or more, compared to £29,000 required mainly for British citizens or settled residents to bring their partner to the country under family visas. The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) set out its recommendations after a review requested by the Home Secretary to look at how to set a minimum income requirement (MIR) for family visas that balances economic wellbeing and family life. The previous government planned to introduce the higher threshold for family visa applicants to be equivalent to the skilled worker level. But the committee's report said: 'Given the family route that we are reviewing has a completely different objective and purpose to the work route, we do not understand the rationale for the threshold being set using this method. 'We do not recommend the approach based on the skilled worker salary threshold as it is unrelated to the family route and is the most likely to conflict with international law and obligations (e.g. Article 8).' Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is the right to private and family life that can be applied to migration cases in the UK. The UK's current £29,000 threshold is high compared to other high-income countries reviewed by the MAC. The analysis found a high proportion of applicants for partner visas are women and 90% are under the age of 44. Pakistan is the largest nationality to use the route applying from outside the country. The committee's analysis gave some options that a threshold of £24,000 to £28,000 could give more priority to economic wellbeing, such as reducing the burden to taxpayers, than on family life. It also suggested a criteria of £23,000 to £25,000 to ensure families can support themselves but not necessarily require them to earn a salary above minimum wage. Chairman of MAC, Professor Brian Bell, said: 'While the decision on where to set the threshold is ultimately a political one, we have provided evidence on the impacts of financial requirements on families and economic wellbeing, and highlight the key considerations the government should take into account in reaching its decision.' While the committee said it is not possible to predict how different threshold changes would impact net migration, it said lowering the amount to £24,000, for example, could mean an increase of around one to three percent of projected future net migration. The report added: 'Determining the MIR threshold involves striking a balance between economic wellbeing and family life. 'Whilst a lower threshold would favour family life and entail a higher net fiscal cost to the taxpayer, a higher threshold (below a certain level) would favour economic wellbeing. 'But a higher number of families would experience negative impacts relating to financial pressures, prolonged separation, relationships, adults' mental health and children's mental health and education.' The committee advised against raising the threshold for families with children as despite them facing higher living costs, the impacts on family life appear 'particularly significant' for children. It also recommended keeping the income amount required the same across all regions of the UK. The MAC also said their review was 'greatly hindered' by insufficient data and urged for better data collection by the Home Office on characteristics of each applicant to be linked to outcomes to inform further policy decisions. Reacting to the recommendations, shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the report shows that raising the salary threshold will drive migration numbers down and urged for the threshold to be increased to £38,000. 'Migration figures remain far too high. It's time to end ECHR obstruction, raise the salary thresholds, and take back control of who comes into this country,' he said. 'As Kemi and I said on Friday, if the ECHR stops us from setting our own visa rules, from deporting foreign criminals or from putting Britain's interests first, then we should leave the ECHR.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'The Home Secretary commissioned the independent Migration Advisory Committee to undertake a review. 'We are now considering its findings and will respond in due course. More broadly, the government has already committed to legislate to clarify the application of Article 8 of the ECHR for applicants, caseworkers and the courts.'

UK has one of ‘worst statutory leave offers for fathers in developed world'
UK has one of ‘worst statutory leave offers for fathers in developed world'

Glasgow Times

time36 minutes ago

  • Glasgow Times

UK has one of ‘worst statutory leave offers for fathers in developed world'

In a new report, the House of Commons committee said a maximum of two weeks' paternity leave is 'completely out of step with how most couples want to share their parenting responsibilities' and 'entrenches outdated gender stereotypes about caring'. The committee has urged the Government to either amend the Employment Rights Bill to legislate for a day one right to paid leave or commit to 'considering this vital change within its review' in consultation with employers. It has also called on the Government to consider raising paternity pay to the level of maternity pay in the first six weeks – 90% of average earnings. The paternity and shared parental leave report by the committee said working parents 'will be let down by a review that leads only to tinkering around the edges of the system'. Chairwoman of the Women and Equalities Committee Sarah Owen said the UK's parental leave system was in 'urgent need of an overhaul to fit with the reality of working parents' lives'. The Labour MP for Luton North said reform 'must start with longer and better paid paternity leave'. Ms Owen said: 'It's essential the Government's proposed review addresses the system's fundamental failings, including low statutory pay, inadequate leave periods for fathers and others, exclusion of many working parents and guardians, plus design flaws and unnecessary complexity in the Shared Parental Leave scheme. 'The UK's parental leave system has fallen far behind most comparable countries, and we now have one of the worst statutory leave offers for fathers and other parents in the developed world.' The Labour MP added: 'Ministers must commit to meaningful reforms in the medium-term, with a view to going further towards a more gender equal parental leave system. 'Tinkering around the edges of a broken system will let down working parents. While much-needed substantial change to our paid parental leave system will require considerable financial investment, this would be outweighed by wider societal and economic benefits.' Chairwoman of the Women and Equalities Committee Sarah Owen (Roger Harris/UK Parliament) The report states that the UK's rate of statutory parental pay is 'completely out of kilter with the cost of living, has not kept pace with inflation and is far below rates in most comparable countries'. It recommends phased introduction of increases to statutory pay across the system to bring rates for all working parents up to 80% or more of average earnings or the real Living Wage. The lack of provision for self-employed fathers is 'deeply unfair', the report adds. The committee recommends that the Government consider options for providing statutory paid leave for all self-employed working fathers as part of its review of the parental leave system, including introducing a paternity allowance for self-employed fathers and other parents, similar to maternity allowance. The report states that the shared parental leave system is 'extremely difficult for most parents and their employers to understand'. It said a forthcoming review must examine the function and necessity of eligibility rules, with a view to 'simplifying or removing the employment status, time in service and earnings criteria'. The committee said the review should examine approaches taken in overseas systems, including the German 'partnership bonus' and Portugal's 'sharing bonus', which provide additional paid leave to couples in which both parents take a substantial portion of leave while the other returns to paid work.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store