Brexit again...

[geosname]

Which is more democratic? For parliament to scrap Brexit or to have a referendum on it?

Neither... both are undemocratic

[Guest TommyMac]

Which is more democratic? For parliament to scrap Brexit or to have a referendum on it?

 

If that's the choice we have then let Parliament decide, publish the names of who voted for what and let them face the consequences of failing to represent their constituents.

[Fosse69]

If that's the choice we have then let Parliament decide, publish the names of who voted for what and let them face the consequences of failing to represent their constituents.

That is their job, to represent their constituents, not only the ones that voted for them. They will have to explain why they made their decision based on their view of whether staying in the EU is preferable to the reality of the best deal available by leaving. If they lose their seats tough, surely the country comes first.

[Jacko51]

If that's the choice we have then let Parliament decide, publish the names of who voted for what and let them face the consequences of failing to represent their constituents.

 

If the job of MPs was to act as delegates for their constituents Jacob Rees Mogg would be one of the leading Remainers.

[Guest TommyMac]

If the job of MPs was to act as delegates for their constituents Jacob Rees Mogg would be one of the leading Remainers.

 

So let's see if JRM is re-elected if, after Brexit, his constituents are worse off. I would hope he would lose his seat if not his deposit.

[Guest TommyMac]

That is their job, to represent their constituents, not only the ones that voted for them. They will have to explain why they made their decision based on their view of whether staying in the EU is preferable to the reality of the best deal available by leaving. If they lose their seats tough, surely the country comes first.

 

Indeed it should.

[Jacko51]

Indeed it should.

 

That is the cause of all our current problems - the country doesn’t come first for the modern day politicians, their own careers do. This is why Bojo joined the Leave campaign even though he has been pro Europe. The likes of Ken Clarke who stood up during the debate and argued for a cross party consensus just get ignored.

[For Us All]

A truly unbelievable post full of utter rubbish.

 

I've picked this line out though as the crowning glory.

 

I'll tell you what I'm scared of - A precedent being set whereby the Government can overrule a democratic decision because they want to.

 

You do realise that if you "win" on this one, we all lose in the most significant and horrendous way possible? This is bigger than being in or out of the EU. This is our constitution, our rights and freedoms and the restriction of our Government being able to abuse power and impose their will.

 

Stick your blue passport and gammon jibes. The choice of our Government now is democracy or the EU. It really is that simple.

 

Spot on.

If you want the EU,you'll end up with this Guy.

 

 

Think about it!

[Heatwave]

Please explain how a second referendum is the answer.

 

What if the result is the same? Do you really believe those that voted remain and lost would accept it and drop their objections to Brexit? I don't.

Will Labour, SNP, DUP, Lib Dems, PC, Greens, and the Tory EU supporters back down and support the May deal? I don't think so.

 

If the vote is reversed there will be a large number of the electorate who will lose all faith in the UK democratic system. A second leave or remain referendum followed by a remain win will result in a massive boycott of any future poll/election; a step towards autocracy at worst or 30% future election turnouts. Neither of these outcomes should rest easy with any UK citizen.

 

To those that claim a democracy gives people the right to change their mind, I fully concur but not before the outcome of a free vote has even been enacted. Imagine a Corbyn victory in the next General Election, would it be democratic if, 3 months later, Tory voters asked for another vote because they claimed people had changed their minds?

 

The only way forward is for Parliament to work together to deliver the will of the people from the referendum. If they are too imperious to do that then go back to the people with the option of May's deal or no deal.

 

Or, as Remainers are so sure people have changed their minds, how about a Remain/Leave referendum where a 70% Remain vote is required to overturn the original outcome.

 

Of course, if the requirement for the original referendum had been 70% Leave we wouldn't be having this argument now.

 

This is the main reason why I think another referendum is necessary - at the first vote it was for an entirely abstract decision, without any regard for the consequences. Now we are much more aware what they would be and we can vote with head rather than heart.

 

If Leave was still the result, well you can't say it wasn't an informed decision and we should abide by it. That said, if at a future date it became expedient - either politically or economically - to seek readmittance to the EU then the same mechanism should be used, with the same requirement.

[Guest TommyMac]

if at a future date it became expedient - either politically or economically - to seek readmittance to the EU then the same mechanism should be used, with the same requirement.

 

What mechanism is that, one referendum to decide whether to re-enter and then another to see if people have changed their minds?

[Heatwave]

What mechanism is that, one referendum to decide whether to re-enter and then another to see if people have changed their minds?

 

One for both. It's better than permanently cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[geosname]

One for both. It's better than permanently cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Unless the nose is cancerous?

[Paul6754]

So we go blindly into a second referendum not knowing if the result will be accepted or not? Sorry Paul but your humble opinion is not a solid basis to overturn a free vote, the outcome of which has not been delivered. I would say the chances of a second leave vote receiving more support are akin to Jeremy Corbyn telling the truth.

 

There wouldn't be any going blindly, look at the options when May's deal is rejected by Parliament in January something like 10 weeks before the UK is due to leave, there are not many options apart from a Hard Brexit or extend the Leave date and that requires all 27 EU countries to agree.

 

A free vote based on lies.

 

If you look at the latest polls you will alter that statement.

 

Remain campaigned with just as many 'lies' as did Leave.

 

What lies did the Remain campaign tell, we all are fully aware of the huge lies told by Boris and Farage.

 

The UN Compact on Migration is non-legally binding and should not dictate a sovereign state's immigration policy. Interestingly, 3 EU member states voted against it, 5 abstained and 1 didn't vote.

 

It is up to our elected government to set out the UK's immigration policy and to adhere to it, failure to do so should be reflected in that government's support. That's democracy.

 

So why did the UK sign and endorse it. The elected government of the UK has been trying to reduce the rate of migration for 15 or years and has failed miserably to do so.

 

The compact sets out the path to make migration a human right and sets up the legal framework to do so, it's naive to think otherwise, why else would a Supra-national organization draft such pronouncements. The USA and Australia also refused to sign.

 

It is naive to assume that because the UK has a long tradition of democracy, the effect of non-deliverance of the referendum will not have a dramatic effect on future turnouts. I am only one of the electorate but, for me, a second referendum would be the nail in the coffin. I would never vote again.

 

Since 1918 when records began voter turnout in GE's has varied from 58-79%, it's naive to think a 2nd referendum is gonna have a dramatic effect downwards as there are always issues that will cause voters to turn out. It's your choice not to turn out.

 

The terms we have now are the terms that have been rejected by the UK people, why would we want to retain them? Future re-entry into the EU would be negotiated and a decision taken on whether those terms were sufficiently attractive to warrant re-entry. That's democracy.

 

Mays' proposed deal is worse than what the UK has now, the only other alternative on the table is a No Deal Brexit which is not an attractive proposition. Who knows what any re-entry negotiations would look like but it would make the UK look foolish. Brexit is democracy, democracy by lies and a disgraceful way to achieve an outcome and deceive the electorate.

 

1. Free movement of people. 2. Adoption of EU law. 3. Contributing to the EU. I believe these to be the 3 main aspects of membership that led to the Leave vote. Does May's deal deliver on those? Not entirely IMO but there has to be compromise in a negotiation doesn't there? Let's have a People's Vote on May's deal or no deal. What are people afraid of?

 

The leave vote was mainly about immigration, May's deal is worse than what the UK has as a member of the EU. Let's have a People's Vote on Remain or May's deal or no deal, that would be sensible.

 

Of course the Irish border has, quite rightly, become a major factor in any deal although I doubt 5% of those that voted back in 2016 gave it any thought whatsoever.

 

Exactly and there were many other issues the electorate weren't aware of and that's why it is important and sensible to have a 2nd referendum, the electorate is now much better informed of what a Brexit would look like.

 

Why can't Parliament agree to work together? Elected representatives of the people working for the good of the people, how radical is that?

We all wish.

 

The Brexit you describe is uncertain but I will give you that it is a probability. Why? IMO because since 24th June 2016, when the result was announced the country (people and MP's) have fundamentally failed to back that result. They have fundamentally weakened the UK's negotiating position to an extent where we are left with a choice between a 'poor deal' that gives little to no future certainty and no deal. Well done people of the UK, you've been such an asset...... to Juncker and co.

 

TM, The UK was negotiating from a position of weakness from the get go, the EU were never gonna give the UK favorable terms to leave else other countries may well follow suite.

 

You see, the people of Scotland had their referendum on leaving the UK and have been told they will have to wait for a second opportunity. How hypocritical to deny them that choice and then pander to those wanting to be part of the EU.

 

The UK may well face economic strife but the UK hasn't yet seen anything in terms of political strife if a 2nd referendum IS held.

 

If Brexit does happen economic strife is virtually a given, a scenario where Scotland suffers and votes to leave the UK and subsequently joins the EU is more of a possibility, holding a 2nd referendum and overturning Brexit would be nothing in terms of political strife compared to that.

[Paul6754]

A truly unbelievable post full of utter rubbish.

 

I've picked this line out though as the crowning glory.

 

I'll tell you what I'm scared of - A precedent being set whereby the Government can overrule a democratic decision because they want to.

 

You do realise that if you "win" on this one, we all lose in the most significant and horrendous way possible? This is bigger than being in or out of the EU. This is our constitution, our rights and freedoms and the restriction of our Government being able to abuse power and impose their will.

 

Stick your blue passport and gammon jibes. The choice of our Government now is democracy or the EU. It really is that simple.

 

RB, Try thinking some scenarios through and stop beating your chest.

 

We know the 1st referendum was open and democratic but the electorate were deceived by huge lies and were ill informed what a Brexit would entail, a 2nd referendum is the only sensible option available and is gaining more public support.

 

The Irish have overturned two "EU related referendums" on the Treaty of Nice and the Treaty of Lisbon and it hasn't done democracy in Ireland any harm.

[geosname]

So much fear of the unknown and straying from the usual path.

It's a little silly claiming leavers won because on false promises when every election is won on the same principle... it's starting from the premise that politicians are truthful... they are not.... no matter which colour flag they wave.

A second referendum wouldn't solve the problem... a third might.

A more democratic approach may be to have a second referendum with again two question/simple choice..... Mays deal or no deal.

With that option I would choose the no deal