Everyone knows that remain would win any referendum with May's deal Vs remain, or customs Union Brexit Vs remain. Those MPs who say they'll back the PMs deal as long as it is then put to the people are just cancelling Brexit in a way that makes them look like they're respecting the original referendum.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...
- Thread starter ainsworth74
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 9,788
It's a good tactic, one they could use to get themselves out of the mess they have made. I bet a number of them are wanting it to happen yet daren't actually call for it. Who blinks first?
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
I'm not fully convinced that Remain would win such a referendum, though I think there's a very good chance that they will.
But in the end, the 2016 referendum was flawed because it put a definite option (keep the status quo) against a phrase 'leave the EU' that actually encompassed a whole variety of completely different outcomes. I'd say that there's a good argument that a 2nd referendum putting Remain against a definitely known version of Leave is perfectly respectful of the 1st referendum: It's basically saying, "52% voted to leave last time - without any clear idea of what 'Leave' meant. The Government has as a result spent 3 years coming up with the best version of Leave it can work out. This is it. Now that you know what the most deliverable/most favourable version of Leave means, do you want to go ahead?" If that means that Remain wins - then we'll know that more people wanted to Remain than wanted to proceed with the most deliverable Leave the Government could come up with.
I don't see a problem with that [*]. Do you?
[*] Other than a general issue that, in my view, this kind of highly technical issue is really not suited to a referendum. But that particular cat is already well and truly out of the bag.
Last edited:
Yes I definitely have a problem with that. The 1st referendum asked a question and said the outcome would be delivered - this hasn't yet happened. Once we have left the EU we could perhaps have a referendum after several years of being out. A party could put this in their manifesto for the next election. I voted remain but could never back a 2nd referendum until the 1st result has been delivered.
What about Leave voters calling Remain voters "traitors"?
nlogax
Established Member
Nobody 'knows' anything of the sort. If there's anything the last three years has taught us, it's that nothing in modern politics is so predictable.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
The first referendum was officially "indicative" so there was no legal obligation to implement it, but I agree having called it, it would have been unacceptable to just ignore the result. But in my view it was a mandate for negotiations on departure terms rather than an absolute remit to depart at any cost. Rather like deciding to buy that shiny used car from Honest Boris's Motors - wouldn't you want to think again if you find out it's held together by filler and firing on two cylinders? Rees-Mogg is on record as saying a few years back that a second referendum would be a good idea once the terms of leaving were known.
Alternatively, it's a bit like a family agreeing to move to another town but not agreeing where to - after discussing it they might decide that where they are is a better compromise than anywhere else.
Trying to get back in after five years is fraught with problems. All our opt-outs would have lapsed and under current rules we'd have to agree in principle to joining the euro.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
But that's a problem with the first referendum: It asked a question that was so vague that it was for all practical purposes undeliverable. I agree with you that that was a problem. That referendum was flawed. David Cameron should never have made the promises he made in the form that he did because they were impossible to fulfil in a way that could satisfy everyone who voted leave. But you can't change the past. In the end, we are where we are. And in that context, I would say it's hard to argue with the least bad option at this point now being to put a specific defined and achievable option for Leave back to the public in a 2nd referendum.
Let’s a have a referendum whether to hold another referendum, then if that’s get a green light once we’ve had the referendum on whether we want to leave to EU or remain we can have another referendum just to make sure the previous referendum was ok.
There can be no more referendum’s we either leave as was asked and voted for , or we remain , parliament goes against the origin referendum who knows where that leads too
There can be no more referendum’s we either leave as was asked and voted for , or we remain , parliament goes against the origin referendum who knows where that leads too
Why do Leavers so often have a poor grasp of English grammar?
Not seen any remainers saying there will be violence on the streets or a swing towards extremist politics if they don't get their way.
Last edited:
What difference would a General Election make ?
We are leaving in 12 days unless another extension is granted or a deal is reached.
Sorry ? Who say’s I am a leaver ?
EM2
Established Member
Good luck selling that to all those who wanted to leave.
I think that's possibly where we're heading. It'd be no more ridiculous than what we've already seen, both in parliament and on here.
Insulting people will never persuade them to your point of view. It does the opposite.
I will remove the apostrophe to satisfy the more intellectual remain voters
EM2
Established Member
Why can't there? Parliament have already had three votes just on the deal!
But we already know that not all of them voted for the same thing
Well, there's no legal mechanism to stop them, so...
So you think "all remainers" are the same?
That's one thing the EU would allow an extension for
Whilst I applaud your optimism - its worth pointing out that the petition everyone was getting excited for is still about 10 million short compared to those who voted remain - so stop making outlandish statements that you know are not true.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
But that ignores the fundamental problem that we cannot leave as was asked for because it was never made clear at the time of the referendum what 'leaving' meant. Probably some people voted leave because they preferred EFTA membership or customs union membership. Some people would have voted leave on the assumption we'd get some kind of deal with the EU to leave the whole trading bloc/etc. Maybe a small number of people would have voted leave in the hope of the kind of hard no-deal Brexit that is now looking very likely - though probably only a small number because that possibility wasn't talked about much in 2016. No matter how much we hear slogans along the lines of 'leave means leave' the fact is that there was no one single definition of leave, and it's therefore physically impossible to deliver on the 2016 referendum result without some further clarification of what 'leave' actually meant. I don't see any other way to get that clarification other than through another referendum which asks about a specific and deliverable version of Leave.
I certainly do not think that , but if you kindly read the above post that seems to be the views of remainers , just as it seems to be certain extreme views which don’t belong anywhere in a modern society appear on the leave and remain side. I firmly believe both sides are as bad as each other.
Last edited:
- Status