Back in August, I said that I couldn’t support the Open Britain organisation (the evolution of the Britain Stronger in Europe campaign) because it was too enthusiastic about restrictions on free movement of people and because it wasn’t calling for a referendum on any Brexit deal.
I still can’t sign up to them for the same reasons. However, I do accept that there are areas of common ground between our organisations. This weekend they have conducted some very useful research which shows that half of Leave voters are not prepared to be a penny worse off as a result of leaving the EU.
That YouGov poll, conducted this week, also obliterates the Leave majority. When asked how they would vote if the referendum took place tomorrow, 44% said Leave and 44% said Remain. That is a dramatic reversal of fortune.
Ed Miliband writes about this in today’s Observer:
This chimes with the experience in my constituency, where seven in 10 voted to leave. Many of them were desperate for a new beginning for themselves and their families. The government will rightly be subject to an almighty backlash from Leave voters if it makes decisions that make them far poorer and leaves less money for public services. Having voted for a better future, for them this would be the ultimate betrayal.
The evidence is already there that people will be worse off after Brexit. And this isn’t just Europhile hyperbole. It’s actual government fact as we saw in the Autumn Statement. This is where Miliband’s article is so depressing. What on earth is the problem with giving the people the chance to determine for themselves whether the final deal on offer is in line with their expectations? What could possibly be more democratic?
Let’s look at it this way. If you decide you are going to buy a house, you state your intention to do so by putting in an offer. If it is accepted, you can still pull out if you don’t like the terms of the sale. The same thing applies to Brexit. If people realise the true extent of the cost, and that the stuff they were told was “Project Fear” was actually an underestimation, then they may well choose to reconsider their decision. The You Gov research proves that.
The reason Labour MPs are swallowing the Corbyn line on Brexit is because so many of them were spooked by the feeling in their constituencies during the referendum. The best thing they could possibly do for their constituents is to give them the power to determine whether and how we leave the European Union rather than simply dance to Theresa May’s tune. They could, if they so wanted, give the Government some serious pain on this, but they choose not to. They are already being punished for that. Their fourth place behind us in Sleaford (where they were pro Brexit) and their lost deposit in Richmond Park (where they were pro Remain) shows the huge pile of marshmallow on which they build their response to Brexit.
It is starting to look very much like the Liberal Democrats are the only party to get this right. Those who would deny the people a say on the deal are clearly doing so for their own interests. We don’t have long to change people’s minds. Open Britain’s research may yet prove to be pivotal. Willie Rennie meet Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s negotiator on Brexit and found him sympathetic to the idea of a “Break Clause” which would give us a way back after Article 50 has been triggered.
Tim Farron has been far more understanding of the motivations of people who voted Leave than other political leaders have been of those who voted to Remain. What the party needs to do in the next few months is to continue building support for a referendum on the deal, but, alongside that, show how we would tackle the main concerns that motivated so many to vote Leave. Better housing, better wages, better public services is what motivates most people in this country. We need to show that we are and always have been with them in these aspirations.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
A perpetual pirouette of prevarication?
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Why non-fiction books need their indexes
Changes in status: Local Elections wrap up
Daniel Walker
David Raw
Jenny Barnes
Tom Bailey
Gill Travers
55 Comments
Hi Caron,
I would suggest you are reading more into a 50/50 opinion poll than is really there (this is only my opinion though). 44% remain, 44% leave so 50/50. I would presume a 2-4% margin of error. Would that not mean the poll is in line with the referendum result itself?
Just to be clear I’m not knocking the poll ( a weak argument I often see these days), I am suggesting it is no really showing a large vote-leave regret vote which the rest of thre article is predicated on.
Your hypothesis is that economic damage will be so bad that enough people will change their mind. I think this is based on 2 factors, one I think is you assume rather that being a fact, the other you have not mentioned.
1. That there will be significant economic damage. We just don’t know. we really don’t. It is an assumption. the autumn statement economic forecasts were just that. I think we still have to wait to see how things look over the next 3-6 months (all commentators agreed the forecasts were certainly wrong, just would it be more or less worse than the baseline taken?)
2. The backlash felt if people who voted leave felt they their decision was being ignored and were being told to vote again. This is a strong undercurrent you have discounted. I think because your own political bias hopes to have a new referendum to overturn the result.
A someone who voted lave. I would have no problem having a 2nd referendum or even a referendum on the outcome (which in itself is a 2nd referendum with a different name). I certain the result would be the same; to leave (maybe my own political bias? possibly?)
As one of the 48%, another benefit of a 2nd referendum when the terms of any brexit deal are clear, is that if we vote for the brexit deal then I and other ‘remainers’ will reluctantly accept the outcome. If however we are railroaded into a damaging brexit deal without a vote on the terms I and I believe many others will be outraged and unreconciled and the dangerous divide between leavers and ‘remainers’ will last for years.
One of the potential political hazards of economic decline as a result of Brexit is that instead of blaming the Brexiteers and the Tory government, Leaver voters will harden in their view that Britain’s decline is all the fault of the EU – because the EU treated the UK so badly in the Brexit negotiations. It is well established that voters can reinterpret evidence to bolster their pre-existing prejudices and inclinations, rather than accept that their original judgement might have been wrong.
The Andrew Marr Show on 11/12/16 is worth a look. We wish him a speedy recovery.
He was replaced for one week by Nick Robinson who demonstrated that the BBC has expertise in depth, but did not explain why a problem with his voice caused him to be transferred to radio.
Imagine Tory MP/s with slim briefing/s from Tory whips. They say “The truth is” as an alternative to pausing for breath, or going “Um, Um, Um”. They do not intend to imply that an open question from an independent interviewer is untruthful. The interviewer states that their is connection between the question and the answer, but even Jeremy Paxman eventually tired of repetition (from Michael Howard MP).
“The truth is” is a cliché which could be deleted in “deUmming” just as Commons Hansard improves slips of the tongue.
Diane Abbott (MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington & Shadow Secretary of State for Health) http://www.dianeabbott.org.uk/ (or Shadow Home Secretary? as per BBC) is an experienced broadcaster and does not “Um”.
By standing for Labour leader she showed that she does not lack ambition. Subsequently she said that she would “support a female candidate” (from a choice of two) but she did not. Asked about Labour’s recent by-election results she said that the gap would close in twelve months. By doing so she may be playing for more time or supporting Jeremy Corbyn with a noose.
The interviewer states that their is NO connection between the question and the answer
Before the referendum polls showed that something like half or more of the electorate did not believe that Brexit would harm the economy. Clearly, most of those who thought it would were among the 48%. This presents May’s government with a dilemma that is compounded by the right wing tabloid press and the louder Brexiters, many of whom are within her own ranks.
Unless she can persuade these vociferous bodies to change their tune, exit negotiations are likely to fall apart. An exit settlement depends on the UK acknowledging financial obligations, that follow from agreements that the UK had signed up to. The Europhobia that was raucously promulgated by the right wing tabloids, threatens to derail the process. All the noise will be about the EU punishing the UK. If this happens negotiations for a post Brexit trade agreement will get nowhere.
Prospects for the impact on the economy are bleak, those who say we do not know how Brexit will affect the economy have no grounds for optimism; they might just as well claim that we cannot tell whether decreased investment will harm the economy.
If and when people find themselves worse off there will be discontent, but they will find little solace in Europhobia and those who voted against Brexit are likely to damn those who had promised a Brexit paradise.
Talk of EU punishing the UK is rubbish. We decided to leave, the rest of the EU are right to look after their interests and if our demands do not look after EU interests they have every right to say no, and on our heads be it.
Latest Yougov poll
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/bg3iahmaw8/TimesResults_161205_VI_Trackers_W.pdf
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right 44
Wrong 42
Don’t know 14
Doesn’t suggest to me that people are changing their minds.
Saying that, I think trying to make an argument for 2nd referendum based on polling is pointless. The polling companies have been having numerous problems with accuracy since the 2010 election, 2015 election, Referendum etc, they simply are not a reliable source of information.
Polls of 2 thousand or so people are never going to give an accurate picture of what is going on in the wider general public.
33+ Million people voted in the EU referendum, the biggest turn out in history.
People who have never voted in their life, finally felt that had a voice and their vote could finally make a difference in an election result.
These people have become in engaged in politics for the first time, if you think they are suddenly going to change their mind or slink back into the shadows and watch their democratic choice be railroaded by remainers, there are going to be a lot of disappointed people come the next election or referendum if there happens to be one.
A good post Matt,
The part about all those never voting before, becoming engaged an voting to leave is a much clearer way of the point I was saying about the backlash that would be seen if their vote to leave was seemingly being ignored.
However many still think it the right thing to do, if the basis for that is no disadvantage or even an advantage to the economy, they are very likely to be disabused.
So far as new voters are concerned, by far the greater number of new voters are younger voters (obviously), who voted overwhelmingly against Brexit. A clear imperative for Liberal Democrats is to give voice to these younger voters. What they have to say may not always be comfortable, but they are the sector that the country depends on, they are the future (obviously again).
I think there is a very strong case for a second referendum on the final deal of negotiations.
However, I don’t think the polls (so far) have provided any convincing evidence of a change of heart among the electorate. Personal experience would actually suggest a hardening of attitudes among many, who can now use the “people have voted…what part of democracy do you not understand” line to some effect.
I think Tim has shown some real leadership on the EU issue and his handline of it (so far) has been to my mind quite impressive. However, as far as whether the evidence suggests we’re “getting this right” – it’s still early days. The party is clearly benefitting, as shown in the Richmond result. But I’d like to see an approach that can actually win over members of “the other side” rather than something that appeals purely to “the 48%”.
I think the comments coming from Brussels, give a clear indication as to how strong a ‘friendship’ we have with our European allies, not a very strong one. It amazes me how angry they are that a member state is making use of part of the treaty to enable it to leave the union, why are they so angry?
If it wasn’t so serious it would be hilarious to watch their responses, ranging from complete denial that it will happen, to trying to engineer a punishment package, so that any other state that even thinks of leaving will remember what happened to Britain and run back into the arms of Brussels apologising profusely for ever daring to think that they might be better off outside the great union.
It reminds me of the Stepford Wives film, know your place, do as you are told, and everything will be ‘lovely’, there are only two rules-:
1 Don’t wake up.
and
2 Leave and you will be punished.
@Martin
“So far as new voters are concerned, by far the greater number of new voters are younger voters (obviously)”
Where is your evidence that the greater number of new voters where younger voters?
I would suggest there where just as many if not more 35,40,50+ year olds who become engaged and voted for the very first time.
the lowest turn out was amongst the 18-24 year olds.
That being said, all votes are EQUAL no matter what the age of the person, a person of 60+ vote is just as equal as a person of 18. A person of 60+ is likely to spend another 20 years in this country and has an equal right and voice to chose who and how this country should be run.
lets also put this poll into some perspective
51% were not prepared to be a penny worse off clearly 48% of that where people who voted remain
49% of people polled where prepared to be worse off between £10 and £200 a month with the largest group 18% prepared to take a hit of £20 a month
This was an online poll of only 1600 people. It tells us absolutely nothing with any accuracy what the real picture is across the whole of the UK
David-:
‘The Polish former deputy prime minister Leszek Balcerowicz said Britain would be used as example. “We should not encourage other populist forces campaigning on exit such as National Front in France or Podemos in Spain. This is a very important consideration. This is in the interests of Europe that we do not encourage other EU countries to leave. The common interest of remaining members is to deter other exits. This should have an impact on the terms Britain gets.”
This is just one quote of several one might use to demonstrate that their are those in the E.U. who will not only negotiate strongly, to be expected, but wish to make the Brexit deal so bad that either, we will stay, and / or it will be a very long time before any other member state contemplates leaving on a voluntary basis. Junkers, Tusk, and Hollande, have all used language such as punish, deter , consequences when talking about Brexit.
Obviously there will be consequences, both for the U.K. and E.U. but to talk of punishment, or a deal so bad that it will deter other members is, in my opinion, unfortunate to say the least when coming from a body that claims to be democratic and espouses voluntary membership.
The E.U. would be better advised to consider why it is so unpopular right know, not only in the U.K. but across a large part of the union.
To me it does not matter whether we are on the right or wrong side of the argument. What to me is important that we have a stance, a position which is clear, different from the others, all of which is electorally beneficial, and to me that is what matters.
@theakes
I think you make a good point. Farron have placed a clear Yellow lib dem Standard in the ground. It is quite clear that if a person voted remain and feels strongly about the referendum result that the Lib Dems are clear choice. Labour is no where, with no coherent policy and offers no alternative. This is electorally beneficial to the Lib Dems and gives them a defining character once more.
When I rebut pro-remain Referendum postings/comments it is I think these comments/postings can fall foul of the echo-chamber effect. Very much like this article does. I don’t see, hear or feel any great change in how people voted in the referendum and think the result would be the same if the referendum was run again. the Author of this article has a50/50 poll but i ‘guess’ (and I should not make subjective guesses) that those people around her echo her believe that there should be a new referendum and most of those she might know would vote remain, ergo the public has changed it view and remain would win.
I just don’t see or feel this. I think it better to be as truthful as possible than to live in a land of bias-conformation.
Most of the people I have spoken to since the referendum have not changed their minds, those who voted remain still think they were right and would do so again, as do those who voted leave. This latest poll adds little of significance to the debate and proves little or nothing.
It is natural that people do not want to be any worse off, regardless of how they voted, and I would go further and say that most people would vote for more investment in health, education and other public services while at the same time voting against any increases in taxes to pay for that additional spending. People vote for the unaffordable and all political parties regularly offer the public that choice. In Scotland the party who has regularly promised more than it can deliver, or afford, (the SNP) consistently gets more votes than anyone else.
Why people voted how they did on Brexit will always be open to discussion, whether there should be a second vote on the deal is something I am not convinced about. It is similar to the SNPs argument that we need a second vote on independence. I was on the losing side on that vote, but accept the result and we should do the same with Brexit.
The comparison in the article with making an offer for a house is interesting. Having recently been involved with an elderly relative making an offer for a sheltered house.
A buyer will only put in an offer for a house if they really want to commit to a major change in their life and move to a new home. There are often a issues in the terms of the sale that need to be discussed and compromises agreed, but the decision to move is the big issue and to bid for a house shows the purchaser has decided to change their lifestyle in many ways. The seller will naturally try to squeeze as much as they can from the sale, but not getting every pair of curtains included in the price does not mean that the purchaser will or should walk away from the deal.
Good posts by Matt and Tynan.
@ Tynan
“The E.U. would be better advised to consider why it is so unpopular right know, not only in the U.K. but across a large part of the union”.
As a remainer who may easily have voted leave, this is such an important consideration.
What’s the point in going back into a ‘club’ who would simply take that as an assertion that enough people saw the error of their ways, breathed a huge sigh of relief and carried on as before regardless?
The majority was caused by people who do not usually voting in general elections voting in the referendum. This is consistent with anecdotal experience with first-past-the-post in “safe” seats. I live in Tunbridge Wells. We can say “Your vote counts” but at general elections and some county and borough elections the voters know the likely outcome and do not bother to vote. The outcome of the EU referendum was uncertain, so people who usually did not vote did so, indeed felt compelled to make a decision by the importance of the issue.
Mike S – I know we have had a similar discussion on another thread, but could you just remind us of what you feel should change about the EU (and whether and what evidence you have for a wish to make those changes among a substantial number of members?) I am quite aware of some of the issues I personally would like to change, but I know that if people want a club, the only way it will continue to run will be if there are compromises between members.
Caron , polls apart, metaphorically and literally , the poll not as important as your comment on immigration. There has to be significant restriction of freedom of movement even most voters for our party and members would recognise we are in a different scenario. Accross Europe the far right are on the march precisely because moderates are pushing a radical agenda on an issue we do not need to.
Liberal and social democrat parties have nothing in their philosophy that means governments cannot be able to control who comes in and out . Humanity needs us to be sensible.
We are denying residency to spouses because of income levels to allow movement of people who have as of yet no connection to our country .
The needs of society must beat those of the economy at least sometimes. Or we are talking in favour of left libertarianism, not social Liberalism.
I came across many who made up their mind to vote Leave fairly late in the day, and although I can’t claim to know the detail of their motivations, it does seem that where fairly balanced opinions were held, quite often they ended up on the Leave side, which indicates to me that they could very easily switch back to Remain, whereas, I find it difficult to believe that the Leave vote has any great potential to strengthen.
I get a distinct feeling that there are two factors which could strengthen the Leave vote somewhat:
1 If they feel the Remainers are nagging them to change their minds.
2 If they feel that others overseas are “punishing” them for voting the way they did.
Personally I feel it would be somewhat dishonest to say that I “respect” the Leave vote, but I can in this light understand why so many remain politicians are saying that at present. They will be waiting till the polls make a more convincing turn – which, of course they will, in time. Whether the change will come quickly to avert the ensuing disaster, of course, is another thing.
In Wednesday’s debate in the Commons a series of Tory MPs queued up to follow the Leader of the House in changing his view in June and mentioning his career. Ken Clarke MP said on the Sunday Politics that “I would have been a terrible hypocrite if I had done that.”
“When asked how they would vote if the referendum took place tomorrow, 44% said Leave and 44% said Remain. That is a dramatic reversal of fortune.”
Seriously?
A poll that is statistically indistinguishable from the referendum result (which polls themselves failed to predict, up to and including the first exit polls) isn’t evidence of any reversal of fortune, let alone a “dramatic” one. This is a clear case of dragging the bewildered evidence along to support a predetermined conclusion whose weight it simply will not bear.
For now, “Bregret” remains a figment of the fond hopes of last-ditch Remainers.
Some of the changes I would like to see are-:
Reform of the common agricultural policy.
Reform of the common fisheries policy.
The removal of the roles of president and foreign minister of the European Council.
A commitment to the recognition and continuity of the sovereign nation state within the union.
A review of the E.U. expansionist policy, especially towards eastern Europe.
An acceptance of the fact that the euro has been a disastrous political vanity project which can never work without fiscal and political union.
A rejection of the idea of a common defense force.
A review of the unlimited freedom of movement, in particular, no movement from accession states until their economy is strong enough to meet the terms of joining the Euro.
The full implementation of free movement of services.
An acceptance of and apology for the fact that they have been completely unable to manage migration from Africa and the middle east.
A genuine commitment to subsidiarity.
An end to the ridiculous move to Strasbourg and back every 6 months, again it is an expensive vanity, there is absolutely no need for the movement of the parliament.
An end to spending millions of euros on propaganda material aimed at schools and young people.
A freeze of followed by reduction in the E.U. budget.
I could go on, e.g. a complete review of and greater transparency in the way the commission works but lets not be asking for miracles.
The EU referendum was largely an emotional issue like the Scottish one. The single biggest issue seemed to be immigration although many people mentioned dislike of Germany as their reason for voting leave. Years of anti EU propaganda from the most widely read newspapers has inflamed a section of the population just as anti German propaganda did in the years before the First World War. Despite the slaughter most people still think we were right, although Germany had full adult male suffrage while only those paying at least £10 in rates (about 40%) could vote here. So much for the war for democracy when our principal ally in both World Wars was firstly the autocratic Tsar of Russia and then the Communist dictator Joseph Stalin.
Of course the EU will use every means to keep us in and some thoughtful people have not ruled out the possibility of war. In a similar situation when Abraham Lincoln said Government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth, presumably he did not consider the inhabitants of the Confederate States to be people because otherwise he would not have launched what was at that time one of the most cruel and costly wars ever and issued the Proclamation of Emancipation for slaves, although the autocratic Tsar of Russia had already freed the serfs without a war. The US is still suffering the effects of that war more than 150 years later as could be seen in the recent election.
Polling seems to suggest that only 20% thought they would be better off outside the EU while about 30 – 35% thought they would be worse off or there would be no difference but that did not change their vote. Presumably a few pounds a week from their relatively affluent lifestyles is a better price than the slaughter of the First World War.
I mean a better price to be free of German domination as the Leavers would see it. I heard a story that one former minister and Leaver would not either speak to or shake the hand of a German Minister who was the guest of the British Government. This shows the nature of some leavers. No doubt most would not be as rude as that.
Correction, they move to Strasbourg every month! for 4 days.
It is pretty much universally accepted that this is ridiculous, even the European Parliament has voted to stop the circus. Unfortunately it is enshrined in the treaties, and even if they dared re-open the treaties, France would block any move to eliminate the Strasbourg parliament, some might say out of spite rather than national interest.
If they can’t even gain reform on such an obvious issue on this, what reform could they ever agree?
@ nvelope2003 Oh dear, your history is remarkably imaginative and original. It would help if you could quote a source on the no handshake thing.
Are you envisaging a re-run of Bannockburn and Culloden ?
Tynan
In other words, almost the Full Monty Daily Mail agenda, with absolutely no admission of what the EU is supposed to be, ie a supranational group of nations with a democratic element? With your changes there is very little point in having it as a body any more, so why are we bothering!!
Malcolm Todd: “This is a clear case of dragging the bewildered evidence along to support a predetermined conclusion whose weight it simply will not bear.”
I agree entirely.
Polling data (is there a link to the source of the 44%:44% voting intention) does not appear to show any great change of heart by anyone and looks no less inaccurate than it did before the referendum. Claims of “a dramatic reversal of fortune” look preposterous and damage the credibility of any arguments made on the basis of that.
Some will look at the Richmond Park result as a mandate to oppose Brexit while others will interpret it as a massive swing away from the Remain vote in the referendum. Everybody sees what they want to see when attempting to read the runes of public opinion on Brexit.
Interestingly, in Yougov’s regular survey last week (linked to by matt above) the response to the question “In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?” for those intending to vote Lib Dem is:
Right: 17%, Wrong 79%, Don’t Know 4%.
and for those who voted Lib Dem in 2015 it is
Right: 32%, Wrong 54%, Don’t Know 14%.
As well as indicating that even in this party the anti-Brexit sentiment is far from unanimous, these figures suggest that Lib Dems have picked up pro-EU Labour and Tory voters in equal measure while losing few more sceptical voters to Labour, leaving me still a bit confused/concerned about the party’s vision and direction when it comes to matters other than Brexit.
Tim
Do yo not agree that the movement of the parliament every month is ridiculous? and shows the problems inherent in getting genuine reform within the organisation?
Even Brussels accepts that the Euro zone is in danger and needs further integration to rule out any catastrophic failure.
Nick Clegg categorically denied there was any move towards a European army, there clearly is, though.
A number of member states agree that the common agricultural, and common fisheries policies need further reform.
The fact that the E.U. has collectively failed to manage migration should be obvious to everyone, it is to the council and parliament.
One need not resort to the Mail et al, and for the record, I don’t, to be aware of and concerned about the issues raised. As previously stated it is not just people in this country that are becoming increasingly frustrated with the distance and arrogance of Brussels in regard to legitimate concern’s of E.U. citizens.
Finally if anyone can convince me why in the current economic climate we should agree to ever increasing E.U, budgets, I would be genuinely fascinated to see the argument.
Hi Tim
Can I just say that on balance I did vote remain and would so again.
The reason I agonised for so long (right up to the ballot box) is that I do think there are many real issues which the EU has simply failed to tackle, the results of which have come into sharp focus in the last few years.
My concern is that the EU does not appear to have any more of a plan to deal with these issues, than the Brexit gov’t here have a plan for us – it’s a monumental mess all round.
I don’t think it’s fair to simply blame the Mail, although the right wing press have certainly played their part in turning people against the EU.
So, these are the changes I would like to see even as a remainer
1. A clear credible policy for dealing with the refugee crisis, that does not encourage the kind of people smuggling gangs, that usually mean fit young blokes (who are most likely to be radicalised) are most likely to make & survive hazardous journeys!
2. Dismantling the internal borders of Europe before having a clear strategy for securing the external ones, should a crisis ever develop was a bit daft to say the least. So, Europe needs a plan to know who is entering and leaving.
3. Recognition that the UK benefits system is non contributory and allowances need to be made, simply because you cannot have open borders and such a system without consequences and the British population have no will or desire to change what is sacrosanct – they would rather leave the club.
4. Reform of the ECHR such that cases like Abu Hamza don’t make headlines for years damaging perception of the EU. Many British people think that their own safety is more important than the rights of foreign criminals.
5. The move towards a Federal Europe and adoption of the Euro (this is a biggy for many). Been able to devalue your currency is important during a recession. Trying to run the same currency for Portugal and Germany to say nothing of Greece is just plain bonkers. Trying to force austerity measures on a member state on it’s knees to make a point is not promoting the club well.
Massive youth unemployment in member states is not going to encourage richer members to believe their is a real plan involving fairness, trust and freedom.
6. As mentioned above, A commitment to the recognition and continuity of the sovereign nation state within the union.
Identity and self-determination is very important for many English (especially dare I say the working class). Europe will not win their support without a continuing commitment to the Nation they love.
I agree with all the posters that say there has not been much evidence of change of views since the referendum. But this cuts both ways – the Remain camp is in no way reconciled to Brexit, especially if it is a hard Brexit foisted on them by Tories desperate to defend their position against UKIP.
However, Caron hits the nail on the head as to why a second referendum is the right policy – not just for the Lib Dems but for the country as a whole. Sure, there was a narrow vote in favour of leaving but their reasons vary widely (stupid to suggest otherwise) and some were mutually incompatible. A referendum on the deal struck is only way of testing whether anything which can be negotiated can obtain majority support in preference to the status quo.
As rightly noted above, a second vote might well go the same way and, if so, nobody can really complain about it. If it goes the other way, it will demonstrate that there isn’t a deal which can get majority support.
@ nvelope – “many people mentioned dislike of Germany as their reason for voting leave”
Would you be able to evidence that in anything other than anecdote?
“Despite the slaughter most people still think we were right, although Germany had full adult male suffrage while only those paying at least £10 in rates (about 40%) could vote here”
There is more to democracy than having a vote. The German parliament was a talking shop with no real power or authority. The failings of our early 20th century democracies probably balanced each other quite nicely, but ours certainly proved to be less catastrophic in its failings.
David Raw: I did write a more considered piece but it did not appear. As it was late I decided to do a summary which omitted references. My point was that leaving the EU is an emotional issue for many people (but not for me) and facts are not going to persuade them otherwise so a second referendum will not change the outcome but proposing it might help the Liberal Democrat recovery and possibly bring about the realignment of parties which has been long predicted but still shows only modest signs of happening. The Irish Home Rule issue did cause the Whigs and supporters of Joseph Chamberlain to leave the Liberal Party in the 1880s and as a result it became a more radical force in opposition to the Conservatives though it was some time before it gained an effective majority. This and the rise of the Labour Party after the First World War show that major events can result in party divisions like that between Asquith and Lloyd George and changes in the party system. We need a challenge to Corbyn by a nationally respected serious figure such as Ken Clarke to make a change more likely as unfortunately Tim Farron is not yet well known enough.
When the Confederate States exercised their sovereign right to leave the Union it resulted in a terrible war when strange things happened. For example the Manchester Guardian supported the Confederacy because of the cotton trade although a minority of mill workers did support the Union. It may seem unlikely but the EU might feel it to be in their interest to fight to keep the UK in. There is a lot at stake for them. Just as in the past the UK could then ally with such figures as Putin and Trump as it did with Nicholas II and Stalin. There is plenty of support among leavers for their modern equivalents and European wars involving Russia do seem to be back in fashion and will be more likely when Trump becomes President as he is equivocal about supporting European nations.
I do not see the relevance of Bannockburn etc except in the context that those wars were fought to protect what was then seen as national interest.
Peter Watson provides some useful data:
“In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?” for those intending to vote Lib Dem is:
Right: 17%, Wrong 79%, Don’t Know 4%.
and for those who voted Lib Dem in 2015 it is
Right: 32%, Wrong 54%, Don’t Know 14%.
These are consistent with the referendum voting figures for Lib Dem voters so again suggest little change on either side. Any talk of “buyer’s remorse” appears very wide of the mark.
So far, none of the predictions of economic apocalypse promulgated by the remain camp has come true. In fact just today, another organization – the BCC – has upgraded its GDP forecast from 1.8% to 2.1%.
Meanwhile the Eurozone coasts along in a state of permanent crisis in which any one of a whole series of upcoming events could trigger a calamity, most immediately the likely bail-in for retail investors in Monte dei Paschi, which means many ordinary Italians having their life savings wiped out by order to the EU.
It is impossible to predict what the state of the EU will be in 2020. Roger Bootle argues in today’s Telegraph that it is possible (but not likely) that the EU as currently formulated will no longer exist. But in spite of that, the Lib Dems are betting the farm on the possibility that membership of the EU will look like a desirable thing by the next election. Looking objectively at the state of the EU right now, I’d classify that as a “brave” choice.
@Graham Evans “One of the potential political hazards of economic decline as a result of Brexit is that instead of blaming the Brexiteers and the Tory government, Leaver voters will harden in their view that Britain’s decline is all the fault of the EU – because the EU treated the UK so badly in the Brexit negotiations.”
I think it isn’t a ‘potential’ hazard but a certainty that the EU will get the blame. Given how the UK media has portrayed our EU relationship todate and how Westminster politicians have failed to challenge the media portrayal.
Firstly, we can expect the UK media spin on the Brexit negotiations will not be without (negative) bias and regarding the final agreement as a “stitch up” if it doesn’t allow the UK to have it’s cake and eat it (along with the option to go back for a second cake).
We can expect Teresa May et al to not disabuse the media of their take on matters and in fact I expect she and her Brexit colleagues to encourage the media to pitch them as the ‘plucking’ UK negotiators standing up for UK interests against the EU monster, because there is an election coming…
Against this, anything other than a rapid delivery of the Brexit dream and I suggest it needs to start before 2020, will result in the EU being blamed for decades to come and likewise poisoning our relationships with Europe…
@ nvelope2003 Thank you for responding, but I still think your version of history is more than a little imaginative and in a bit of a muddle …… you still don’t verify the non-hand shaking the Germans by Government Ministers bit which I don’t find plausible.
I also don’t see your reference to the American Civil War as relevant to Brexit. To say that Abraham Lincoln “did not consider the inhabitants of the Confederate States to be people” is bizarre. It was the Confederates who did not see their slaves as people that was the issue ………… and it was the Confederates who seized Fort Sumter who fired the first shots.
As to 1914….. yes there was a form of male (but not female) suffrage in Germany – but to a Reichstag with limited powers in its relationship with a Prussian Monarchical Military Junta regime. Female suffrage did not exist until after the First World War.
“Of course the EU will use every means to keep us in and some thoughtful people have not ruled out the possibility of war”. And which ‘thoughtful people’ will that be ? People with a vivid imagination one presumes.
I think this should worry Leave supporters. They have the referendum victory, of course, which means they are in the driving seat. But this poll confirms that we continue to be a divided nation. We were divided six months ago; we are divided today. There has been no falling in behind the result – not least, I suspect, because there has been no attempt to reach out to the 16 million who voted Remain.
The findings about how weak the support for Leave is too – i.e. that it falls away rapidly as soon as people feel they are even 1p worse off (which they obviously will be, if even just from the massive cost of the bureaucratic workload of exiting) – should be very concerning for those driving the Leave argument.
Public opinion is divided, and the half that is with Leave is deeply vulnerable. They should be worried.
@ Stuart
Hi Stuart – I agree with you in principle However, the point Tim 13 made earlier on this thread is surely very relevant here.
Tim said:
“I get a distinct feeling that there are two factors which could strengthen the Leave vote somewhat:
1 If they feel the Remainers are nagging them to change their minds.
2 If they feel that others overseas are “punishing” them for voting the way they did.”
So, any attempt to “railroad” the leavers could very well strengthen their stance.
Reaching out to remainers whilst not annoying the hell out of the leavers is therefore is a careful balancing act I think.
MikeS/Tim13 – I think that the fundamental issue here is that REMAIN (and I stress I mean REMAIN in all parties) got into the habit of seeing the EU as Business As Usual. So great if it’s working out for you, not so great for a lot of others.
What they did not do, and again I stress that all parties are at fault, is say what change could be brought about WITHIN the EU. What remain needed to be saying was something like this:
‘Yes – we get it and we will do something about it. In Denmark they have restrictions on immigrant ownership of residential property. In Germany they have restrictions on welfare seemingly beyond what Cameron proposed. Other countries sharpen the distinction between free movement of people and of labour – Spain indeed temporarily stopped free movement of Romanians. We will stop these A8/A2 only job agencies and make it stick. If other countries can do this then so too can we. We will stop at nothing to find other examples of what we can do WITHIN the EU to change.
While we are at it we will look long and hard at non-EU migration, starting with ICT visas and the work allowances in student visas.
Too many EU leaders have done nothing whilst their citizens vote with their feet. We will challenge those leaders and we guarantee that the days of asymmetric EU enlargement are now gone and won’t come back.’
That is what REMIAN I think should have said. Instead we’ve got this strange mix of starry-eyed idealism and Business As Usual. There are far too many REMAINers with rose-tints when it comes to the EU. There weren’t too many REMAIN voters who belted out Ode to Joy as they voted – and some might do well to remember that.
I have considerable sympathy for the argument that successive UK governments could and should have worked differently within the EU – but I don’t think that REMAIN made any of those arguments. To their cost.
Mark Goodrich – ‘Sure, there was a narrow vote in favour of leaving but their reasons vary widely (stupid to suggest otherwise) and some were mutually incompatible.’
I agree completely. However I don’t think that REMAIN entirely reconciled. On the one hand I had big business telling me to vote in – on the other I had Corbyn telling me that workers rights were key.
CON and LAB have spent decades trying and (largely) failing to reconcile what could be called ‘social Europe’ and ‘corporate Europe.’ The REMAIN campaign didn’t really reconcile them neatly and I suspect that the LDP will yet have to face the same divides.
Indeed, how many want a ‘hard remain,’ and a, ‘soft remain.’
As I have said on here previously, there a too many starry-eyed people at the moment.
Little Jackie Paper
from the perspective of leave the history of dealings with the EU (whether real or just perceived) meant that there was already deep cynicism that EU was ever going to be reformable form within. The deal which Cameron brought back only reinforced this view.
I think i goes back to the fundamentals of the Europe founding counties and the UK always having differing and non-reconcilable views on what the EU is and should be. UK = trading block, little political integration; EU = federated country with regional states and therefore prevent war.
@Stuart “The findings about how weak the support for Leave is too – i.e. that it falls away rapidly as soon as people feel they are even 1p worse off”
This might be an overly optimistic interpretation of the polling.
Firstly, it is unclear what “worse off” means here. The data linked to by Caron seems to be comparing two possible scenarios for future growth, one of which will leave people less well off than the other, but the implication being made is that people will be worse off than they are now.
Also, as reported on the Open Britain website, “very few Leave voters thought that they would be made poorer by Brexit, with just 11% believing that their personal finances would be negatively affected”, so most of these respondents were considering a very hypothetical price tag that they were prepared to pay. Extrapolating from this based on economic forecasts of the possible cost might be very unreliable.
The data for the Open Britain survey is available on line (https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/in/pages/11479/attachments/original/1481550848/YouGov_Poll.xls?1481550848) and is the source of Caron’s 44%:44% split in the article. I don’t know how polling data is manipulated to give a more “accurate” result but the respondents to this online poll (commissioned by an organisation with a dog in this fight) seem to have voted 750:673 in favour of Remain in the Unweighted Sample and this becomes 635:690 in favour of Leave in the Weighted Sample so there has been some interesting statistical magic to generate the reported findings.
Jedibeeftrix: Was the German Parliament anymore of a talking shop than ours ? In the UK the Government uses Parliament to force through the policies it wants and only rarely do MPs reject them. The Government goes to war and MPs are told to vote the money to pay for it.
Yes there is more to democracy than voting and the Western form of democracy is facing a crisis because the demands of people for subsidies cannot be met from taxation because no party will risk losing an election. We need to have Governments which will take the hard decisions. It is unlikely that they will be elected and Parliaments will become advisory bodies elected by Proportional Representation.
David Raw: The piece about the British former minister refusing to shake hands with a German Minister was in the Evening Standard. They did name all the parties involved but if I put the details here this will be deleted.
I have asked friends from overseas who are not emotionally involved with the EU issue as we British are and they have compared the situation with the secession of the Southern states from the USA which resulted in a war.
I am not an admirer of the Southern Confederacy or of slavery which I consider wicked but the Civil War created more problems than it solved and still poisons American society and politics. British participation in the First World War seems to have had similar effects.
I have seen and heard voters saying things like ” we beat the Germans in 2 wars and we are not going to be ruled by Angela Merkel”. We went to war with them to stop their domination of Europe but despite 2 devastating defeats they have regained that status and there is nothing anyone can do about it except by adopting their methods which we are too lazy to do.
@ nvelope “Was the German Parliament anymore of a talking shop than ours ? In the UK the Government uses Parliament to force through the policies it wants and only rarely do MPs reject them.”
Yes. Quite simply; yes!
Jedibeeftrix: in that case why was Kaiser Wilhelm II so concerned with the growing power of the Social Democrats ? Maybe for the same reason that the wealthy British are worried that Corbyn will win in 2020 despite the polls and a few disappointing results in seats they never had any chance of winning. In earlier by elections they have done well in retaining seats and also in some local elections. It is votes, not opinion polls that decide elections.
David Raw: The Southern troops fired on Fort Sumpter because the North were re supplying it. No sovereign state would permit another to maintain a fort without their permission. It is interesting that Davis, the Confederate President, although charged with treason, was never tried because the US Government apparently feared that the court would rule that the states did have the right to secede in the original constitution. Several leading lawyers in the North offered to defend him free of charge. The Confederacy did eventually decide to abolish slavery subject to certain restrictions which were deemed too limiting.
Little Jackie Paper is absolutely right to say that “REMAIN … got into the habit of seeing the EU as Business As Usual” when there is a clear case for change within the EU.
YouGov’s recent European mega-survey shows that no EU country is satisfied with the status quo (see item 3) balance of power between the EU and member states. And that’s despite no alternative being on offer; a better plan for how the EU should work would command strong support – including here in Britain.
The same survey also shows that other countries share UK concerns to a remarkable extent though not to precisely the same degree.
All of which makes me wonder why, oh why, have the Lib Dems always supported the status quo when, as an avowedly internationalist party, they should have been the first to build common platforms with reformers elsewhere in Europe.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/11/28/five-findings-yougovs-european-mega-survey/
On Open Britain: I didn’t sign up, not only because of their rapid shuffle on immigration, but because of the way they were going on about the centre ground and assuming that was where their supporters were. It was all too reminiscent of a former leadership.
They are now resorting to the tactics of dodgy businesses. They emailed all their contacts with an online survey about young people’s views, asking young and old to complete it. Completing and sending the survey meant you were counted as a supporter!! So watch out for claims of how many people support them…
I might have been convinced to vote remain if anyone had campaigned to either stop, or roll back the integrationist policies for a looser cooperative model, nobody was suggesting anything.