A Leader article in this week’s Economist argues for a referendum on Theresa May’s proposed deal:
Today’s paralysis is the result of Britain’s inability to reconcile its tradition of representative democracy with its more recent experiments in the direct sort.
Many argue that MPs should shut their eyes and vote for what they believe to be a damaging plan, out of respect for the referendum. They are wrong. Their argument rests on a flawed assumption: that the majority for Leave in 2016 means any resulting deal reflects the will of the people. It is far from clear that Mrs May’s plan does. It breaks many of her own negotiating red lines, never mind the promises made by campaigners in the run-up to the vote. The government has largely given up arguing that its deal will be good for the country, instead insisting that it is what democracy demands. Yet no one can claim to intuit what the people want. The only way to know is to ask them.
You can read the full article here.
* Paul Walter is a Liberal Democrat activist and member of the Liberal Democrat Voice team. He blogs at Liberal Burblings.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The pine martens of Shropshire
The shame of Liverpool Labour councillors taking their allowances but not turning up to do the work
Should Labour reconsider the Brexit red lines?
Raising a flap about letterboxes
Restrained
David Allen
Simon McGrath
Peter Davies
Rob Heale
Kira Collins
8 Comments
I see the Sun or as my colleagues in Liverpool refer to it The Scum has also suggested a peoples vote but without the remain option. Well they are halfway there and they don’t and can’t be allowed to set the question.
Calling another referendum could cause the same riots as in France especially if it resulted in a different outcome. People might feel cheated and those who voted Leave as a protest against other policies could engage in further action. Of course if you feel leaving the EU would be a disaster then you will want to take that risk. Either way this will run and run – the only good thing might be a split in the Conservative Party between the centrists and the hard right but then again the hard right might come to power at the following election leaving the centrists with a handful of seats – sounds familiar ?
Not necessarily, it depends on whether the result yields a bigger margin for either Leave or hopefully Remain. 16/17 year olds should be included as the result affects their future and as a democracy we should be bringing groups of people in to decision making rather than shutting them out. I can see a potential for disorder in the event of a no deal scenario where medicines are affected, prices and inflation rise and there are queues at ports awaiting clearance from customs. Those of us on lower incomes like myself will suffer but the well off will hardly notice or care less.
Amber Rudd, a senior cabinet minister, today has acknowledged that the Norway + customs union option or peoples vote are the most likely alternatives to Mrs May plan that could command a majority in Parliament.
nvelope2003 – and who will lead these riots? Boris the Blonde Mop with his fear of the mob? Jacob the Periscope with his aloofness from ordinary people? And Nigel won’t be breaking many Whitehall windows with his dodgy back.
And what will these rioters attack the police with? Rolled-up copies of the Daily Telegraph?
Rioting is for youths, I can’t see many British youths rioting for Brexit.
As marcstevens writes, the only risk of rioting is in the event of Leaving with no deal with all the consequences that will follow. In that event even I would feel so strongly that I might be tempted to block two parking spaces at the Crewkerne branch of Waitrose with my tractor, so there.
The remain option needs to come with a very tough five year residence test that would exclude recent immigrants from any benefits, tax credits, social housing, child benefits, etc – and could even include the personal tax allowance – with exceptions for nurses, etc. In this way those who voted leave on the back of immigration would be sated, even astonished if it was retrospective and there was a movement of 200,000 immigrants from social housing to hostels whilst rough sleepers would suddenly find social housing available to them. This would square the circle, so to speak, and whilst there might be 20-25 percent of the population who want a hardcore Brexit regardless they would be firmly in the minority.
Just for a moment or so, when I saw your pic of the front cover of the Economist, I thought I might see an article about Macron and France.
But I guess you don’t want to talk about that?
Yeovil Yokel: I did not see many youths rioting in France. Most looked middle aged to elderly with some in their 20s and 30s. I am not so sure that we will have no riots. They can be contagious. There are just as many thugs and arsonists here as there are in France and Germany. We will see.