I don’t believe in a second referendum, but do believe we need to listen to the dissenting voices. What happened on Thursday was not a ‘landslide victory’ or even a mandate by any stretch of the imagination. But it WAS a big two fingers up at the established political system that we have here in the UK.
Many Leave people voted to get rid of David Cameron. Many voted to Leave because they were always going to vote against the government. Many people voted Leave because they were lied to about things like the NHS or that we would somehow stop immigration overnight. Some people voted because they really felt their lives would be better outside of the EU.
But people voted against the current form the EU has taken.
I do sincerely believe in Britain’s place in Europe – but a reformed Europe that allows more control for sovereign states on issues, less bureaucracy and more transparency.
But I believe that Britain’s place in such a Europe must be on the same terms.
So whilst the Conservatives and Labour fight between themselves – the markets crash, divisions widen and Britain is in danger of being torn apart at the seams.
But we can change that.
The Liberal Democrats are needed now to raise the sails, grab the wheel, and sail the Bounty to safety. Britain cannot afford a mutiny. Britain needs strong leadership, and it needs reform. We can offer these people that reform. Proportional representation, abolition of the House of Lords, and a strong determination to make Britain a place where the people call the shots – not the politicians hungry for power.
We can be part of a united Europe in the future. A reformed Europe. And it is clear that Europe is already learning these lessons. But first we have a job to do here at home. Not on a promise of “getting back in” – but on a promise of making the country finally work for the people.
#WeAreThe48. But we are also the 52. Lets not forget them.
* Kev Walsh is Chairman of Bolton Liberal Democrats, an admin of the Liberal Democrats Policy Debate Group on facebook and a pro-active Remain supporter.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
No, Leave didn't win the Brexit referendum because of Northern working class voters
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
Geoffrey Payne
Richard Whelan
David Raw
Tom Reeve
19 Comments
Bravo, badly needed to be said.
We should ditch the tempting but wrong #wearethe48 rhetoric; we are British, European, and Liberal, and we want to hear not only from the huge remain vote but the 17 million victims of the largest con trick in British political history. These people have been lied to, they will be increasingly angry, and we must articulate that anger and give them (through constitutional reform, devolution, fair votes, social housebuilding, and significant infrastructure investment to deprived areas) the real control that Johnson and Gove promised but never even dreamed of delivering.
I think it’s right for us to campaign for re-entry, but we need to show we have a serious vision beyond trying to patch up what has just been broken.
Don’t get e wrong James. I believe there is a place for the #WeAreThe48 campaign and it should be used to tap into and galvanise support for the party. But we cannot campaign and push on a policy of “Get back in” alone. We must also have a vision of the sort of Europe we want to be a part of. Be able to answer questions that the 52% voted o – such as immigration and sovereignty.
We need to make the UK a vision of what we want the EU to be. Devolved. Fair. Inclusive.
But most of all Democratic to the core!
Actually, many of the people who voted leave are not the disposed, the powerless, or the conned. They were people who have done very well, the people who own their home outright, have a pension or two, who own a second home and travel the world, the buy to let landlords, the people who don’t want anyone else getting their hands on their stash.
There were plenty of the establishment, the wealthy elite who don’t want international institutions restricting their wealth and power. The Murdochs, the Dysons who moved his factories to China to avoid paying UK workers decent wages, the Eton educated Boris, with his £300,000 “chicken feed” for his Telegraph Column, and who owns the Telegraph and The Daily Mail?
I want to know specifically what reforms are suggested. I am sick to the back teeth with generalities about ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘reform’ when people don’t actually share the same ideas about what would be the purpose of such ‘reforms’. I assume that the Lib Dem approach would be neither Socialist nor Conservative.
The Coalition Government carried out a Balance of Competences Review which was exhaustive, lengthy and took years. It was set up to find evidence to keep the europhobes happy and it failed, insomuch as conclusion after conclusion was that the balance between the role of the EU and the powers of individual Member States issue by issue was about right. So with what conclusions do you disagree? Do you acknowledge that much of the ‘bureaucracy’ exists to curb the cheats and the crooks, and what do you suggest by way of an alternative?
Certainly if Lib Dems are to argue that we want the UK to be in the EU we should be highlighting specific changes we would campaign to achieve, but they need to be identified. We could, to take one example (continue to) press for cuts in subsidies to farmers and therefore reduce the EU budget, but we also have to recognise that countries outside the EU also subsidise farmers so we would potentially place ours at a competitive disadvantage.
@ Caracatus But it was the Labour working class areas that swung it. Not people with money or the elite. Hard working people from low-skilled or unskilled jobs who had serious concerns about immigration and how their lives had been affected by government cuts. They were fed a scapegoat and – because of their own personal experiences in these areas – they bought it.
It cannot be denied that some areas of the UK – particularly in the North of England – are more adversely affected by migration. Admittedly non-eu migration – but many people failed to see a difference between the two things. Pressure on services IS greater in those areas – although it can be argued that this has more to do with the poverty within those areas to begin with leading to greater need for public services.
But its an issue. And refusing to acknowledge it and plan around it must be part of any Lib Dem manifesto.
At a different time, in a different place I may agree. I think the opportunity at the moment is to growths core base by focusing on appealing to a specific demographic. Those predisposed to vote remain.
This may well attract others who voted leave but a marketing strategy aimed at everyone is doomed to fail in my view.
I would agree that the #wearethe48 is a short term marketing mechanism, over time it should morph into something a bit more purpose focused…. #wewantourfutureback has a ring to it and feels like it could appeal to the large amount of leavers who felt they were doing it in the interests of their offspring.
Priority needs to be given to a clear sales pitch to those looking for a home… The young, the educated, the internationalists.
We are in a great place to do this, but focusing needs to be, for the short term at least, more important than wider appeal.
The Leavers core vote resided in the North, outside London, so,.. is it time for Lib Dems to have a policy of Barnett Formula parity for Northern England with that same level of funding for Scotland?
It was more than just London though… Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester, York, Bristol, Newcastle.
There are bound to be policies that appeal more if we accept young, urban, educated as the focus.
Whether that be a key focus on things that would appeal such as education, help onto housing ladder, environment, etc.
Or things that would clarify what is stood for that actively don’t appeal to demographics never likely to be a happy hunting ground such as stronger fox hunting laws, etc.
What is required is some quick research to better understand the general lean on domestic policies of those who voted remain and live in these areas. This would then bring a suite of policies to appeal alongside fighting against an in democratic and deeply flawed referendum.
I do believe in a second referendum. In fact I think one is essential if you believe in referenda at all, and only unnecessary if parliament makes its own considered choice of what to do next, bearing in mind a narrow vote by about 1/3 of the population to leave, but also a considered view of our position now and what might really be on offer after extensive negotiations. The real argument should have been about exactly what leave are offering beyond aspirations. You offer more aspirations above, and I agree with a post also above, the devil is always in the detail.
It is not true that people made their choice on the issues. Leave lied. I am pro Eu, so maybe I am biased, but I tried hard to find on their side reasons why GB would be better off. Remain were accused of running a fear campaign, how things could only get worse. i think they told the truth, and Leave produced no evidence they were wrong. All they did was lie further in accusing remain of lying, thereby spreading confusion amongst voters. All this was most certainly compounded by distrust in politicians, which lib dems have contributed their fair share to creating.
The referendum was flawed and should not be regarded as settling the matter on such a small majority, in fact a minority of voters. Lib dems are the ones who believe in PR not FPP. Accepting this referendum result is not respecting the will of the people, but instead is accepting the right of politicians to lie to their voters and trick them into a false choice.
What do we know? We know that a lot of people voted not to leave the EU and a good few more voted to leave.
What do we assume? We assume the Tories will more or less unite under a new leader. Ukip’s fox is shot and they can only survive by being a nasty little right wing party appealing to the lowest common denominator. Labour will accept Brexit and try to reconnect with their core vote.
Where’s the obvious gap? The part of that 48% who weren’t scared into voting remain and didn’t vote remain holding their nose.
I don’t know how big that group is but it’s a group that shares at least some Liberal values and has nowhere else to go.
And, most importantly, it’s a group that deserves to be represented in parliament.
Fight the battles you can fight.
#WeAreThe48 is a worthy banner, but you need to fight for some tangible in light of the result.
I’d suggest single market access and four freedoms. I voted out, and I’d join you in that fight in a heartbeat.
Jon Hannah,
Yes, Leeds voted narrowly for Remain, but where I was knocking up on Thursday in student and young professional areas the vote looked to be as high as inner London… Which means that on East Leeds council estates it was probably as high for Leave as Boston. And the Labour activists I was working with regarded these Labour heartlands as no-go areas because of the abuse they were getting (and probably also what happened to Jo Cox). Everywhere in England and Wales except London (where even quite deprived areas seem to be strongly Remain) we have the same divisions. Once upon a time Michael Meadowcroft won a working class constituency in Leeds (now represented by Rachel Reeves, who epitomises the divide between the elite of the Labour Party and their voters). We (and Labour) have to find ways to reconnect with those voters or we could go the way of Germany in the 1930’s
Kevin,
I am afraid that thinking that Ukip’s fox is shot may prove to be very optimistic. They are poised to replace Labour in many areas and neither the Blairites nor the Corbynistas seem to know what to do about it…
Andrew McCaig,
What you are describing, namely the mobilisation of the non-metropolitan white working-class by the populist hard right, is a global trend. It has already happened in the United States, it has happened in much of Eastern Europe, and it has happened in Turkey (more than anywhere in Turkey).
In Britain, the reasons are probably threefold: (1) the decline of heavy industry has weakened trade unionism, and with it class solidarity; (2) education has taken the leaders and educators of the future out of those communities; and (3) the tabloids have targeted the demographic with a relentless cataract of right-wing propaganda over many years.
People living in those old steel and mining communities are never going to vote Tory in a million years, but they might just drift towards UKIP, as you say.
A quick point on Leeds. In order to carry the city, Remain must have won substantial working-class support, even from the big council estates. In cities that are almost exclusively white (like Hull), the Remain vote was weaker.
How about a law that says anyone who voted out is not allowed to wear seatbelts anymore? Seatbelts are part of project fear. Its unlikely that car crashes will happen. And when they do they might not be that bad. And seatbelts only help to cause whiplash.
I don’t think UKIP are going away just yet. Conservative and probably labour want to close down debate over the EU by accepting the result of the referendum, regardless of what they think of it. Politicians really just like governing, its all one big computer game where winning is what matters, not outcomes. Reading between the lines, the plan is to go for the Norway option, which I predicted some time ago. I never understood why Norway is in the predicament that it is, but it also is trapped between what the politicians see as essential for the country (membership) and voters refusal to allow it. In reality the Norway option preserved the essential need for market access, but at a great cost in loss of ability to direct or control that market. Farage will find the Uk in a worse position than before and one he still will not like. If he still has fight in him, he will continue fighting, although his campiagn has been hijacked by the conservative remain and conservative just-want-some-changes factions. The plan was that if conservatives controlled both campaigns, the party must end up on the winning side. I’m not sure how well that will work for them, but it means they started the campaign trying to encompass both sides.
I can only say that libs have destroyed themselves by their attempt to gain wide appeal over the last 15 or so years. parties need to have beliefs.
Andrew McCaig
It doesn’t really surprise me that Leeds split and that this split would be within different areas. No doubt Seacroft, Belle Isle and others were heavily leave. Headingley, Chapel Allerton, etc. heavily remain.
There needs to be a level of pragmatism though, if people are minded to support UKIP they are highly unlikely to be easy to convince that Lib Dem values are their values.
The start of any fightback needs to be a focus on galvanising those who are natural supporters of Lib Dem values and bringing them to the party.
Those who voted remain are a legitimate group who deserve a voice. The electorate deserves a chance as things become clearer to speak now or forever hold their peace.
The success of UKIP is that they have targeted a specific demographic and grown from this base, never really reaching out for the cosmopolitan elite.
We are in an age where the Americanisation of our politics is a sad fact. This means turning out your core vote and seeking to appeal to floating voters, not being a party of everything for everyone.
Agree strongly with the sentiment of this piece.
How about a quarterly referendum day – The People’s Ascent. Every new bill must pass before getting Royal Ascent.