Advanced search

We should have had the EU referendum back in 2005

(15 Posts)
Lucydogz Thu 07-Jul-16 11:03:43

A promise to have an EU referendum was included in the manifestos of all the major political parties at the time. Tony Blair promised a referendum, but, under Gordon Brown, it was dropped. One of the reasons was that the Dutch had had a referendum and responded negatively so, even then, there were concerns that the result would be a 'no' vote. Shortly after, the Treaty of Lisbon was ratified - without public consultation in the UK. Eire held a referendum and, when the public voted against it, the EU jiggled it around a bit (making no substantial changes) and made them vote again to give the 'right' answer.
FWIW, I feel that, if we had had a referendum then, pre the financial crash, it would have been much better, whatever the result was.
What many Leavers object to, I believe, is the total lack of public consultation in the evolution of the EU.

crappymummy Thu 07-Jul-16 11:06:30

Oh god

You got your referendum, and now we are all riding to hell in a rickety wheelbarrow full of debased currency

Can you not be satisfied with that?

if anyone does invent a time machine to go back to 2005 I can think of other things I might prioritise changing ffs

Lucydogz Thu 07-Jul-16 11:10:48

Well I am sorry about that - but I do think that discussing whether lack of public consultation in the development of the EU has come back and bitten us on the bum is interesting. If it helps, hide the thread.

purits Thu 07-Jul-16 11:16:53

We should have had a referendum back in 1992 when the EEC morphed into the EU. We had no say in that because all the major parties endorsed it. I had to spoil my vote at the General Election because no party represented my view.

crappymummy Thu 07-Jul-16 11:40:25

well we are leaving the eu, so job done, surely?

purits Thu 07-Jul-16 11:45:54

Not really, If they had left it as the EEC then it would have been OK.
We want trade deals, not ever closer union.

Lucydogz Thu 07-Jul-16 12:07:48

I believe that some public consultation at the time of the Treaties of Maastricht and Lisbon would have meant that we wouldn't be in the fix that we are now in. If you tell the voters that nannie knows best, while the EU grows way beyond it's original remit, how can you be surprised when. eventually being allowed an opinion, they vote against it?

crappymummy Thu 07-Jul-16 12:25:28

I am probably one of the least surprised people about the outcome of the referendum

my chagrin at this thread does not stem from shock at Brexit

You are like a child who, on being given the treat they'd begged for, proceeded to complain they hadn't had it sooner

Tough tits, we can't go back in time, you've got what you wanted, can you be happy now?

purits Thu 07-Jul-16 12:38:41

you've got what you wanted, can you be happy now?

Until I am Grand Dictator in Charge of Everything I won't be totally satisfied but I'm very happy with the Leave vote.

SugarPlumTree Thu 07-Jul-16 12:46:33

Could you elaborate on the 'fix we are now in' ie. what you perceive this to be as I think it might help other posters understand where you are coming from? I for one don't understand if you voted leave why you don't sound happier as you now have the outcome you voted for.

roundaboutthetown Thu 07-Jul-16 12:57:03

I voted Remain and would have done in 2005, too. I agree with you that this was an appalling time to hold a referendum. The country and the entire continent have more important things to worry about at the moment and I suspect this appalling Tory administration will not learn the lessons from this that they need to learn, so there is one hell of a lot of strife ahead - and still no solutions to more important issues, just more excuses as to why those issues are not being attended to.

Lucydogz Thu 07-Jul-16 15:57:44

I don't think it's relevant how I voted.
If I was a Remainer, I would feel that, if the public had been consulted about the development of the EU over the last decades, many of the Leavers who, rightly or wrongly, felt disenfranchised by the process, would have been appeased.
If I was a Leaver, I would have preferred to have had a vote several years ago.
Either way, I'm interested if others agree with me that the public should have been included in discussions well before now, but politicians of both parties.

roundaboutthetown Thu 07-Jul-16 17:02:49

Public included in discussions?! What fantasy world do you live in?! Honest and sincere discussion of different opinions appears to have been banned from political campaigning, because soundbites and spin are all they think our little brains can cope with. Honesty must be suppressed at all costs on both sides... It wouldn't have been any different in 2005.

Lucydogz Thu 07-Jul-16 17:10:36

yes - I know what you mean. But, back in 2005, one of the reasons that there was no referendum, as promised, was because polls showed that the public would vote against the EU. Surely it would have made sense to have spent time and money to try and address this.

UnderTheGreenwoodTree Thu 07-Jul-16 17:24:33

We want trade deals, not ever closer union.

Well I want the moon on a stick. And a unicorn. Definitely a unicorn.

<goes off to get drunk> wine

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now