If a new referendum on Brexit was announced..

[bbcessex]

Would you be up in arms about that?
Discussing last night.. I think given the margins in the last vote and the (being charitable) confusion and uncertainty over the Brexit plans, a new referendum would generally be accepted.

DH (remainer) thinks a re-vote is not constitutional & would cause uproar (amongst all).

Who is unreasonable ?

I think what's needed is for Theresa May and other senior government leaders to actually face up to the public and admit that they know full well that brexit would be a major economic disaster for the country

So we should ban Corbyn from politics because he would be a major economic disaster for the country

Well the first referendum was definitely undemocratic

You can’t surely get any more democratic than allowing every single member of the electorate a chance to have their say, with every single individual vote being of equal weight.

FaithHopeCharityDesperation
You can’t surely get any more democratic than allowing every single member of the electorate a chance to have their say

It is not about more or less democratic. It is direct or representative democracy. Direct democracies have lots of referendums. Representative democracies, like the UK, express democracy through their elected representatives in the House of Commons.

Would love another vote. DH voted leave and regrets it.

I wanted to remain. So in this situation democracy has definitely not got me what I wanted 🙄

My comment wasn't tongue in cheek.

Eh? Are you the thread moderator or something Boney?

sandy

I know your post wasnt tongue in cheek

I thought allegrettos was

I did say “unconstitutional” for lack of a better word. Please enlighten me if there is a better fit. I am always interested in furthering my vocabulary.

Rufus time to hit the I think

DaisyRaine90

I don't want to put words in your mouth but I think you are saying you didn't want referendum. Lots of people use words like democratic and constitutional to justify their arguments but they use the terms incorrectly.

It's OK to say I didn't think there should be a referendum.

Thank you sandy

But ive already started

(Drowning my Brexit-induced sorrows I mean.)

X post
Cheers Rufus!

sandy

Fresh, Corbyn isn't in government. The PM and her ministers are the ones attempting to negotiate brexit, Corbyn's irrelevant.

Good post, Inertia. Sums up the situation well.

But then what are we going for? The best of 3? The best of 5? If you think there is uncertainty and economic turmoil now..... by having another referendum bow you would be saying the results of the first were not valid. So by definition the results of the second wouldn't be either. Both sides had their chance. We are leaving and that's that.

Op I agree with your DH. I voted remain but you can’t have a re-vote. I too believe it unconstitutional for lack of a better word

We do actually have a constitution. It is not codified and is comprised of various documents, and a measure of convention (for instance nowhere is the office of Prime Minister defined).

I am not sure that debate around a possible second referendum can even be approached from a constitutional angle. Parliament certainly has the authority to hold another referendum.

I think you are suggesting that a second referendum would be against the general spirit of democracy, or would go against some sort of unofficial mandate established by Cameron's government.

Moreover, Parliament, as it is supreme, cannot be bound by previous Parliaments.

I think, fwiw, "validity" or lack of validity, is the issue here. I personally find it hard to believe in the outcome of any vote where (on both sides) people couldn't possibly know what they were voting for ie the outcomes.

It's like someone making a decision to take path x because it has pretty flowers alongside it, and someone taking a different decision to take path y because it is more shady, when they should be making a decision about their destination, the perils they will meet along the way, how long it will take to get there, and what they will find when they do.

I wouldn't have minded so much had people been told straight that yes, we can leave the EU and we may even function and trade reasonably well, but it's going to cost a lot and it will take 10 years. But the information provided on (on both sides) was complacent, lazy, inaccurate. It wasn't good enough. Why should we proceed on that basis? The electorate deserve better.

Imho, we definitely need a vote on the deal (or lack of one) at least then people will have a better idea of what they are voting for.

Sandycarrots

Eh? Are you the thread moderator or something Boney?

why would you think that?

I just find it strange that you would, heartily cheer s a view on without knowing the thought processes of the person behind it.

I agreed with what she said Boney simple as that

I think really it's far too complicated an issue for the vast majority of people to make an informed decision about. Which is why it was a ridiculous thing to have a referendum about in the first place.

I doubt there's a dictator, either in history or alive today who wouldn't agree with you there..

Crackednips

The point I believe Bertrand was making was that in a democracy we elect MPs who can then use their expertise to make decisions on our behalf. Brexit is an extremely complex issue so an ideal time for the benefits of representative democracy to benefit the country.

This is entirely different than a dictatorship.