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 ?

Thank you, mousse. Put better than I would have put it myself.

Same could be said for elections in general. If, at every GE, all the bad losers rail against the vote, where does that leave us?

"If, at every GE, all the bad losers rail against the vote, where does that leave us?"

With a robust and effective democracy where our politicians are held to account.

Crackednips

Same could be said for elections in general. If, at every GE, all the bad losers rail against the vote, where does that leave us

It leaves us with an effective Opposition which is essential for any kind of healthy democracy. The losing sides in GE do object and argue and represent the views of those who voted against the government. Have you never noticed that?

If, at every GE, all the bad losers rail against the vote, where does that leave us?

They get active in Local politics and do their damndest to get the sitting incumbent out. Which they know they will have a chance of doing five years later, or earlier.

As we saw with this June's election which allowed people in my constituency to work hard to unseat an MP many regarded as unsatisfactory. If the vanquished Tory had any complaints about her tenure being cut short, and she was a bit mardy at the Count, then she should have addressed them to Theresa May not to the electorate she appeared to have little time for as a sitting MP.

Fair enough..

There was no vote on whether or not to be in the EU. There has been now.

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.

And if the Conservatives decided in 2016 that we were leaving the EU and triggered Article 50 your stance would be?

And if the Conservatives decided in 2016 that we were leaving the EU and triggered Article 50 your stance would be?

That is what they decided. They could equally have said that the vote for a change of such magnitude, after what legally was only an advisory referendum, was too close, and set up a cross party working party to analyse all the options. Then put some realistic choices before the public.

I don't understand why people are talking about a second referendum being 'undemocratic'. Democracy died in this country when it became acceptable to spout blatant lies in an attempt to hoodwink the voting public.

RE Advisory :

The 2015 Con's Manifesto, stated: "We will legislate in the first session of the next parliament for an in-out referendum to be held on Britain's membership of the EU before the end of 2017.... We will honour the result of the referendum, whatever the outcome."

The European Union Referendum Act 2015, which was, coincidentally, "An Act to make provision for the holding of a referendum in the United Kingdom and Gibraltar on whether the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Union." The words "non binding" don't appear anywhere in that Act.

Do you recall the information leaflet put out by the government about the referendum (pursuant to the terms of the Act), which noted that "On Thursday, 23 June there will be a referendum. It’s your opportunity to decide if the UK remains in the European Union (EU)." And "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."

Again, nothing about it being Advisory and/or non-binding.

:Two:

The real death of democracy occurred when the EU changed from being a trade organisation to a political one.

It doesn't matter what the Manifesto said. That has been established by law.

If the Referendum was intended be binding, the Act would have said so. As did the Act which allowed a Referendum on the alternative vote system.

M4Dad

The real death of democracy occurred when the EU changed from being a trade organisation to a political one

Why? It was explained in some detail earlier in the thread how the EU functions democratically and yet you again imply it is not a democratic organisation. Please explain how an executive that is held to account via a democratically elected legislature is not democratic?

" the Act would have said so. As did the Act which allowed a Referendum on the alternative vote system".

For quite obvious reasons. The argument's not whether gov' can legally fail to follow through the ref' decision; it's whether it can legitimately do so by claiming the referendum was meant to be "advisory". It plainly wasn't and claims otherwise are nonsense.

Why? It was explained in some detail earlier in the thread how the EU functions democratically and yet you again imply it is not a democratic organisation

You failed, 3 times, to answer a question I put to you about the democratic workings of the EU. The EU has been constructed to appear democratic, it is anything but.

Let's have a look at the European Commission:

President - Claude Juncker (un-elected)

The EU's executive arm, proposer of ALL EU laws, 28 members nominate a commissioner each.

So the people who make all the rules aren't democratically responsible for their actions, are they?

M4Dad

It was explained in the posts on 11/10/2017 by Sandycarrots at 18:57 - she links to an article by Peter Miller. I also explained how voting for the institutions that make the decisions makes the EU democratic in my post of 19:03.

I had also addressed your point in previous posts.

Just because you do not understand the answers given to you does not mean they were not made.

Mousse

You're willfully deluding yourself.

The EU is part Governmental and part Federal, everyone with a hint of honesty appreciates that it requires much more democractic legitimacy.

I had also addressed your point in previous posts

No, no you did not.

M4Dad

Yes the EU is a tripatate system and one body is unelected - as I said previously. The other two bodies are elected.

The EU Parliament - a directly elected body - holds the Commission to account.

If the EU is not democratic then the UK's bicameral system with a selected second chamber is even less democratic and yet Brexit supporters want to rely solely on the UK's imperfect system.

It plainly wasn't and claims otherwise are nonsense.

May I take it that you have never studied law? If you had done, you would have been warned against making statements like 'clearly', 'surely', 'obviously'. What such statements do is keep lawyers in work.

However, if you want to go down the route of 'the manifesto said, therefore it must be', the 2015 manifesto clearly stated that there would be a commitment to the Single Market. May ditched that commitment, so why should she not ditch Cameron's other commitments?

You may try to argue that with the 2017 election she had a mandate for the hard Brexit she seems intent on pursuing. If she had won outright I would agree that the electorate gave her a mandate, but then squandered her majority, and is now only in Government by grace and favour of the DUP. The DUP which no one in England, Wales or Scotland is eligible to vote for.

Democracy died in this country when it became acceptable to spout blatant lies in an attempt to hoodwink the voting public.

So, basically democracy never lived. Anywhere.

Spouting lies to manipulate the public is what democracy is. All that 'power to the people' stuff is just manipulation.

Brexit demonstrated what a bad idea real democracy is - it's almost as if it was designed to make us comfortable with the delusion that our 'representatives' should be left to make decisions 'on our behalf'.

Here is my previous post where I address the question - how is the EU accountable.

M4Dad

They are democratically responsible because we can choose NOT TO VOTE FOR THEM AGAIN. In the case of the EU Parliament directly. In the case of the The Council via each countries own democratic elections.

The EU Parliament is directly elected, it holds The Commission to account.

The EU Parliament - which is directly elected - has power OVER the only body, The Commission that is not elected.

Elections hold the EU to account therefore the EU is democratically accountable. It is NOT either "undemocratic" or "totalitarian".

M4Dad

The EU is part Governmental and part Federal

Despite my politics degree I don't understand this statement. Please elucidated?

leaflet

It was a leaflet.