Second Referendum

[MyNameIsArthur]

If there was a second referendum, how would you phrase the question on the ballot paper? I thought maybe it should be phrased in the following way in two parts but I'm not sure. What do you think?

A) Do you wish for the UK to Remain in the EU or to leave the EU ?

B) If the majority of the UK votes to leave the EU, do you wish for the UK to leave with:

                    1         Theresa May's deal
                    2          No deal

If "no deal" means the UK has to breach the GFA - an international peace treaty lodged with the the UN - then there is quite a strong case for it not being on a referendum paper.

People should not be allowed to directly vote for something unlawful.

I don't think that Remain should be on the ballot sheet
We already had that referedum and remain was rejected in favour of leaving. Cameron's nine million pound leaflet which explained, in black and white to every household that leaving the EU would mean leaving the customs union and leaving the single market.

There would have been a considerable number of people who voted tory in the recent GE who did so, not because of their Brexit manifesto but because a Corbyn government is a more terrifying prospect than a no deal Brexit.

I am not sure that the claim that there is consensus in parliament that a no deal Brexit is unacceptable. This is particularly true given the deal currently on the table. I also think those of you saying that no deal should not be on the ballot sheet should actually educate yourselves a little about what a WTO Brexit would entail. For example, were you aware that only 6% of imports come through Dover, that bought HMRC head and Irish counterpart said electronic systems were already in place for customs and that the Irish boarder issue was a manifestation of Leo Varadkar: his predecessor Enda Kenny actually set up two committee to make arrangements and Leo V disbanded them!

So if JRM and his colleagues can actually define something tangible, by all means put it on the ballot.

I can't see them doing that. They only seem able to object, not to contribute anything useful.

Only options should be remain or Teresa’s deal. No deal is stupidity and the British public can’t be trusted it seems!

We already had that referedum and remain was rejected in favour of leaving.

We were told that leaving would be good economically for the country in that referendum. Now the government's own impact reports contradict that - meaning that the first referendum was held under false pretences.

Noel Edmonds could sort this out

We were told that leaving would be good economically for the country in that referendum.

Nope, the government leaflet specifically told us that leaving the EU "would create risk and uncertainty" [with respect to the economy]

I meant by the Leave campaign!

{People should not be allowed to directly vote for something unlawful.}

So the referendum to leave in 2016 was unlawful as no solution to the NI border had been worked out. The same issue we have now 2 1/2 years on and counting.

@dgrossetti

Sorry but that’s not correct.

The Conservatives won the election, with 42.4% of the vote versus Labour’s 40%.

They lost their parliamentary majority, which is a different thing.

Regardless, who won isn’t the point.

My point was that the Conservatives won the election based on a manifesto that excluded the possibility of “no deal”.

So did Labour, who’s manifesto said:

“We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union”

That means that 82.4% of votes in the 2017 election went to parties with an “orderly Brexit” manifesto.

I can’t see any numbers anywhere that suggest anything but a small minority of Brexit supporters actually want no deal.

If there’s no evidence of strong public support for it (in terms of numbers, not who shouts the loudest), then it doesn’t belong on a ballot paper (in my personal opinion).

You might have meant that @recently, but the leave campaign were not the executive. They didn't have any governmental powers, only the executive did and what they promised was that a leave vote would mean leaving the customs union and single market and that we would be economically worse off. And this is what people voted for: every household received a leaflet!

The 2016 referendum was not unlawful - it was put into law by parliament. Please do some research - perhaps start with this article.

Speaking of unlawfulness, this thread was started by someone who wants Mrs May's deal put on a ballot sheet. A deal which has not been voted on in parliament because the executive knows full well it will not be passed by the house. That would be unlawful, but I doubt parliament would agree to a second referendum with these terms, in fact I doubt they will agree to a second referendum full stop. There is not sufficient time to debate and pass a bill before the deadline.

Maursh

You cannot absolve your self of responsibility here, the Remain camp was seen as the Government and Leave as Farage/Gove BJ etc

The promises made by Leave were the ones the country expected to be enacted, Leave rubbished the leaflets claims, indeed "we've had enough of experts!"
Voters are not constitution experts, understanding the powers and limitations of the executive!

Leave lied their pretty pants off as we can now all see, re writing history esp one that is 3 years old, fools no one.

You sound scared of a PV with remain on it? not out of moral outrage but because you know we ve all seen through the shite and would vote to stay now.

@maursh

that bought HMRC head and Irish counterpart said electronic systems were already in place for customs and that the Irish boarder issue was a manifestation of Leo Varadkar

Have you got the links for these quotes by any chance? I’d like to read them if possible but I don’t know the names involved so I’m finding them hard to find.

All I can see from HMRC in the news is that they can’t even begin to build the necessary systems until a decision has been made (and that it’ll take 30 months):

www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/23/brexit_ireland_backstop_hmrc/

I would chuck Theresa May's deal in the bin as a halfway house that hardly anyone wants and go for a straight in or out question with 'out' meaning a no deal Brexit and 'in' meaning no Brexit whatsoever.

It's the only binary question that has an option that would satisfy the majority on both sides.

NotDavidTennant
Just a shame that so many people will probably die, but apart from that it's a brilliant plan, along with jumping out of aeroplanes without a parachute.

I think the only options should be remain or the deal. I'd add that a big problem is that a lot of people who are entitled to vote don't follow the goings on closely enough to know what the deal means do the government even know?

So if 'no deal' was on there, it almost appears as simple as in or out if you don't know/care about the implications.

There needs to be a massive campaign I think to explain to the electorate exactly what each option would mean, and there's not much time for that!

You cannot absolve your self of responsibility here
I wasn't seeking to absolve myself of anything.

You sound scared of a PV with remain on it? not out of moral outrage but because you know we ve all seen through the shite and would vote to stay now.
The so called people's vote is a thinly disguised attempt to overturn the referendum, particularly with this new push for only remain or may's deal on the ballot. It is so transparent, it is laughable. No, i am not scared, as I stated, it will never get through parliament.

@jm90914 It was in a interview so it will take me a while to find (but I will come back)

The so called people's vote is a thinly disguised attempt to overturn the referendum, particularly with this new push for only remain or may's deal on the ballot. It is so transparent, it is laughable. No, i am not scared, as I stated, it will never get through parliament

Agree, any PV should have no-deal as an option, Mays deal cannot get through the HoCs so shouldn't be allowed.
A 2 way choice between Remain and Leave on No-Deal, either a managed version (if the EU would allow this) or a wto version.

I'd not be so sure on PV not getting through parliament.

the impression i get is that Leavers don't want a PV because they fear the public mood has changed, which democratically, they are allowed too.
Aside, the new version of a no confidence vote (in the Government) allows a cooling off period, followed by another vote so the 'commons can be sure..... Goose and Gander an all that lol!

@Maursh why are you so against TM's deal that you don't see it as leaving at all? It ends FOM and aims to negotiate a FTA with the EU during the transition period. What more do you hope for?

@Loletta i am a bit surprised that you are asking this question but I will assume that you are not being goady and answer it.

TMD has less than 4% public support based on all the online polls I have seen. (No doubt someone will correct this will an official polling statistic, but my point is that her deal has very little public support)

You make some assumptions in your question in that I must have voted to leave based on FOM ergo, I must be happy to lose FOM but keep a FTA. I didn't. I have no interest in these matters, FOM would be less of an issue if the government(s) had regulated or enforced existing regulation on the use of the welfare state (eg benefits, schools, NHS etc). The UK would be less attractive to unskilled workers if there were fewer benefits on offer. I have no objection to people who would like to come to the UK, or elsewhere to work and contribute.

I voted to leave because I would like the UK to regain it's sovereignty. TMD acquiesces even more sovereignty in return for a FTD and loss of FOM. It is worse than our existing arrangements and no one with half a brain would vote for it. It permits the EU to set tariffs, leaves the European Court as superior and don't get me started on the backstop which leaves us in this arrangement in perpetuity.

Anyway, I hope that this explain why I so against TMD.

Ok thanks for explaining that sovereignty was the most important issue to you. I take that on board even though I disagree with you that being part of the EU means giving up sovereignty - we made those EU laws too, they weren't imposed on us. More importantly though, what do you propose instead of TM's deal?

@Maursh
Please do some research
Are you always so condescending? I have done plenty of research, I just don't agree with you. Unfortunately, it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference as I don't have a vote. I never said the referendum was illegal but I do think it was immoral not to allow all British citizens a vote seeing as all British citizens were affected by the consequences. I want a vote in the second referendum and I should have the choice to vote Remain!

The so called people's vote is a thinly disguised attempt to overturn the referendum

They haven’t even attempted to disguise that it’s a pro-remain organisation.

You’re implying that it’s some kind of underhanded conspiracy, and they won’t openly admit that, but that’s not the case.

From their own website:

“The People’s Vote is a grassroots campaign supported by its constituent groups including Open Britain, the European Movement UK, Britain for Europe, Scientists for EU, Healthier In, Our Future Our Choice, For Our Future’s Sake, Wales For Europe & InFacts.”

Just to point out, I’m speaking as a remain voter who’s pretty reluctant to have another referendum.

Agree, any PV should have no-deal as an option, Mays deal cannot get through the HoCs so shouldn't be allowed.

But surely that’s the point of deferring to a referendum on the deal?

If parliament could agree between the options on offer, then there would be no need of a referendum. But they can’t, so what other choice is there than to ask the people to vote?

If the reason for not including May’s deal on the ballot is that there’s no parliamentary majority for it, then your own argument also applies to “no deal” (which there also is no majority for).

I think that a remain option definitely needs to be on second referendum ballot paper.

It's all very well saying we've already had that vote but people didn't know the details back then and I bet a lot of leavers will have changed their minds now they see the likely detail of how bad this will be for the U.K.