what about a YOUNG people's vote? (the people who didn't get a say last time)

[M3lon]

I kinda get the 'anti-democratic' argument about a people's vote - not really, but I see why MPs view it as a disaster. But what about asking the 1.6 million people aged 18 to 20.5 who are now of voting age who weren't able to vote in the referendum...and adding their polling to the previous vote?

Could it possibly be considered anti-democratic to ask people who haven't had a say...and who are incidentally most affected by this decision?

I think that's an excellent idea op.

My DBro missed the origional vote by a month in the 70s. Can he have that one now?

So you feeling 'disrespected' trumps my 20 year old ds having to live with a decision that he was allowed no part in?

Do should 10 year olds have a vote as they weren't allowed to take part in? What about babies? One squeeze of a toy for remain, two for leave?

It's not about one trumping the other. It's how we do (and every other democratic country does) democracy.
Adults vote. All of them. Universal suffrage. Which includes people who voted leave then died. Which includes Tommy Robinson types. Which includes other idiots who think NoDeal will be great. And me, who thinks Tommy Robinson types and No Dealers are utterly fucking stupid.

Any generation of voters who are responsible for momentum and JC really shouldn't be allowed near a ballot box in my opinion.

They have ruined the Labour party. I'm form a Labour stronghold, they would literally vote a dog with a red rosette on it in, but the tide has turned now everyone won't bite Labour till JC is gone. Which is a shame, because I do believe it's time for a left government to come in to power.

Forget old dead people, perhaps men
should get an extra vote because women can't really be trusted to have sensible views. Or white people. Or just Christians. It's nonsense, op.

I couldn’t agree more with CoachBombay

And if we are going down a route of whose vote should ‘count’ more then should we really be listening to 18 year olds who have only just started out on their journey of life- most of whom will be idealistic and naive, or those who have lived long lives, have a wealth of experience, have lived through wars, through good economic times and bad, have raised families, have worked etc.

If you ran a family business and it was your only source of income who would put in charge- a school leaver or someone who has worked in the business for years ?

Sorry posted too soon!

We need the balance of young and old - we need the votes of the idealistic and the votes of the experienced, and to say young people should have more of a day is naive at best.

I agree. I think the voting age should be lowered also. Some kids are really politically savvy whereas some adults are idiots and still get to vote. There should be a politics exam before you are allowed to vote, pass it-you vote no matter what your age.

I'm reluctantly prepared to agree lowering the voting age to 16 ad long as you are liable for tax from that age (even if you don't earn enough to pay any you should be liable for tax if you vote).
However, tbe idea that you need to pass an exam before voting is nonsense. Do you know why we make a cross to vote? Not just for anonymity. It's so people who can't read or write can vote too. Education level was one of the chief arguments used to block universal suffrage.we can't upturn that.

There are arguments for a second referendum, though I'm not convinced that it would bring any kind of closure or solution.

Because old people died isn't a good reason.

Oh and I'll put my hand up to voting for Thatcher as an 18 year old 'cos my parents thought she was doing a good job. So no, I'm not convinced 18 yo will all vote to remain.

I have young relatives who voted Leave. And older relatives who voted Remain. I'm old. I voted Remain. Leave won. You don't fix this by pretending that didn't happen.

@noodlenosefraggle how will they become streamline?
Honestly I would have voted to remain if concessions had been made when Cameron tried.
I don't believe they are capable of change.
The EU needs to have more countries contributing too many poor relatives.

It's not true that the EU 'keeps asking the question until you get the right answer'. That's tabloid nonsense.
For example, the Irish didn't like some aspects of Lisbon, so the EU took that on board, clarified and then the Irish were happy to accept it. That's grown up politics for you.

Do you know why we make a cross to vote? Not just for anonymity. It's so people who can't read or write can vote too. Education level was one of the chief arguments used to block universal suffrage.we can't upturn that

This is a really really good point, and an important one, which, in part, has lead us to the current political landscape-
Being able to talk eloquently about politics (which many young people can do) does not mean that they have a better understanding of how policies and political decisions will impact on people’s everyday life.

Because as you said, they will have to without our money. The EU, even though I would rather we were in it is far from perfect. Its a bloated bureaucracy. But they will have no choice but to look at how they do things after we leave.

Of course nobody should be allowed to change their minds or review their opinion based on things that have happened since the last vote. It’s not like we have a general election every four years or so is it?! Imagine, ‘well you all voted conservative, let’s get rid of the nuisance of voting for terms and have them in power forever. Who cares that they are self serving arseholes, you made your bed now lie in it’.

rainbow having a general election every few years is completely different to having an EU referendum every few years...

I agree it is different, but it acknowledges that people change their mind based on things that happen. A referendum on a single issue should in theory be a one time event, but we voted in or out and now we can vote on the final options as per the outcome of the withdrawal negotiations. It shouldn’t be a case of we voted once and be done with it.

rainbow yup...you get one vote on which of parties you hate least when you turn 18 and that just counts till 4 years after you die...

Could be a wonderful new dawn of democracy...

I'm sorry, but I still can't take either of the following ideas seriously.

1. That we shouldn't ask people what they think about something now, in case this is disrespectful of the people who are no longer around to express their views....or disrespectful of the people who know someone who is not longer around...or something.

1. That the EU will collapse without the poxy net amount the UK put in.

I think the grown up version of Brexit would have looked like this:

UK government has finger on the pulse of public opinion on brexit as a concept via properly resourced polling on the issue that lets them know that the number of people wanting out of the EU is crossing over the 50% threshold.

Government thoroughly investigates what voters concerns actually are and therefore what sort of exit from EU would alleviate them. Is the population in favour of a no deal exit? Do they just want out of freedom of movement? Do they want in or out the customs union? (incidentally will still have no fucking idea what the public wants around any of those issues...we just know 'the will of the people is clear'...not what it actually IS.)

Parliament starts putting together some serious supportable ideas about for how to exit EU in discussion with the EU.

A workable exit strategy is put together.

This is then offered as a referendum between following the strategy and exiting or remaining.

If exit strategy is voted for by majority on the day then it is enacted.

If not the government goes back to EU to try and fix the things that are pissing off the UK public about the way it runs from inside the club instead of outside.

The Scottish in out debate would also have gone better that way too.

Keeping a constant track of public opinion and putting together a workable divorce strategy then asking people whether to do it or not.

I'm not entirely against it (though I thought the first was a foolish idea and don't think another will be very helpful if it's anything like the first), but if we're opening to all who didn't get a say last time, it will be more than young people. UK citizens who have returned from living abroad as well as immigrants who have gained citizenship since then would also be part of the potentially voteable public opinion that wasn't then counted.

I think idea that we can calculate the rate of death of those who voted Leave or those turning 18 who would voted remain pretty silly, like the 'blue wave' that meant Clinton would win or how remain was meant to win the first time around. While more young people voted that way, I think it would be foolish with things as they are to think we could rely on that.

@M3lon That the EU will collapse without the poxy net amount the UK put in.
God help us all with so much ignorance. Look it up.

Viewing the EU in terms of net contributors and net recipients is overly simplistic anyhow. It only looks at how much we directly pay in v. how much we directly receive. It doesn’t take into account the indirect benefits derived from access to the single market (more lucrative for the UK than say, Poland no?) or sharing resources such as regulators rather than having everything at a national level. There is a reason Germany is pretty happy being a ‘net contributor’ and it ain’t philanthropy.

blue They will be losing 12 billion out of a total budget of 160....so 7.5%

Almost all businesses, county councils, governments, have had to suck up sudden changes much larger than 7.5%.

I'm sure the EU will cope just fine.

That 12 billion is 1.5% of our annual budget in the UK. So it will make even less difference to us, to get it back, than it will to the EU losing it.

rainbow mind you the reason germany is so chuffed and greece is so screwed is not really the EU's finest moment IMO.

Germany may look like a net contributor on paper but it has profited by massively more than the net budget contribution via the valuation of the euro...

It’s true, many countries have the added issue of the Euro which we don’t. Depends on which side of that fence you fall as to what you think of it, but the architectural design of the currency with no mechanism to deal with a failing sovereign is an utter travesty. Definitely doesn’t highlight the competence of the EU for sure. Nevertheless, I still can’t see the benefits of leaving, however problematic I may find the institution for various reasons. I am not too keen on many of the UK governments, but sadly we can’t vote to get rid of Westminster and find an alternative!