Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Who thinks there should be another referendum

510 replies

paprickapaull · 11/02/2019 19:23

Who thinks there should be another referendum?
My mum says there shouldn't but my husband says there should be I'm not very sure.

What do u think?

OP posts:
Efferlunt · 11/02/2019 20:52

No, I don’t know what the answer is but a referendum would take 18 months to set up. We can’t wait that long for a resolution.

Jitters22 · 11/02/2019 20:53

Yes, that's basically what Switzerland did a few years ago. They had a referendum on ending freedom of movement, narrow win to end it. Government said ok, we'll research how to implement this. Came back a while later and said we're not doing it, it'll be too damaging to the country and the economy.

The entire population of Switzerland is 8.7 million. Less than half of those who voted for Brexit. Those eligible to vote are approx 5.2 million and on the particular referendum you are referring to the overall turnout was less than 3 million.

The Freedom of Movement vote was 50.3% to 49.7% - representing some 19,000 votes. 19,000 is a lot easier to ignore than 1.2 million.

Why don't you look instead at the last Québécois vote for Independence - where the result was upheld.

Frankiestein402 · 11/02/2019 20:53

they have been unwilling to engaged to negotiate a good brexit even though we have been in the eu for over 40 years

We said 'we want out, these are our red lines' the EU said - those red lines mean this - ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/slide_presented_by_barnier_at_euco_15-12-2017.pdf "

(the flags indicate the possible relationships with the EU, the text represents the specific red lines that rule out the option)

I'd call that engaging - all that has happened is that we have not changed our red lines - remember it is us that wants something from the EU (frictionless trade, passporting, no payments etc) we can't expect the EU to change the rules of the club because it would mean other members wanting the same - effectively destroying the club.

Who thinks there should be another referendum
expatinspain · 11/02/2019 20:55

Yes. 💯

rainbowsRcool · 11/02/2019 20:55

Why don't we get rid of may and be done with this

Littlespace · 11/02/2019 20:59

Oh - 18 months to organise one is too long.

It explains why the government is acting like a rabbit caught in the headlights. It is the martial law stuff that I can't quite believe. I'm amazed that poorer leave voters are not freaking out by now.

jasjas1973 · 11/02/2019 21:00

What is undemocratic is not accepting the results of one

But counter to your argument, its ok to ignore the results of the 1975 referendum?
In all walks of life, you make a decision, once you know the outcome of that decision, you can walk away or accept.

& pls dont quote the DC leaflet, he fucked off, anything he promised is null and void.

A further vote ensures we know exactly what the UK wants based on an additional 2.5 years of further information.

As for "has the UK changed its mind?" true, i accept your rebuke (though polling across all sectors is showing we have) however, you don't know either if we have or not!

Its to big a decision to go on a somewhat illegal vote 3 years ago.

rainbowsRcool · 11/02/2019 21:05

I think we should change the power from labour and conservative and allow parties like: Green Party and the Lib Dem's

Because they would be more likely to listen to us public instead of thinking they know it all

paprickapaull · 11/02/2019 21:05

Totally agree

OP posts:
paprickapaull · 11/02/2019 21:05

So who thinks we should leave

OP posts:
GirlsBlouse17 · 11/02/2019 21:37

So who thinks we should leave

That's a whole thread for discussion, all by itself. One that has been raised on MN many times before

MeganBacon · 11/02/2019 21:49

The problem is that it would be another vote close to 50/50 and that would be devastating - even more uncertainty for business, anger amongst the electorate and pointless delay.

If polls indicated a clear remain win beyond the margin of error, then yes obviously it would be a good idea.

Even if there were a second referendum (which there won't be), no deal would have to be an option.
If it is so clear to those in power that leaving would be "devastating", then it is their responsibility to revoke unilaterally, save us from ourselves and put the greater good above party politics. I don't think that is TM's style though.

Jitters22 · 11/02/2019 21:54

we can't expect the EU to change the rules of the club because it would mean other members wanting the same - effectively destroying the club.

That single sentence is probably the most sensible thing that has been written on this entire thread regardless of whether you are a Leaver or Remainer.

Although it was paid lip service in the EU constitution, there was no real mechanism in place to accommodate any member state actually leaving. Forget about the EU for a moment - no-one here in the UK, Leaver or Remainer, genuinely thought that the result of the referendum would turn out the way it did. Farage even at one point went on TV berating the skewed, dishonest campaign against 'Leave' only to come out hours later smiling at the result, while it was left to the Remain camp to start bemoaning the skewed, dishonest campaign perpetrated by the Remainers.

The problem comes because Euroscepticism was always a factor in UK politics from the moment we joined. It simmered slowly over decades. Did no-one even notice when it came to the single currency, we as one of the top three net contributors, chose to remain outside the Eurozone? By the way I don't give a shit which side of the argument you are on, you must surely see that retaining Sterling was the best thing we ever did in this whole sorry saga of our relationship with the EU?

Euroscepticism was growing, but no-one was paying it any attention. Even when UKIP became the largest UK party in the European Parliament, because of the apathy of UK voters in European elections, who just didn't see the rising tide ... they were laughed off.

UKIP were a massive threat because they were stealing votes from both the left, right and centre of politics. They absolutely decimated the Lib-dem vote and ended up with 4 million votes in a general election and not a single MP. Oh how we laughed.

It was no laughing matter. The fact that they didn’t have a presence in Parliament meant nothing. Those 4 million weren't going to go away. They had become so disillusioned with mainstream parties and the EU and that wasn't set to change.

After the disastrous Conservative-Lib Dem (Cameron and Clegg) coalition, Cameron campaigned on a platform of 'we'll give you a referendum on EU membership' to try and attract back those right of centre voters who had defected to UKIP as well as mop up a few voters from the other parties to give him a majority. And it worked.

The problem was, he then had to deliver on the referendum. If the EU Commission had only been willing to acknowledge the reality of the situation instead of dismissing it, the chances are he (a staunch remainer) would have won that referendum but unfortunately they refused to be conciliatory so we saw what we are seeing now with May - a democratically elected UK prime minister going to Brussels and being knocked back and treated as irrelevant, dismissed, ignored.

People talk all the time about us, the UK and our faults and failings but do you not see that the EU commissioners themselves are culpable? They should have addressed the malcontent and dissatisfaction with the EU institution itself that was growing - not just in the UK but right across Europe - but they just dismissed it (as many here do too) as fascism, populism, and so on.

And we all know how that ended up. A referendum in a key member state resulted in a shock vote to Leave. If Cameron had stayed with his majority and seen through what he'd started, it might have been achieved in a more conciliatory and orderly fashion, but May was on a loser from the start. I'm not excusing her by the way. Poorly advised, disastrous election campaign and feeble leadership, although without a majority, strong leadership wouldn't have done her much good either, because her own party is split. Split like the country is.

The strongest leader, the best negotiator in the world, would not get us a good Brexit deal, because the EU does not want us to leave. It doesn't want us to prosper post Brexit, it doesn't want us to withdraw our significant financial contribution to the EU purse... because it doesn't want anyone else to leave. I don't blame them, would you them blame them? But neither can you blame those Leave voters who marked their X on the ballot paper based upon the decades of their experience?

For the EU to survive it requires the contribution of wealthy member states. It’s an expensive institution to run. Unfortunately, the introduction of a single currency has been disastrous for many countries (you cannot have the world’s 4th economy in an economic union with the world’s 40th economy and expect the latter to prosper) and we’ve seen the effect the Eurozone has had on the southern European states. The number of net contributors to the EU purse is diminishing and the UK’s contribution was significant and is going to be missed. Again, I don’t care what side of the argument you are on, if you deny that, you are denying the truth. The figures are there for all to see.

Farage is always made out to be the villain of the piece but Farage always made his intentions clear right from the getgo when he first got involved in politics. He laid out his stall and he stuck to it, never deviating and you can loathe him as much as you like but he is probably one of the most honest politicians out there is the sense you know exactly what he stands for.

I think personally that the man history will judge badly in all this is Cameron. His tactics in the post coalition government, pre-Brexit referendum were so transparent. Appease the Eurosceptics, give them their referendum, we'll win, put it to bed once and for all, and they'll all fall into line. And then when he lost he abdicates next morning, leaving others to pick up the pieces …. and here we are ...

Jitters22 · 11/02/2019 21:56

Sorry typo - second para of my reply - last word should of course be 'Leavers'

Grin
Mookatron · 11/02/2019 21:58

Yes, and having one on the final deal should have been written into the law that brought the first referendum into being. The deal or stay. The idea of leaving the EU with no arrangements in place is just fucking ridiculous (unfortunately that doesn't mean it won't happen).

Mookatron · 11/02/2019 22:02

History will judge many people badly when it comes to this shit show. Farage might have been honest about his desires but he was far - FAR- from honest about what leaving would mean for ordinary people who can't taje private jets everywhere or keep their inherited fortunes offshore.

jasjas1973 · 11/02/2019 22:09

May - a democratically elected UK prime minister going to Brussels and being knocked back and treated as irrelevant, dismissed, ignored

If you are going to write drivel, pls keep it short.

The EU agreed to the UKs and Mays demands and the exit door was held open for the UK.

It is Parliament that cannot agree and vote through her deal, which she as PM signed.

Jitters22 · 11/02/2019 22:15

If you are going to write drivel, pls keep it short.

And if you are going to write drivel, please write something that is literate, comprehensible, and uses punctuation.

The EU agreed to the UKs and Mays demands and the exit door was held open for the UK.

What does that even mean?

Moussemoose · 11/02/2019 22:17

treated as irrelevant, dismissed, ignored

Apart from the deal she negotiated, agreed to and signed.

Not irrelevant, not dismissed and not ignored.

The U.K. parliament however did dismiss her deal and has done its best to call it irrelevant.

Mammajay · 11/02/2019 22:19

I would like another referendum. Democracy is meant to keep us safe and free.

Theworldisfullofgs · 11/02/2019 22:22

A referendum wouldn't take 18mths to set up. It's another May myth. She managed to have an action at a drop of a hat.

Personally I think we should revoke article 50. Failing that a referendum. Just don't let Chris Grayling near anything.

jasjas1973 · 11/02/2019 22:23

Really Jitters?

Is that the best you can do? me thinks you understand only too well lol!

You attempted to make out the EU was being nasty to poor old TM, when the reality is, they gave her what she wanted, especially in regard to the backstop and a uk wide CU, if it were triggered.

HoC rejected it, not the EU.

MeganBacon · 11/02/2019 22:25

Farage was not in power though and nor would he ever have been, so people like him could say whatever they wanted about the NHS etc. - it wasn't a promise because he was never going to be in a position to deliver anyway, it was nothing more than a statement of what he would like to see happen.

I think history will judge most harshly those MPs who voted to invoke Article 50 knowing full well there was no plan as to how they would implement the exit but that it was likely to be incredibly difficult to achieve within two years. That's madness.

SisterOfDonFrancisco · 11/02/2019 22:25

I don't want another referendum. Nobody's learned anything from the first one.

Mookatron · 11/02/2019 22:26

If you can't understand something because it's missing a couple of apostrophes that doesn't make it incomprehensible. It means your comprehension skills are lacking. Much like interpreting an organisation engaging in a negotiation with someone as ignoring them.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.