Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
arsefeatures · 14/02/2019 19:34

our FPTP system isn't the problem. The Lib Dem's problem is they're ideas, [i e the second ref]' are rubbish, so they deserve to fail. They also along with the Labour and the Greens want the voting age lowered to 16.

Personally, I reckon 25 or 30 would be more like it.

Calloway · 14/02/2019 19:36

FPTP is definitely a problem. As it stands only one of two particular teams can win.That's not much of a choice. If PR means UKIP MPs in parliament, so be it.

Calloway · 14/02/2019 19:36

*not much of a choice.

Kazzyhoward · 14/02/2019 19:37

they moderated the Tories massively during the coalition years

They completely screwed up the tax system with their tax policies which they managed to force through. For that alone, they should be disbanded and never be allowed near power again.

Kazzyhoward · 14/02/2019 19:38

If PR means UKIP MPs in parliament, so be it

Be careful what you wish for. Hitler gained power in Nazi Germany due to PR!

Calloway · 14/02/2019 19:47

Well the UK is hardly a beacon of democracy at the moment is it? And the far right are on the march.

Calloway · 14/02/2019 19:48

So yeah, I wish for PR.

Moussemoose · 14/02/2019 20:21

Kazzyhoward

Hitler gained power in Nazi Germany due to PR

PR is not just one system, there are multiple forms of PR. Weimar Germany used a list system which is very proportional. There are many other systems which, while proportional, are not as unstable.

Smaller extreme parties deserve to be represented if people vote for them, it's called freedom of speech. Anyway these parties tend to implode when exposed to the pressures of active government.

laraDiller · 14/02/2019 21:26

Yes

arsefeatures · 15/02/2019 08:05

Exactly, if we had PR, UKIP would have 80+ seats. Would you be happy with that?

In PR Systems with lists, democracy is well and truly stymied. Nicola Sturgeon, for instance, has never won an election as a constituency MSP. But she's well up on the SNP regional list - so if the SNP do at all well, she's elected. The FPTP system also has its problems to some degree, especially in the selection process. It is nevertheless much more open than a PR with list system.

The Alternative Vote [AV] is a lot fairer than FPTP but maintains the character of single MP constituencies where the MP can be thrown out by his or her electorate.

For all of its faults, what we have here is better than the mess of PR nations like Germany, which keeps Merkel in power no matter who the people vote for.

jasjas1973 · 15/02/2019 08:29

Exactly, if we had PR, UKIP would have 80+ seats. Would you be happy with that?

No they wouldn't at all - Ukip would have a maximum of 11 in the 2017 GE.

The big difference under any PR system is Lab would be far closer to the Cons.

www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/how-would-parliament-look-under-proportional-representation

Merkel can be voted out quite easily, IF the German electorate chose so.
Thatcher was also in power for many years, as was Blair.

FPTP disenfranchises 60% ish of voters and is not democracy.

Motheroffourdragons · 15/02/2019 08:44

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ to protect the privacy of the user.

Kazzyhoward · 15/02/2019 08:53

No they wouldn't at all - Ukip would have a maximum of 11 in the 2017 GE.

UKIP would have won 82 seats in the 2015 GE - they'd have been the 3rd largest party. That would have given them significant power to form a coaltion with either Tory or Labour.

Quoting the 2017 election is irrelevant because UKIP was no longer relevant once the Brexit referendum had been held. There may not have been an election in 2017, or there may have been an election in 2016 - who knows? But what is highly likely is that had we not had a referendum, or had Remain won, then UKIP would still have been a popular party. It was the Brexit result that made them irrelevant.

jasjas1973 · 15/02/2019 09:10

I knew that was coming! lol! the PP stated what they would have now, not in 2015..... 2 GE's ago.

The 82 seats is under a form of PR that is the most generous to ukip (54 under STV) and of course, the Libdems and Greens would have also won many more seats, almost negating the ukip gains.

Regardless, DC acted as if UKIP did indeed have 80 + MPs.

Kazzyhoward · 15/02/2019 09:26

the PP stated what they would have now, not in 2015

And as I said, given a different result in 2015, there may not even have been a GE in 2017 - PR in 2015 would have meant a completely different 2016, 17, 18 and 19. UKIP would have continued to gain popularity had there not been a referendum.

arsefeatures · 15/02/2019 09:55

UKIP would have won 80+ seats in the 2015 election. I should have said.

I disagree PR systems with a 'list' are fundamentally undemocratic in that they keep the same 'elite' at the top of the list in power however their party's popularity waxes and wanes.

If you add to that that this 'elite' refuses to cooperate with other parties for reasons of ideology then you have politicians aping social divisions which will therefore never be resolved.

In continental Europe they frequently have coalitions because of PR. It fosters elites because of the 'list' system. Career politicians, once they've made it on to a 'list' as opposed to a constituency vote - are probably there for life. That is why they all know each other and can cut deals which we would find incredible. Most Germans turned against Merkel at the last election, desperate to get rid of her. The fact she's been able to cling to power is evidence of the rigged nature of "PR" electoral systems.

The worst thing the LibDems did in my view was to lose the ref' vote on the Alternative Vote (AV). AV is the acceptable face of PR and I'm all for that because it involves no 'list'. The problem for the LibDems was that they wanted full blown PR because they want a lot more MPs. They could not seem to accept the half way house of AV and their campaign was half-hearted to say the least.

With AV, the LibDems and UKIP might well have a lot more MPs. This quite old article is interesting - www.indy100.com/article/heres-how-the-election-results-would-look-under-a-proportional-voting-system--gJenQmaW2gW

prettybird · 15/02/2019 10:00

Indeed mother - arse couldn't be more wrong Confused Nicola Sturgeon has been a very good constituency MSP since 2011 (and a good list MSP before that).

For the record, the SNP has 59 constituency MSPs and 4 list MSPs (the low number of list MSPs is because they won so many constituency posts), in contrast to the Conservatives, who have just 7 constituency MSPs and 24 list MSPs (and the only reason Ruth Davidson is now finally a constituency MSP is that she was moved from the Glasgow region and parachuted into to the safe Edinburgh Central seat in 2017 Hmm)

jasjas1973 · 15/02/2019 10:17

Kazzy its all ifs and buts.

Here is one... had we had PR, no referendum and UKIP did indeed gain 50 to 80 seats, their policy (they've only ever had one) would have come under far greater scrutiny, esp as they'd be asked about a whole host of different stuff and remember many kipper politicians are from the far right, with very unpleasant views - Farage would not have been able to get away with a complete pack of lies quite so easily.

However, it's all speculation, what we do know is, at least in the short to medium term, our economy will become smaller and i think, given we are here because of a speculative/divisive vote, then another referendum based on the final deal would help get the UK moving fwd again - whatever the result.

prettybird · 15/02/2019 10:17

I actually like the hybrid d'Hondt system we have in Scotland. It still means that there is local engagement.

I have to accept that the d'Hondt system gave us the first ever and only UKIP elected representative in Scotland in any capacity, when the odious and execrable Coburn sneaked in as a UKIP MEP in the last EU elections under the "last man standing" calculation Sad

I see nothing wrong with coalitions. I see compromise as a strength, not a weakness.

The UK's FPTP has been demonstrated to be toxic and that we effectively get, when there are working majorities, electoral dictatorship by the government of the day. AV is not a sufficient safeguard against that - it still perpetuates the principle of binary politics Sad

SophieCatScribbles · 15/02/2019 11:12

Another referendum is only unpopular with hardline, committed Leave voters, and those sick to their stomachs of the whole charade.

The ONLY vote we had in the referendum was Yes/No. Nothing else. Cameron et al in their vacant wisdom had prepared no plans for a Leave result, because despite saying that the vote would be 'free and fair' he almost instantly started campaigning vehemently for Remain. Which given he was already a hugely unpopular PM was never going to end well. A lot of people voted No just because they'd finally been given a say on something and their vote would actually count equally. A lot of that 'No' vote was pure protest against an elitist government by people who'd felt ignored for years. A lot of people didn't even vote. Take the whole UK population into account and only 39% voted Leave. Who's ignoring people now?

Add to that the fact (proven fact, not debate) that BOTH SIDES LIED. Continuously, repeatedly and unashamedly. Not one single British citizen knew exactly what they were voting for, because we had no real truth or detail at all. Literally none. Just a load of hype from both sides. We were voting in the dark. The close result showed that. It might as well have been the flip of a coin.

This 2.5 years has seen idiocy and farce the like of which has never been seen in the country before. We have reduced ourselves enormously on the world stage and become a laughing stock and an embarrassment. Our politics has been shown for the posturing shambles that it is. Our PM has done nothing but ignore everyone and spew the same exhausted dozen phrases, veiled threats and 'misleading' statements at every single stage. Two years wasted. Then a deal thrashed out in haste - a deal which suited no one. Now they are running down the clock to hope to force her deal through out of sheer fear. Great example of democracy at work. The crazy deal with the DUP proved that the Conservatives would do anything to stay in power, even be gripped firmly by the extremely hard fist of the DUP. They hold so much power it's frightening and utterly wrong.

Throughout the whole time since the vote, no one - NO ONE - has listened to the public, only to the extremists on all sides that the media has chosen to give air time to. The pundits, 'experts' and representatives who hoot and bray and lie and accuse and deny ad infinitum. No one asks us, the public, because each camp thinks things are close enough to claim they're right, and each is determined to get themselves across their arbitrary line to victory. However hollow that might become.

All the players in the Westminster game are winners because they do not inhabit the real world faced by ordinary people. The Leave movement is like a cult now, shouting slogans and demands and threats and getting more frightening by the day. Their followers repeat what they're told and get more and more fanatical. Open violence is being threatened now if they don't get what they want.

Those saying a second referendum would divide the country need to look outside and see the reality - we are already divided. It has been a classic, perfectly-executed case of 'divide and conquer' by this government, a clinical procedure to divide us into sects and set us against each other so that we're too busy fighting to see where the real responsibility lies, and too divided to join together to demand that they get their act together and do what is best for their citizens rather than themselves.

Do you think even one cabinet member or senior Tory will be seriously hurt by any Brexit result? No. They are just fine. They are already coining in on the chaos, manipulating the markets, moving assets and businesses, making sure they have a get out. Look at JRM and how he's moved things around so that he'll be protected. Millions will be being stashed away based on the money market uncertainty being cleverly manipulated every day. Anyone thinking that the political jaybirds of the Eton (and similar public school educated) crowd are working in the interests of the majority of ordinary Brits - whom they have literally nothing in common with - are deluding themselves. For them this is a game of power and prestige. If 5 million lose their jobs, 2 million starve and 30 million end up in abject poverty it won't affect them. We're just numbers. You only have to look at the cuts to public services, the treatment of the sick and poor, and the tax breaks given to big industry and business to see their priorities. None of us will win.

We can all now see some of the harsh reality of Brexit at least, which is better than the dark room we were in when we voted. We must now have a vote on what is actually likely to happen and the options that we have. It does not have to take 18 months. It can be done much quicker.

If the Leave crowd opposing the vote are so sure that "Leave means Leave" and that "this is what the British public voted for" and that "this is what the public want us to do" then why are they so opposed to a vote? Surely they're certain they'd win with an even bigger majority? A bigger majority would silence a lot of the arguing and at least show us a clear way forward.

The only way we can now come together is by delaying Article 50 while we vote. Any other course leaves us all bitter and divided.

(Imho)

TalkinPeece · 15/02/2019 13:11

Lots of people do protest votes in FPTP elections
whereas if they knew their vote would count, their choices would be very different.
UKIP are a busted flush.

HoustonBess · 15/02/2019 21:13

There's no majority for anything in parliament. No deal would be a catastrophe and a deal is worse than EU membership.

I don't see that there is any option other than returning it to the country to resolve the deadlock. They will come round to it eventually.

If the only real argument for Brexit now is that to not to do it threatens faith in democracy and civil unrest - the illegality and lying in the referendum already damaged democracy, and any outcome will cause civil unrest.

I just wish enough MPs had enough of a spine to push for a second referendum.

PrivacyPolicyYeahRight · 18/02/2019 09:28

I think, ideally, the terms of leaving should be sorted and a clear statement made about impact. Then people vote on the terms of leaving. That way everyone knows exactly what they are voting for.

Would I trust our government to do such a thing fairly and transparently? No.

PrivacyPolicyYeahRight · 18/02/2019 09:31

Add to that the fact (proven fact, not debate) that BOTH SIDES LIED. Continuously, repeatedly and unashamedly. Not one single British citizen knew exactly what they were voting for, because we had no real truth or detail at all. Literally none. Just a load of hype from both sides. We were voting in the dark.

I voted remain but I agree with this.

BrexitFreesBritain · 08/03/2019 13:55

What are you suggesting?

There is a continual repeat referendum until you get what you voted for?

Best of three?

Best of five?

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.