I will return to pointing out that there is simply no point putting 'no deal' on a confirmatory vote. This is because a confirmatory vote is there to give the MPs a plan of action - the go ahead to move to the next stage - and 'no deal' does not tell them what to do. Yes crash out - then what? There is no road map. The EU have already stated the things that will be needed to sign up to in order to start negotiations (basically the W.A) but if the W.A was rejected by the people then the govt cannot sign up to those conditions - so we are in no man's land and sane people are getting angrier as food and medication shortages start to bite but the radicalised are getting no less radicalised. And even bypassing not being able to negotiate - how do they know what they are supposed to be working towards? How do they know if the trade deal qualifies as brexit or as treason in the swivel eyes of the radicalised fringe who are driving this?
If they are using a P.V to get out of the mess then they are under no obligation to offer an option that does not help clear up the mess. The only sane and viable option (and no this does not mean they'll do it - but that doesn't mean it's not the only way) is to offer TMs W.A (yes - with the backstop) vs remain. Because that is the only brexit the EU are willing to offer us - we can take it or leave it, but we are in no position to make demands.
If they are the options then absolutely no - we do not need a landslide majority either way in order to follow the outcome. The question is basically - to use Rory's analogy from last night - here is the door out of the EU, the key to it is the W.A. Do we pass the W.A and go through the door or revoke and stay in? They just need us to tell them which to do, so they can do it in good conscience.
The idea that we need a super majority in order to act is baffling. The point is it allows us to act - one way or the other - refusing to act because we didn't quite hit the 70% threshold just leaves us in the mess.
No - a close referendum won't heal the divide. There are some people - on both sides - for whom the divide is never going to be healed, even if the final result was 70% - 30%. That isn't the purpose of the referendum! The purpose is it tells us which one of two reasonably sensible options to take - we take the most popular and then we move forward. It would then - from a place of more stable footing - be the job of the government (whoever would be in power at the time) to find a way to start healing those divisions. And the best way to do that would be increased public spending on health and education and transport, a decent living wage and affordable housing. None of which comes back to the EU.