What they should have done about Brexit
Cameron, May and Johnson: If only they had acted in the national interest

What they should have done about Brexit

Referendums are not the way Britain normally makes decisions.

We have a representative Parliamentary democracy. It’s our elected MPs, acting as our representatives, who usually make key decisions on our behalf, often following months of debates and many votes.

Referendums are relatively new in this country.

We’ve only ever had three UK-wide referendums in our country’s history, and generally referendums in the UK tend to be advisory only polls, and not legally binding.

That was the case for the 1975 and 2016 referendums on whether the UK should remain a member of the European Community. Both were advisory, and not legally binding votes like a general election.

In other mature democracies, where they are more used to running referendums on key issues (i.e. constitutional change) they would not have had a referendum like ours.

For example, Brexit went ahead with the support of a mere 37% of the electorate. In other democracies, Leave could not have won a referendum on the say-so of such a small minority.

It would be normal to set a higher threshold of the electorate positively voting FOR a big change before it could go ahead. But there was a bigger flaw in our EU referendum of 2016.

In other democracies that hold referendums, it would be normal to present the electorate with a clear and defined choice. If voting on a proposed treaty, for example, the treaty would be published in full before the referendum took place.

But in the EU referendum of 2016, whilst the Remain option was fully defined (we’d had it for 43 years), Leave was entirely undefined.

Anyone voting for Leave would not have had any idea what they would be getting. There are many possible versions of Brexit, but none of them were presented or offered as a choice in the referendum. Leave was just one, undefined word.

There was no description of Brexit; for example, whether we’d stay in the Single Market and/or the customs union (more than possible as an ex-member).

In the circumstances, it would have been sensible, and democratic, to have a new, confirmatory referendum once the version of Leave was properly defined. That could then be put back to the electorate as a real and realistic choice: between the already-defined Remain and a fully defined version of Leave.

This is just common sense. The fact that our political masters didn’t offer that is more than odd.

Yes, the Tories in their manifesto promised to abide by the referendum result whatever it was. But clearly, they didn’t think this through. How can any government agree to something before it’s known what it is?

The three Tory Prime Ministers of this millennium could have saved Britain from years of arguments, uncertainty, and anguish if only they had agreed to a new, confirmatory referendum between two equally defined choices.

Anyone who believes in democracy, Remainer or Leaver, could have supported and welcomed this option. But David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson didn’t do that. It’s why we’re in this terrible mess with a Brexit that isn’t working.

Even Boris Johnson is not happy with the Brexit deal he negotiated and signed. He now wants to change it – but refuses to give us, ‘the people’, any chance of changing it.

How undemocratic is that?

  • Related 2-minute video on YouTube: ‘Brexit remedy’

  • Report and graphic by Jon Danzig, who is an independent campaigning journalist and film maker who specialises in writing about health, human rights, and Europe. He is also founder of the information campaign, Reasons2Rejoin
  • Share on Facebook:

No alt text provided for this image

  • Join the discussion on Twitter and retweet:


Dr. Paul Gordon

Lecturer of Moral Philosophy, Contemporary History and Literature at San Pablo CEU University Madrid.

3 年

Cameron allowed a Brexit referendum and did virtually nothing to support remain.

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Jon Danzig的更多文章

  • Fixing broken Britain starts with changing a broken lightbulb

    Fixing broken Britain starts with changing a broken lightbulb

    UK democracy needs radical reform, but there’s little evidence our leaders are ready to take up the challenge, writes…

    2 条评论
  • It was never just about trade

    It was never just about trade

    Eurosceptics often claim that they love Europe but hate the European Union. They assert that Britain can still be part…

    5 条评论
  • My extremely bizarre overnight sleep test

    My extremely bizarre overnight sleep test

    Today is World Sleep Day. Their message this year is to promote that sleep is essential for health.

    1 条评论
  • A vote for Brexit was a vote for Putin

    A vote for Brexit was a vote for Putin

    After the EU referendum, suspicions grew about the role of Russia in clinching the narrow ‘win’ for Brexit. Evidence…

    11 条评论
  • The value of being citizens of Europe

    The value of being citizens of Europe

    Back in 2013 I wrote an article called, THE VALUE OF BEING CITIZENS OF EUROPE. We didn’t know then that within three…

    5 条评论
  • Never again? It's happening again.

    Never again? It's happening again.

    After the Second World War, during which many millions were systematically, industrially, gruesomely murdered in the…

    4 条评论
  • How did we get stuck with Brexit?

    How did we get stuck with Brexit?

    All the Tory candidates to be our next Prime Minister just accept Brexit as a fact of life, without question, even…

    5 条评论
  • How do we get out of this mess?

    How do we get out of this mess?

    In my life, I have never known a worse time either for my country or the world at large. I started to campaign against…

    2 条评论
  • Brexit laid bare

    Brexit laid bare

    Brexit is based on blatant mistruths and lies. Every reason given to leave was a stinking falsification.

    1 条评论
  • In Britain, general elections are how 'the people' decide

    In Britain, general elections are how 'the people' decide

    Some people say it was undemocratic for Britain to join the European Community in 1973 because ‘the people’ weren’t…

    1 条评论

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了