This followed a bitter referendum campaign that saw division across political parties, communities and families.
I should probably point out that I voted to remain and although I respected the result of the EU referendum at the time, I no longer do.
Taking into account where we are now, a second referendum with three options seems to be the only way forward.
Parliament won’t accept the Chequers deal or a no deal Brexit and while I imagine there would be a majority for a ‘remain’ option in the two Houses, democracy would never allow it.
Today’s Sky Data Poll shows Three-quarters of people asked say they believe Theresa May is doing a bad job of negotiations.
So a new vote for the electorate is the only way forward. The Chequers deal appears to have elected politicians in a state of checkmate.
These are the reasons I believe we need another say – the reasons on their own are small points but together they point towards the PEOPLE having the final say.
This argument will rile people up. Both sides in the original referendum debate exaggerated. Money that we give to the EU will not be going to the NHS – more money is coming into the health service but it will be coming from you.
By the same token, we haven’t had the predicted recession that was promised – albeit the UK economy has fallen from being one of the fastest growing in the G7 to the slowest. With the Chequers, No Deal and Remain on the table it would surely be more difficult to get away with falsehoods.
Given that parliament is sovereign or the people are sovereign – or the word sovereign is over-used – shouldn’t we be allowed to approve what happens next? We’ve purchased a new house but we aren’t going to have a say on how it is decorated? Maybe we regret buying said house and the estate agent is a generous sole who is allowing us to backtrack after 24 months.
The point being democracy is fluid and just because we voted once doesn’t mean that we agree with what is happening now.
The Chequers deal has been described by the de facto leaders of Leave and Remain (Johnson and Cameron) as the “worst of both worlds”. A ‘no deal’ option could see us having medicine delivered by the army and by the governments own research would cause unfathomable issues.
How does the day after Brexit work if we don’t strike a deal?
Then there is the option to remain – if that is even an option. Could we potentially use the Brexit vote as leverage to remove ourselves from one of the freedoms or from the jurisdiction of the European court? Would any sort of remain be a betrayal of the people?
Mike Gapes and Tim Aker will discuss Brexit on 1075Tonight this evening.
Let’s be real, the two main parties are split on Brexit even amongst remainers and brexiters. David Davis and Boris Johnson have resigned, Michael Gove and Liam Fox are staying in there. Kate Hoey and Frank Field are facing confidence votes while remainers like Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubry and consigned to the back benches.
Theresa May is a remain voter putting forward a ‘manifesto’ for leave, while I’m not sure if anyone knows where the Labour leadership stands on Brexit.
Surely having three options to campaign for will allow each of the major players to fight for the deal they want? It would certainly bring an end to the back-stabbing.
The original referendum was only 52-48, while on its own that isn’t a solid case for a re-run or a new vote, with the other reasons stated I think it helps make the case. Majority rules but it was only a slim majority.
A recent Electoral Commission report found Vote Leave broke electoral law. We don’t know if this had any impact on the result and it may be appealed but this is something that should be taken into account.
I don’t claim to be a Brexit expert but given I’ve got a blog I thought I would use it to explore the option of a People’s Vote.
What do you think?
