Cont: Brexit: Now What? Part 6. Pick up sticks...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dave Rogers said:
I think that would be the clearest way to put it; the Leavers would then not have the argument that their vote was being split. Choosing the options for question 2 could be difficult; what are there? Leave the EU but not the single market or customs union, leave on the terms of May's deal complete with backstop, leave with no deal?

Dave
Click to expand...

I don't know the problem is that it takes only a small percentage to carry. Ranked choice would be better. Rank which your preferences will be

1. No Brexit
2. Mays Deal
3. Crash out.

that people who would prefer to remain over more popular forms of brexit are best represented.
 
Could the Parliament even agree what sort of a referendum to hold though?


Perhaps what is needed first is a indefinitely deferred Brexit (with approval from the 27) and have a referendum asking the people whether they want another Brexit referendum or not, then Parliament could debate the result of that for a while, especially if the result was close, and make that a two out of three if they are not satisfied if the people really want a referendum or not.


If the Parliament decides that the people vote that they don't want another Brexit referendum, then they can go back to doing what they are doing now - talking about what not to do.


If the Parliament decided that the people vote that they do want another Brexit referendum, then they can go back to doing what they are doing now - talking about what to put on the referendum vote.


That should take you nicely through until the next due election date when the people will then get a real chance to vote on whatever vague and unworkable solution the Parties can come up with as policy on Brexit.


Norm
 
Its a complete shambles isn't it?

You cannot have a vote on what you want the EU to accept without some agreement from the EU that they would be willing to accept it.

Given that the deal seems to not please anyone and has been rejected by Parliament I am tempted to say the question should simply be 'Do you still wish the UK to leave the EU on March 29th knowing that it will be without a withdrawal agreement?' Yes or No. If no then revoke Art 50 and to hell with it.
 
Nessie said:
We vote on multiple parties at elections. We are able to decide on a winner there. There was a debate to have a third option of devo max on the Scottish independence referendum, which was dumped because both stay and leave side knew it would win.
Click to expand...

OK, suppose the result is

Hard brexit - 31%
Soft brexit - 30%
Remain - 39%

We would have to go for remain in spite of the fact that 61% of the voters want out of the EU. Can you see any potential issues with that?

If there are more than two options, you'll need to do some sort of transferrable vote. Or, as I suggested once a long time ago (it feels like) two questions:

Should we accept the negotiated deal?

If the deal is rejected, should we Remain or Hard Brexit?

I put that idea on a different forum (long before wee knew what the current deal would look like) and the leading proponent of Brexit on that board said it was too complicated for the voters. Obviously, if that is the case, you have to question why they were allowed to vote on the immensely complex topic of EU membership in the first place.
 
3point14 said:
It really does need to be two options.

The sensible options would be:

Remain
or
Continue to try to find an exit.


But the treasonous actors who have initiated this ****-show would kick up such a fuss that their unicorn option wasn't on the ballot.
Click to expand...

Nothing major has changed since the last vote. When is it a good democratic value and when is it making people vote until you get the outcome you want?
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
I think that you are going to have an issue with the second question if you offer things which are not necessarily on the table. Although it may be irrelevant because SURELY leaving would not win again.

I think the best you might be able to do on question 2 would be:

a. move ahead with the withdrawal agreement as negotiated
b. leave the EU without a withdrawal agreement
c. postpone leaving the EU and attempt to negotiate a new withdrawal agreement

although I think C is probably still too vague but probably reflects what Labour are saying (in its vagueness)

The bigger issue with Question 2 is that I don't trust the electorate to understand the implications of the choices.
Click to expand...


C is too vague but it is politically expedient. The reality is that the May deal is the only one that is on the table and the EU have said there is no renegotiating it. C doesn't really solve anything, but it does allow a government to effectively stop Brexit without being accused of going against the will of the 52% of the 72% of the 71% (on June 23rd 2016). The government can stay in negotiations with the EU pretty much forever.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Nothing major has changed since the last vote. When is it a good democratic value and when is it making people vote until you get the outcome you want?
Click to expand...

A lot has changed since the last vote. The electorate has had some turnover. We have a better idea of the options available to us if we do leave the EU. We have a better idea of the consequences of Brexit.
 
Matthew Best said:
But with three options, what would constitute a winner? Just the one with the most votes? That would almost certainly mean an option with even less support than Leave or Remain got first time round. So anything that won would have been voted against by a vast majority. It might end up being even worse than the situation we're in now, which is already a situation with no good outcome IMV.
Click to expand...

First and second choices out of three options. First choices get two points, second choices get one point.
 
jeremyp said:
A lot has changed since the last vote. The electorate has had some turnover. We have a better idea of the options available to us if we do leave the EU. We have a better idea of the consequences of Brexit.
Click to expand...

I thought remain did a good job arguing something like this would happen. I don't see right now as materially different from what they said would happen.
 
Nessie said:
We need to have a second referendum. But it has to have options. Hard brexit, soft brexit, cancel brexit.
Click to expand...

Why? Elected officials are there to make decisions on behalf of the electorate. Stop asking the question over and over and do what's best. If Brexit is a terrible idea, cancel it.
 
Belz... said:
Why? Elected officials are there to make decisions on behalf of the electorate. Stop asking the question over and over and do what's best. If Brexit is a terrible idea, cancel it.
Click to expand...

One person's bad is another's good. The vote expressed on the behalf of the electorate that the outcome of brexit is good.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I thought remain did a good job arguing something like this would happen. I don't see right now as materially different from what they said would happen.
Click to expand...

It's materially different from what those who proposed leaving said would happen, which is, after all, what the people in the referendum voted FOR.

This, like most of you arguments is remarkably backwards, it's equivalent of saying that people who voted Tory in the last election can't complain if they privatise the NHS because Labour said they would, even though the Tories said they wouldn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom