expressman33 wrote: ↑
Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:49 pm
pabenny wrote: ↑
Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:45 pm
Surely the only way to resolve this is a new referendum. It may not be what the Leavers want, but can they suggest an achievable alternative?
So if remainers win a new referendum would we then have the best of 3 in 3 years time ?
It's not a best of three though.
It's becoming ever more obvious that the original referendum was not asking the right question. It was intended to get a 'Remain' answer. The other option was 'Leave and do something else' and was not defined, because it was there as a token gesture.
A second referendum should have defined options, so you'd know what you voting for (and not just what you were voting against). But first we need to decide what sort of future relationship we want with the EU. Remember all that talk of Norway and Canada+? Retaining access to the Single Market, or staying in the Customs Union? Well, which one did you vote for? Nobody knows. 'Leave' was just an umbrella term that meant whatever you wanted, but ultimately meant whatever the government of the day wanted. Your interpretation is moot.
However, we've actually got stuck at the first hurdle. We can't even decide how to extricate ourselves successfully, let alone decide on the future. The talk of a second referendum is largely a way of resolving this impasse, which means it's a different question. We could do it right now: May's Deal, No Deal or Remain. It's not a repeat of the same question. Or we could try and get some more appealing options on the table (arguably if we could do that, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now), but that means more time.
*Before anyone says it, the vote should be by Single Transferable Vote ('put them in order of preference' in layman's terms) to avoid splitting the leave vote.