Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
We're calling it May's deal because it is the deal May brought back from Brussels for ratification by Parliament. Pretty much everyone else has disowned it.

The first referendum on EU membership was held in 1975 and Remain won by 67-33%.

The second  referendum on EU membership was held in 2016 and Leave won by 52-48% on the basis that they were promised they could "have their cake and eat it" and that negotiating new and advantageous trade terms with the EU would be "the easiest deal in history".

We now have the reality of "May's deal" which almost no one seems to want. It is even more unpopular than "no deal" and both, combined, are now less popular than Remain.

So the argument for a third referendum is that the people need to decide do they want May's deal, No deal, or Remain. There is no Brexit which matches the expectations raised by the second referendum, and Parliament cannot decide what to do next.

The argument against a third referendum is that the people decided to Leave, and if Parliament can't agree on May's deal then No deal is the default (and correct) outcome.

But no one told voters in 2016 (or 2017) that that would be the form Brexit would take. No government actually has a mandate for that outcome. So either a general election or a third referendum (or both) is required to break the impasse.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jan 13th, 2019 at 07:44:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series