Britons would now vote to stay in EU, want second referendum: poll

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, Spidey said:

British democracy doesn't require a referendum for parliament to enact a decision.

But there was a referendum in 2016. Which unfortunately for you, Leave won. You think it is democratic for Parliament to overturn the results of the biggest vote in UK history because they don't like the result?

 

Not to mention that the Conservatives were subsequently elected on a manifesto promise to Leave. You think it's democratic to break that promise?

 

It is anti-democratic to not accept losing the vote. You are abandoning any democratic principles you may have once had because you do not like the result of the democratic vote. 

[brewsterbudgen]

But there was a referendum in 2016. Which unfortunately for you, Leave won. You think it is democratic for Parliament to overturn the results of the biggest vote in UK history because they don't like the result?
 
Not to mention that the Conservatives were subsequently elected on a manifesto promise to Leave. You think it's democratic to break that promise?
 
It is anti-democratic to not accept losing the vote. You are abandoning any democratic principles you may have once had because you do not like the result of the democratic vote. 

If the result of the 2016 referendum is democratically overturned, how is that not democratic?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[baboon]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

But there was a referendum in 2016. Which unfortunately for you, Leave won. You think it is democratic for Parliament to overturn the results of the biggest vote in UK history because they don't like the result?

 

Not to mention that the Conservatives were subsequently elected on a manifesto promise to Leave. You think it's democratic to break that promise?

 

It is anti-democratic to not accept losing the vote. You are abandoning any democratic principles you may have once had because you do not like the result of the democratic vote. 

The CON party called the referendum, conducted the negotiations and couldn't deliver. Take it up with them.

Edited January 16, 2019 by baboon

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

But there was a referendum in 2016. Which unfortunately for you, Leave won. You think it is democratic for Parliament to overturn the results of the biggest vote in UK history because they don't like the result?

 

Not to mention that the Conservatives were subsequently elected on a manifesto promise to Leave. You think it's democratic to break that promise?

 

It is anti-democratic to not accept losing the vote. You are abandoning any democratic principles you may have once had because you do not like the result of the democratic vote. 

Referendums aren't part of British democracy, historically. Referendums pander to mob mentality. The Conservative manifesto didn't contain a promise to leave. It contained a promise to hold a referendum. Not the same. When has any government upheld the promises in it's manifesto?

 

You don't elect the government, you elect your local MP. The party with the greatest number of MPs then forms the government. That party elects the Prime Minister. That's how British democracy works.

 

Your MP then forms part of the decision making process to govern the country. The democratic way to have done things in 2016, was for parliament to vote on leave or remain. The outcome would have been to remain, just as it would be if a free vote in Parliament were held today.

 

If British democracy had prevailed in 2016 we wouldn't be in the mire we're in today. Instead, Cameron bowed to mob rule and Britain's future is very uncertain.

[melvinmelvin]

13 minutes ago, baboon said:

The CON party called the referendum, conducted the negotiations and couldn't deliver. Take it up with them.

yes right, but I think that they called the referendum on the basis of a green light statute enacted by the house

 

I listened / looked at the ramblings of the Westminster Zoo last night, very very interesting.

 

It has been debated, in the light of sovereign parliament, here on TVF whether the referendum was binding or not.

I noted last night that several MPs in their interventions expressed that

when parliament did the green light statute they, at the same, gave the ultimate decision power over to the people,

alas, cannot remember the exact wording but the semantics were quite clear.

 

Also noteworthy that these expressions were not arrested/corrected by the Speaker nor remainers.

 

I have no stance on this issue as such, just conveying observations.

Edited January 16, 2019 by melvinmelvin
fix

[vogie]

12 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

yes right, but I think that they called the referendum on the basis of a green light statute enacted by the house

 

I listened / looked at the ramblings of the Westminster Zoo last night, very very interesting.

 

It has been debated, in the light of sovereign parliament, here on TVF whether the referendum was binding or not.

I noted last night that several MPs in their interventions expressed that

when parliament did the green light statute they, at the same, gave the ultimate decision power over to the people,

alas, cannot remember the exact wording but the semantics were quite clear.

 

Also noteworthy that these expressions were not arrested/corrected by the Speaker nor remainers.

 

I have no stance on this issue as such, just conveying observations.

And your observations are spot on, normally very neutral and unbiased, to which I for one thank you.

 

The remainers on here are already doing a lap of honour thinking they have won the cancelling of brexit. Infact all that is happening is we are even nearer to a 'No Deal'. If a deal hasn't been formalised or agreed to by the end of March, we simply leave. It is law we leave and Parliament can mince about as much as it likes trying thwart the leaving of the EU, but it will need a new law to be passed to alter this and the only person that can do this is the PM, and it would appear that Theresa May would not do this. 

[rixalex]

If the result of the 2016 referendum is democratically overturned, how is that not democratic?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Because there was a promise to implement the result.

The way democracy works is you have one vote, the winners get to see their decision enacted, and then you move on to the next democratic process. You would like to skip over the enacting part and go straight to another vote. Meaning that the vote prior was meaningless.

Ok. Fine. If you're happy to accept that. But then be prepared to accept that any new vote can also be skipped over. No need to enact it.

I'm guessing if you manage to win a vote you might not be so keen on this type of democracy.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[baboon]

1 minute ago, rixalex said:

Because there was a promise to implement the result.

Cameron should not have made promises that were not his to keep.

 

Not that I am particularly keen on another referendum either. It strikes me as a cop-out. What do we need parliament for, if we are left to sort out out what is in their 'Too difficult' tray?

[Chomper Higgot]

59 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

But there was a referendum in 2016. Which unfortunately for you, Leave won. You think it is democratic for Parliament to overturn the results of the biggest vote in UK history because they don't like the result?

 

Not to mention that the Conservatives were subsequently elected on a manifesto promise to Leave. You think it's democratic to break that promise?

 

It is anti-democratic to not accept losing the vote. You are abandoning any democratic principles you may have once had because you do not like the result of the democratic vote. 

This slur of yours:

 

”It is anti-democratic to not accept losing the vote.”

 

It implies ‘anti democratic’ on the basis that those who oppose Brexit and want another vote do not accept the first vote.

 

This is utter hogwash.

 

Losing a vote in no way precludes campaigning for a second vote, especially under the circumstances of the miserable failure Brexit is and the fact the electorate are now better informed.

 

People speaking up against what they don’t agree with, campaigning for what they want, these are at the heart of democracy.

 

The referendum did not bring the democratic process to a shuddering halt.

[metisdead]

Numerous off topic deflection posts and replies have been removed.  

 

This topic seems to have ran it's course as the following is the newest report about the Brexit vote:

 

 

 

This topic is now //Closed//