It’s past time for another Brexit referendum – but Theresa May is too scared to call it
This is the truth of the matter.
Brexit is a charade. The referendum was influenced by dodgy donations between Leave campaigns, partisan propaganda that drowned out the facts, and personality politics.
The more information we have, the more we know that the whole process should be stopped and re-examined.
But Theresa May will have none of it because she’s terrified of reprisals.
History will never forgive her – or David Cameron, for calling the referendum in a vain attempt to bring unity to his hopelessly divided rabble of a political party.
But that doesn’t help those of us who will have to live through the nightmare she is inflicting on us.
The mission of the Leavers to push through the self-destructive Brexit “to gain control of our country again” is akin to a parachutist cutting his cords to “gain control” of his descent.
It is time to abandon this folly immediately or at least give the now better-informed public the chance to vote again in another referendum in which its outcome is more decisive (“A 52-48 referendum would be unfinished business by a long way” – Nigel Farage, 16 May 2016).
Of course, the PM and her ministers will do neither. The reason: cold unadulterated fear.
I believe that the Government is presently more scared of upsetting the nasty element among the Brexiteers than it is of global warming, the resurgence of the far right or an attack.
The refusal to cancel Brexit or hold another referendum out of fear of increased hate crime or civil unrest is like a surreal Wild West movie in which the nervous town sheriff – Theresa “Water Pistol” May” – cowers under the mob rule of a band of local gunslingers whose leader has scarpered.
Toby T Brewster
Cardiff
Source: Theresa May is too frightened of the Brexiteers to act in the national interest
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Quite right
It is absolutely essential that Jeremy pushes for a new referendum as well!
The referendum was the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on a whole nation. It was gerrymandered, there were blatant lies and meaningless slogans and now, to cap it all, like the Tory Party itself, it is tainted by allegations of financial fraud and corruption.
I realise Brexit is a big fail, but don’t agree with having another referendum. The referendum was a part of the Democratic process and it should not be overturned because a) we don’t like the result or b) people were misinformed.
I think if they decide to have a change of heart on this it needs a different party to do it. A general election should take place if we don’t like how the Govt are mismanaging this. I don’t like the austerity the Tories are inflicting on people but I have to listen to their total idiocy because they were voted in and that is Democratic. A vote of no confidence first and then take steps to sort out the mess the Tories are doing to the country. If I don’t understand something, or don’t feel confident about voting I also have the right to abstain. Many did but the majority voted to leave. I was surprised by this outcome, but I don’t think trying again is going to resolve the issue as we are already on the way out. I think I am saying we need to respect the decision and vote against it before it’s finalised. I’d agree to a referendum on the how its done, but not on let’s start again to see if we can do a) or b) above.
I wanted to abide by the referendum decision at first, even though I didn’t agree with it.
I’m not advocating a new one because I don’t like the result. I am advocating it because people were misinformed. I wonder why you don’t think that’s a reasonable choice.
If we were misinformed, then the choice was based on lies. Are you seriously suggesting that people who extracted the result they wanted with falsehoods should have their way? Why?
Why should the dishonest win this debate? Where’s the justice in that? Where’s the democracy?
I notice you also say the Tories were voted in; they weren’t. They lost their majority in Parliament and had to bribe the DUP to support their horrible laws. That isn’t democratic; that’s cheating democracy – which is exactly what has happened with the referendum.
You’re absolutely right, Mike. It is totally unacceptable that while so many people are suffering because of austerity, the government are prepared to spend over 50 billion on an exit from the EU based on lies and distortions.
This seems a very strange request, to have new referendum, to continue demands for a change of heart, until some, get the answer that they want. The leave campaigners were undoubtedly fooled, by single issue’s of crooks that stood to gain or appease.
That however is not the point. That was democracy in action, that was the people speaking, albeit, that was also the people fooled. You can not reverse this decision, it may be moderated, it may be succeeded, but it can not be quashed.
To request another referendum undoubtedly represents the same selfish motives of those that initiated the vote. This decision of the peoples voice must stand, and these very same people must suffer the consequences of their ill informed choice if this country is to learn the lesson that some politicians are corrupt, selfish and prepared to sell the country down the river for a bag of silver.
When the common people start to take an interest in their future, and understand politics does not live on another planet, then they will truly be worthy of intelligently debating the countries destination. In the meantime, why would anyone expect a result that comes from reason.
Please don’t go spouting that said old Brextremist codswallop that those who want a new referendum only want it because they didn’t get the result they wanted last time. If the result at the EU referendum had been gained honestly, then there might have been something in that claim – but it is based on lies, so there isn’t.
Why can’t we reverse the decision? Why should the liars win? That’s not democracy, and it certainly isn’t justice. In justice, a decision that is found to be based on false information is extinguished immediately and a retrial ordered. Why not with a referendum?
Isn’t it more accurate to say that you don’t want a new referendum because you had the result you wanted and simply don’t want to lose it, in the face of the evidence and against reason? I think it is.
Although…
Tell you what – if a demand for a new referendum represents the same motives as were behind those who initiated the original vote, and we know that the vote was based on lies, then I’ve got a brilliant idea:
LET’S SIMPLY ANNUL THE RESULT OF THE REFERENDUM.
There’s no need for another vote if it’s annulled. We can simply remain in the EU and the liars behind the ‘leave’ majority will have been foiled.
Brilliant.
Much better than forcing the consequences of the ‘leave’ vote on the people who are most likely to be harmed by it – who AREN’T those who pushed the lies on us, of course.
Let’s do that.
Whoa, to allude that I’m a remainer is a distortion of what I wrote, though your entitled to infer what you want. Yes I’d go along with your annulment, based on an examination of the facts, but your romantic notion of attaining annulment on the basis of justice is flawed. Not because it isn’t deserved, but because it carries no weight with this government. Since when have the Tories or their followers recognized justice as a genre, their spelling of the word is e v a s i o n. This has more to do with the foolish choice of the British public who are so gullible and ill informed to the point of ignorance of the consequences of important decisions they make. Are you seriously trying to tell me that without experiencing these consequences the gullible will somehow wake up and smell the coffee, I doubt it. Shock & awe would serve better to dispel misplaced trust in the vanishing integrity of the Tories, why because most can’t be bothered to think beyond the diatribe, the same cause & effect unscrupulous politicians rely upon to get away with their actions. Go in any pub and mention a political issue to discover this ignorance yourself. You might view it as punishment of the innocent, but justice works both ways. If you were right, those crooks responsible for the lies would be brought to book, this government would be hauled from the house & replaced with politicians that can be trusted to have the welfare of the country at heart, rather than their wallets. If I’m right, they will walk away from their destruction and claim it’s someone else’s fault.
I didn’t allude that you were a remainer; quite the opposite.
I agree that the idea of an annulment on the basis of justice won’t get anywhere, for the reasons you state. They got the result they wanted; they’re going to run with it.
This may be unpopular but I wholeheartedly disagree. The whole of Parliament had the opportunity to put checks, balances, plans and all manner of other things into play when it passed the Bill that enabled the referendum to take place at all. It appears that it did not.
We, the people, were failed by BOTH campaigns and I wrote to them stating as much, at the time, and asked them to tell us what we NEEDED to know; they failed so, I had to do the work myself. To this day, I am still waiting for answers to questions that I put to M.P.s of many stripes.
Anybody who claims that they did not know what they were voting for should not have voted but that is their right.
To use the “divorce” analogy; you do not decide that you want to stay married, because you don’t like the settlement.
We were never given the opportunity to say whether, or not we wanted to join the E.U. so this referendum was the chance for those who believed that we should be in it to sell it to the public. They did not.
If Br’exit fails, it may be because it has been sabotaged but we will never know. Too many people have publicly undermined the process, because of their failure to accept the result, regardless of what they say. This is damaging. We have to be united in that. Aside from that, the biggest problem, as I see it, is the incompetence of the Government and its lack of ability to conduct negotiations.
We have not yet left the E.U. How many people, this long after the referendum, know any more about it – what it is, what is for, how it operates, what it does, what it is supposed to do – than at the time of the referendum? If this has not changed, on what basis should another referendum be called? We we asked whether or not we wanted to remain a part of the E.U. not whether we would not leave if things became a little awkward, or difficult, as they were bound to with any major transition, as we were told. These things are without our control but do nothing to address the reason why people wanted to stay, or not. My referendum decision has not changed, because the E.U. has not changed.
We were told by numerous Ministers, on both sides of the debate, that a vote to leave would mean leaving the Single Market and Customs Union yet our M.P.s still cannot agree on even that!
I contend that had Parliament united, after the referendum, to work out how to make the best of the decision, instead of trying to undermine, or reverse it, we would be in a much better position than we are at present. Unfortunately, the damage has already been done. I say, again, we have not left the E.U. yet and that is what we voted for.
Accuracy time: Most of those who did not previously have the chance to vote on EU membership voted to stay in. The ‘leave’ vote was strongly concentrated among older citizens.
You can’t say those who believed we should be in the EU didn’t sell it to the public because the difference between ‘stay’ and ‘leave’ votes were too narrow.
People who are currently claiming they did not know what they were supporting are only doing so because so much information has become available, since the vote, to show that ‘leave’ advocates lied to them.
Refusing to accept the result because of evidence that the result was based on lies isn’t undermining the process; it is pointing out that the process has already been undermined.
We do have to be united in knowing that the fact that unscrupulous creatures like Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage deliberately lied in order to get us to vote ‘leave’ – and backroom manipulators like Arron Banks used their money to ensure that those lies were accepted – is damaging. It undermines the democratic process.
How do you see the government – which is incompetent, I agree – conducting negotiations more successfully? We are not in a position to dictate any terms and the EU is. There is nothing to negotiate. The EU will tell us how it wants our departure to go and if we disagree, we’ll be out on our ear with no agreement, having fouled the air between us and our largest trading partners, in one of the harshest commercial environments the world has seen. In supporting a decision based on lies, you are condemning the UK to horrific hardship. Many millions are already living below the poverty line and your determination to support this foolishness will make it much, much worse. How many deaths do you think Brexit will demand?
I can’t tell you how many people know more about the EU and how it works. We all know that the referendum result is based on lies – the biggest being the one that was painted on the side of a bus. That was what convinced enough people to vote ‘leave’ that a majority was clinched. We know that line was a lie, and the people who voted on that basis have changed their minds as a result. Why are you so determined, so desperate, to deny them the chance to rectify their mistake?
Nobody wants to have another referendum because the process of leaving has become difficult – they want a referendum because the result of the original was based on lies. Please don’t push THAT lie again!
It doesn’t matter whether MPs should have united or not to make the best of the decision because the decision is based on lies. It is the lies that have undermined us, not the choice of the people to call out those lies. We could not be in a better position than at present because there is no better position for us to occupy, if we go ahead with Brexit.
I say again: We know, now, what Brexit means. We know, now, that Brexit’s advocates lied to us. We know, now, that the result of those lies will be horrific hardship and misery for the people of the UK. We know, now, that the referendum wa corrupted. And that is why we know, now, that we need to run another referendum, to get a result based on the facts that will affect us all, and not on the misguided greed of the few.
Firstly, none of us had the chance to vote on joining the E.U. That decision was made for us in the Treaty Of Maastricht so, it matters not how old the voters were, NOBODY was given that choice. We were supposed to have a referendum but were denied, when the treaty Of £isbon came into being.
I studied the referendum debates intensely and wrote to both Campaigns, several M.P.s and Ministers, the Minister For Europe, among them. Just because the vote was narrow, it does not mean that the E.U. was sold to us; it was not. The Remain campaign concentrated on what terrible things MIGHT happen if we left, rather than on the E.U. itself and why we should have joined it in the first place, had we been given that choice.
As I said, there were inaccuracies on BOTH sides. I did not make my decision based on lies. The question on the ballot paper was, should we remain a part of the European Union, or should we leave it. That was the question. People made up their minds based on a multitude of things. Some people, I’m sure, just voted. As I said, people who didn’t know what they were voting for should not have voted but that is their right.
We don’t know what Br’exit means, because it hasn’t happened yet. We know what this situation is, that is all.
You cannot deny that the whole situation has been undermined by the behaviour of certain persons. How different things might have been, we shall and can never know but I am certain that things would have been different.
I said that what I wrote would not be popular but like a court case, unless something pertinent to the question has changed, there is no cause for another referendum.
Only government can decide how money is spent. The £eave Campaign was not government (and Nigel Farage was not part of it). Both Campaigns were appalling.
I also said that the whole of Parliament, both the Commons and the £ords, could and should have put safeguards in place when they passed the Bill that enabled the referendum in the first place. Why did they not? Because nobody thought that people might not like the E.U. and want to leave it? That there was no plan is the fault of the whole of Parliament and shows a gross contempt for the electorate.
If the people know no more about the E.U. than they did at the time of the last referendum, what is the point in another? People will still be voting based on ignorance; this is my point so, please, do not accuse me of spreading lies. I spent a great deal of time educating myself, before the referendum, because the decision was too important for me not to know what I was voting for. I have copies of all of the E.U. treaties and their amendments.
If another referendum is to be called, Parliament must do its job, properly and make sure that the Campaigns are accountable, put into law what their remits and responsibilities are, the timetable must be adhered to (the referendum was supposed to be held this year), the electorate must be given all pertinent information, if not, the question must be changèd. These things take time and money so, where would that leave us?
Something pertinent to the question HAS changed, so there is cause – at the very least – to void the result of the last referendum.
If you blame Parliament for the terrible way in which the referendum was set up and run, then why are you trusting the same people to take us through Brexit?
As I have mentioned before, I have no problem with not having another referendum; I just disagree with any and all claims that we should respect the result of the referendum that we had.
Give it a rest. Keep having another vote till you get the result you want? In that case, with all the blatant lies from all politicians, every General Election for the last 50 years should have been re-run.
Nobody is suggesting we keep having a vote until some of us get the result we want – I’m surprised at you for pushing that lie.
The facts show that the EU referendum was corrupted, for the reasons I have explained. We now know that leaving the EU will have a devastating effect on the people of the United Kingdom, that those who advocated this choice lied to us, and that the information offered to us was not properly checked for factual accuracy. Huge numbers of us are angry at having been misled and would welcome the opportunity to rectify this monumental mistake before it becomes a national disaster.
But, you know, if you want to let that happen for the sake of a snidey soundbite, go ahead.
If Teresa May says there will be no Brexit, then she will face a leadership challenge from the Brexiteers. If she has a hard Brexit, the Northern Ireland Unionists won’t support her and she has no majority in Parliament. And on top of that, if a hard Brexit damages the UK economy she will get voted out. If she has a weak Brexit, the Brexiteers will make her face a leadership challenge. Whatever she does it will end badly for her.
The people, and the writers above who disagree with Mike, must first of all accept that the ‘leave’ case propaganda was based on lies. Once this is accepted then the vote should be seen as a false result. Together with this the existing government do not have the expertise to ensure the negotiations with the E C produce anything but future disasters for the working class of this county.
Let the people have another say – this time with the facts presented truthfully. Harvey Lloyd
I’ll repeat. All politicians lie. If the Eu stayed as it was, I would have voted remain. But it won’t ! It’s a steamroller set on a course by a few fanatics who push the agenda to have a unified European state. Fine if you want that but many don’t.
By the way,, how are the plans for the EU army coming along? Mind you they said that wouldn’t happen!
Further to what Mike said….
“Accuracy time: Most of those who did not previously have the chance to vote on EU membership voted to stay in. The ‘leave’ vote was strongly concentrated among older citizens”.
That isn’t true. No one has had a vote on EU membership until recently. The EU wasn’t formed till 1993 and there was no vote at that time. I voted yes to remain in the European community in 1975.
I’m probably more pro European than most, it’s just that I think the EU has turned into a bad idea. Many other Europeans think that as well.
Even taking your claim that the EU is being steered towards becoming a unified European state by “a few fanatics”, the only way to stop that would be to stay in and influence it from within.
There are NO plans for an EU army.
I understand your quibble about people voting on EU membership. Still, people have voted on our membership of a European community and in the 2016 referendum, most of those who did not previously have a chance to vote, voted to stay in.
No doubt you are right that many Europeans think the EU is a bad idea. How many? Let’s see your figures and the evidence supporting them.
Thank you Harvey Lloyd, for a calm, reasonable response. The previous referendum was undermined by lies and manipulation. Now that we know the damage that will be caused, for no real gain, we need to vote again.
Your strawman is showing. You blame the result on lies and assume that those lies had an effect on the votes of the plebs. The bus wasn’t a lie because it just asked a question. Those of us with a brain knew that 350 million was never going to be spent on the NHS or any other public service, but hey, it gave you remainers something to latch onto. The vast majority of people that I know voted to leave because the institution as a whole is corrupt and undemocratic. It has always failed the test set out by Tony Benn and his five questions and your undemocratic calls for a re-run basically back up that assertion that the EU and its supporters wouldn’t know democracy if it stood up in their soup. Even if it was accepted that the vote was won on the back of lies then it still has no real bearing on the matter because we were lied to about joining in the first place….whatever did happen to just a trading bloc? Oh that’s right….it never was going to be just that, but that was mentioned by absolutely no one at the time….
Oh yeah, one more thing. If the only reason to remain is because of what the EU will try and do to this country financially over leaving or what big business will do to try and punish us, then it just shows that this is not a club that any morally decent person would want to belong to and it also highlights the moral cowardice of those that would put money ahead of the opportunity to get out from under the yoke of unelected bureaucrats that presently control the EU.
A “straw man” argument is one that intentionally misrepresents someone else’s position because it is easier to defeat than their actual position. That is not what I was doing.
Yes – lies definitely had an effect on the referendum vote. The bus didn’t ask any questions but definitely did lie. It stated: “We send the EU £350 million a week.” That was a lie – we don’t and never have. The next line was “Let’s fund the NHS instead.” That is not a question – it is another statement. “Let us fund the NHS instead.” It was an appeal to voters; a claim that money saved by not funding the EU would be diverted to the NHS if people voted to leave the European Union. It was a false claim, as only government can fund the NHS – not a referendum campaign organisation. So the appeal to “let us” do anything is a lie – ‘Vote Leave’ was not in a position to be allowed to fund the NHS by anyone. So the message on the bus was a lie. We have evidence that people voted to leave the EU, based on that message; that information is public knowledge so I do hope that you won’t quibble about it.
I’m perfectly happy not to re-run the referendum. We should simply declare the original referendum void as the public were systematically misinformed. A decision based on lies is a bad decision. That’s what the referendum decision is. It is not acceptable as the basis of a major change for the United Kingdom.
You are lying when you say the EU’s existence as more than just a trading bloc was “mentioned by absolutely no one at the time”; it was.
And you are lying when you say the only reason to remain is “what the EU will try and do to this country”. Already the economy is suffering, and not because of anything the EU has done. Businesses are leaving of their own accord, and currency speculators are similarly driving the value of the pound into the dirt of their own accord. They’re not doing it to punish us; they’re doing it because it is the logical decision that makes good business sense.
If you want to discuss whether we want to belong to the EU or be ruled solely by Tories, consider the Conservatives’ current plan to use Brexit to strip us of our rights at work (human rights will no doubt follow). No morally decent person could say that was acceptable – but it is what you are implying.
One last thing: There are no unelected bureaucrats controlling the EU. That is another lie.
For someone who claims I was wrong to mention lies, you certainly have come out with a lot of your own!
Well it hasn’t been 44 years so it is no where near time for a third referendum. The people who want one don’t accept that the whole project fear remain campaign was based on lies deception and misdirection which in bodies like the bbc has continued after the result.
Okay, no new referendum then. As the referendum we had last year is based on false information and both rich organisations and foreign powers seem to have interfered with the results (the last two are yet to be confirmed, I know), let’s just annul its result and carry on as if it never happened.
Your capacity to deny the evidence showing what the Brexit decision is doing to the UK, let alone what actually leaving the EU will do, is impressive – but in the wrong way.