Brexit means total chaos. With just over 100 days until the UK is due to leave the European Union, British Prime Minister Theresa May now faces a no-confidence vote in her own party after 48 Tory MPs sent letters signalling they no longer support her as leader.

The leadership challenge caps a gruelling few days for the Prime Minister. Faced with the prospect of a humiliating defeat, May had postponed a vote in Parliament on her draft deal with the European Union. EU leaders are adamant that the agreed text is final and cannot be renegotiated (though they may be open to minor ‘clarifications’).

May argues that hers is the best deal Britain can get. However, her proposed agreement has come under fierce attack from all quarters, including from May’s allies in the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), who have threatened to withdraw their support for the government if the deal goes ahead.

The opposition Labour party scents blood, and hopes they can use the chaos to collapse the government and force a general election. Yet even some critics of Theresa May worry that a combination of stark parliamentary arithmetic and the strictures of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act mean political paralysis is the most likely outcome; there doesn’t seem to be a majority for anything. If Theresa May survives, then the Conservative party cannot hold another leadership challenge for a year.

How long can Prime Minister May keep kicking the can down the road? At some point the road surely ends, as the default outcome (assuming no other plan is passed) is a ‘no deal’ Brexit. Is there a way to break the deadlock and reach agreement?

All this and Brexit hasn’t even started yet; we’re still only discussing the divorce deal and the so-called ‘backstop’. The real Brexit negotiations won’t start until after 29 March 2019, when the UK has (in theory) formally left the European Union. Most ordinary people are probably bored stiff of Brexit by this point, but we could still be talking about it for years to come.

Against the backdrop of political chaos, support is apparently growing for a so-called ‘People’s Vote’. Proponents argue that the only way to resolve things is to go back to the people by calling a second referendum on Brexit. They argue that the 2016 referendum was a simple ‘Yes’ / ‘No’ vote, and nobody knew what Brexit would actually look like in practice. Now we’ve all got a better idea (in the form of Theresa May’s proposed deal) supporters argue the people should be given a vote.

Critics of a second referendum argue it would make a mockery of democracy. The British people have already made their minds up to leave, so asking them again and again until they give the “right answer” is fundamentally undemocratic. Even some of those who supported Remain in 2016 worry that another referendum won’t resolve things if it results in a narrow defeat for one side or another, and will just intensify divisions and political paralysis.

Should there be a second Brexit referendum? Is it time for a ‘People’s Vote’? Or would holding another vote be an affront to democracy? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!

IMAGE CREDITS: (c) BigStock – Alex Rotenberg

90 comments Post a commentcomment

What do YOU think?

  1. avatar
    Chris Jones

    Yes people need to have their say

    • avatar
      catherine benning

      @Chris Jones

      People had their say, not once but three times, and each time it has been ignored. It will be ignored again if it doesn’t suit the questioner. And that will not happen. It is stronger now than ever.

      What you are asking us to do is not democracy of British knowledge of it. This is Zimbabwe style manipulation. And tell me this, would you be calling for another vote had it been ‘remain’ the first time? We all new very well what we were voting for.

      And his acceptance of the will of the British people.

      You and your kind of thinking bring the UK to third world practice. And it is imperative we do not stoop that low.

    • avatar


    • avatar

      As a Swiss who practices Direct Democracy as a matter of fact I must tell you that they already had their say. It’s not like Britain just woke up one day and left, they had been complaining about all kinds of things for over 10 years. Complaining about Romas, then the Polish, then funding the EU etc. etc. Nigel Farage made the case for Brexit for over 20 Years. Britain was a EU Member and saw the good and bad, benefitted greatly from that membership and still there could be a majority for Brexit. How is this possible?
      This idea of you say let’s vote and then when you don’t get what you want the people should vote again until they get it right is anti democratic. If the Brits had voted to remain and even one person said let’s vote again that person would have faced the most vicious insults and attacks. I can see it now Big Headlines ”Nigel Farage sore loser, wants another Brexit vote.” or ”Anto Democratic Brexiteers lost election, want another go”. Some decisions are forever. And what makes you so sure you would win such a second vote anyways, you totally underestimate the Brexit emotions in Britain.

  2. avatar

    I don’t like brexit. I think the only thing it has and will cause is instability. But I believe that a second referendum would be undemocratic. It’s kind of like saying we don’t like your opinion so do it again. Then again when brexit was first proposed the public was lied to and didn’t know the repercussions of brexit.
    but I still believe that the best thing the english government could do is go through with brexit.

    • avatar

      Sadly the 2016 referendum was very undemocratic, I’ll thought out and full of lies and corruption, many people were denied a vote

    • avatar
      Paul X


      “Sadly the 2016 referendum was very undemocratic, I’ll thought out and full of lies and corruption, many people were denied a vote”

      Yes lies on both sides….. but who exactly are the “many people” who were denied a vote?

  3. avatar
    Noelle Grammelis

    Yes! Now more than ever, why would a second referendum be antidemocratic, can’t people change their mind? especially if they voted without being aware of the true consequences of Brexit, a second referendum would either confirm the vote or reflect a change of opinion, refusing a second referendum after we know what deal we are getting would be antidemocratic in my mind.

    • avatar

      I totally agree. It was nearly 3 years ago and now we understand more. It’s so different now. Also many people’s votes were formed because they believed the hype and lies that have since been admitted to. I don’t understand what brexit is now offering in way of benefits.

  4. avatar

    According to Soros – yes.
    Are you part of his propaganda, and why is this EU matter, when this is strictly UK’s?

    • avatar

      there is nothing x ( x = any specific group like nations) only. it is not us vs them, it’s we only. and your opinion?

    • avatar

      Oh for God’s sake: hitting on Soros is just today’s version of the pathetic “Reds under the Bed” scare in the fifties. Grow up.

    • avatar

      Sadly you don’t know how EU works, go do some research

    • avatar

      My car stopped working this morning. It was Soros fault

    • avatar

      Pete, Fabio, If Soros were a Russian oligarch, would you have been saying the same thing? I bet not.
      Unlike the “russians under the bed”, this one is real, and is spending a lot of money, to interfere and affect EU nations politics.
      And yes Mizelli, “nations” have their own identity, we all do, and we are all different, and yet we are all tolerant, but not toward intolerant religions.
      Asking such questions border on “Should EU be tyrannical and end democracy?” – maybe that will be your next question for debate?

    • avatar

      If you are ok with Soros manipulating politics, are you also ok with corporations doing it too?

    • avatar

      George – I have been in Brussels. Horrible place. We need the UK too be there. The EPP needs the tories. The S&D needs Labour. We need Farage too keep people on their toes.

      It IS our business. The best team member is leaving.

      The UK has been an integral part in the EU not collapsing. Has it made mistakes? Ofc. We all have.

      But we need your help. We need too stop Soros and ALDE. I completely agree.

      But we wont manage without the UK.

  5. avatar
    De Coster

    Yes whenever initial referendum was made on false statements and unknown or unevaluated consequencies for the UK and the Citizens the actual agreed UK/EU brexit deal should provide some additionnel delay in order to provide UK a second referendum with 2 alternatives Remain or Brexit on known deal

  6. avatar
    Pete R

    The EU Referendum allowed the people to decide between Leave and Remain. Another referendum would allow everyone to decide which ‘deal’ they want from those available to our country … no-deal, May’s deal, the Norwegian-plus deal, the Canada-plus deal, the original EU deal or any other deal that MPs can realistically offer. This is a completely different democratic choice from the one we had in June 2016 and thus it would be totally false for anyone to claim this is a “second Brexit Referendum”. It would be a “Which Deal Referendum”. In every way; this would be the people’s first opportunity to choose the actual deal they want and their first opportunity to accurately assess what the real impact of each practical deal will have on them, their family and their future.

    In the UK we chose a new government every five years. Just because we had a vote on our choice of government two-and-a-half years ago doesn’t mean we cannot have one tomorrow or every again. In a democracy there are no limits on people’s right to vote as many times as they like on all options. Placing restrictions on people’s right to vote and the selections available to them is nothing less than a denial of democracy … and I am amazed that anyone would want to choose to deny themselves the right to a democratic vote on a decision that could change their future so dramatically. To leave the choice entirely to politicians who we constantly complain do not listen to us is illogical … unless, that is, you were actually afraid of democracy.

    • avatar


  7. avatar

    Yes. And people should be informed on the real costs of the brexit and if 66% of the voters vote for remain it should be immediately stopped the process.

    • avatar

      João – do you think a decision like this should have been taken by just 50% +1? This is a decision to affect the next generations and not a short term decision that you can change in a couple of years. This was a mess from the start. People were not truly informed on how things would be outside of EU and the cost of this decision. I said 66% and not 50%+1 because it would be a more strong decision. This should had been the rule to make the referendum definitive. Don’t forget that Scotland, Northern Ireland, Gibraltar and London voted 60% or more on the remain.

    • avatar

      João – The problem is: A lot of peoples votes were biased by fake information created by the brexiters that surprisingly enough, aren’t showing their faces nowadays. Some people only realised that now that the negotiations are over.

    • avatar

      Make them vote again and again until they get the right vote right? Democracy!

    • avatar

      Ariano – what is your point? That is how such a national referendum works?
      It is the job of the f****** government to decide on such a strategic thing, goddamit!

    • avatar
      Paul X

      ” And people should be informed on the real costs of the brexit and if 66% of the voters vote for remain it should be immediately stopped the process”

      Likewise the people should also be informed of the true cost/benefit of remaining in

  8. avatar
    T Farquhar

    People were not fully informed about the EVIL of the EU and its EVIL underhand influence and pro-EU influencers, RE:

    It’s lack of democracy, its unaccountability, its ‘strange’ un-audited finances, its CAP and CFP that have starved millions and millions of Africans and stultified numerous African farmers, its biased ECJ populated by pro-EU zealots identified via biased EU job interviews.

    The UK government broke the Venice Commission rules/guidelines regarding supplying a Pro-Remain pamphlet i.e. partisan to every UK household prior to the people’s referendum.

    The UK govt and the BBC itself have identified that the BBC was and is biased against Brexit.

    All bar 2 of the UK newspapers were pro-Brexit.

    Numerous pro-EU and often EU-funded academics presented hyper-favourable pro-EU statistics in the run-up to the referendum – the most noticeable being the much-criticised Christian Dustmann.

    Please get better informed before venting your spleen.

  9. avatar
    Ray Hughes

    Most definitely need a vote on the deal. Any TU leader would bring back an offer from employees and put it to the members. We are the members of the country!

  10. avatar

    The 2016 referendum was an affront to democracy, when some of those most affected by it were denied a vote, that’s before all the lying cheating and outside interference that went on, which Theresa May won’t even acknowledge, so yes there should definitely be a people’s vote now or even better revoke A50

  11. avatar
    van der Geest Koen

    I don’t understand that Brexit, a huge political decision, was agreed on 51 %. For the same money tomorrow you could have 51 % for the remainers. So 51 % was not enough to start Brexit procedure. I see only one solution, UK stays in EU…

  12. avatar
    Iacopo Quaglieri

    People should not be allowed to vote for such things. Do you remember the day of the vote? They voted and than went to home to look on Google “what is European Union?”. People should decide just on the themes that they can understand…soccer, gossip, food etc.

  13. avatar
    catherine benning

    Ariano December 12th, 2018

    Do you think the Swiss are asked, in their regular Direct Democracy form of government and voting process, to repeat the vote every time their parliament is not happy about the decision of their people?

    Lies by politicians are indeed a big and faulty problem that should lead to criminal law proceedings. However, lies were told on both sides and the bigger issues on the side of Remain. Had the Remain been honest the Leave vote would have been 80%. British rule by our sovereign government is imperative to Democracy and the citizen of the UK.The EU is not a democratic administration. Look at the simple solution to Merkal leaving office. She is not leaving any office at all, simply changing the name of the office she presently has. The same two women running that show, along with their back room, are exactly the same people they have had for 13 years. Just playing musical chairs after a vote to rid them of the face card they have today.

    What you are missing is, both houses in our Parliament have decided that Democracy and the rule of our law, no longer has to be adhered to. They collectively do not want Brexit. They are being paid a great deal of European tax payers money to stay within their rule. So they connived from day one to overrule our peoples decision. And it has been a conspiracy of utter deceit.

    Had our present day simpletons, who call themselves MP’s, been ‘honest,’ as this man was, and told it as it is today, only foreign residents in our country, akin to the Ugandan born woman who took the British voter to court in order to deny their voice a hearing, have ticked remain. And this is the reason.

    This man evokes Tony Benn today.

    Here is who stands against the people of the UK’s right to democracy ‘British style.’ In fact she wants Britain to be ruled by alien judges, to the point she would use her ‘own’ money to do so.’ She is speaking to one of our MEP’s.

  14. avatar
    catherine benning

    Should there be a second Brexit referendum?

    The EU has just signed a comprehensive free trade deal with Japan. Japan will remain an independent country, have its own laws and control its own budgets – it will not pay the EU a penny and not be subject to the European court. If the EU can sign such a deal with Japan, why not with us? Why cannot our incompetent Parliament get us a similar deal with the EU?

  15. avatar
    Krzys Robak

    Well. Second referendum is like another election. After 4 years we choose new Parliament. That’s the law. We choose different party because we changed our mind. Same with early election.. No one has problem with it.
    Also, 2 years ago the Tories have chosen Theresa May to be their leader. 2 years later they decided to vote if they still want her. Still, no problem with democracy.

    So why people call it affront to democracy, that people would have another referendum when they know more facts.
    What are the brexiteers afraid of? And why they use double standards?

  16. avatar

    I see some of you only believe in Democracy when things go your way yes. How democratic of you.

  17. avatar

    This second referendum campaign is only being pushed by people who didn’t like the result of the first vote.
    If they are successful in this what’s to stop the Croatian football association from demanding a re-run of the world cup final because they didn’t like how the first match turned out.

  18. avatar

    why not a referendum for a second referendum ?

  19. avatar

    Well the first was a scam, people voted for unicorns and free candy .. and they got what? Best slaughterhouse deal in town, either that or jump of a cliff? They voted for a bunch of lies! A greedy political agenda with no plan and none having a clue! And that was the betrayal of people’s trust!
    People need a second vote, on the real pros and cons and timelines of such a major move, as this move will impact on generations.

  20. avatar

    Switzerland is not in the EU and we still HAVE to do what the EU sais! This is what not even T. May understands, let alone the Parliament or the Brits generally!

  21. avatar

    How many referendums are going to be held in succession about the same subject? Two? Three? Four? Maybe one a year?

  22. avatar

    It must deeply modify economics, policy and judgement all over European Union : this is the way!”, I believe we aught to arouse with any doubt, albeit it’s hard to realise and achieve…

  23. avatar

    Why not, democracy means you can change your mind.

    • avatar

      Jack – yes but not now.

  24. avatar

    Lets wait some time until enough Brits will have enough of this spectacle.

  25. avatar

    Will you continue doing referendum until the result is the one that EU likes

    • avatar

      Alfredo – So, according to your mentality, Berlisconi or May must reign forever because people chosen them “eternally”.

    • avatar

      Serdar – Sorry, but you totally missed my point

  26. avatar

    The term Brexit is fundamentally wrong. This is an Englishexit. Consider Scotland’s and N. Ireland’s votes.

  27. avatar

    No!! Brexit means Brexit! Judging by how little respect UK politicians have for Europe, Europe is better off with UK outside the Union

  28. avatar

    Yes. To destroy the future of the young generation is the betrayal of democracy. They and England don’t deserve treason.

  29. avatar

    Cangemi I hope in a second referendum to choose European Union or definitively brexit.

  30. avatar

    why not? The populism with which the British are manipulated makes a new referendum necessary, it is democratic, right?

  31. avatar

    Why are we EU citizens having an opinion? This is a purely British issue.

    They wanted out and voted so under false info? Then maybe they should consider a purge and cleanse of their public representatives. After all, Brexit was all about…taking back control. Real control.

    And yet – the Brits are still under the same illusion that they’re making the decisions here, when higher powers and more greedy backbenchers are behind all this chaos… In the end, who’s deciding for who?

    The damage is done, to the UK, to the EU. They’ve had the best part of 2 years to decide… And they want to change now??? Oh, come on! We all know this was a farse from the beginning.

    But enough is enough now. See it through. End it. And when you’re out and all those “dirty things” in Parliament and the Gov’t are flushed out, and the Brits are informed of the true scale of Brexit… And they decide to rejoin the EU, perhaps we’ll be ready to welcome you…

  32. avatar

    No. Enough is enough. Thank you very much. Nice meeting you. Good bye and wish you all the best.

  33. avatar
    catherine benning


    I am very interested in the Swiss form of Direct Democracy as I want my country, the UK, to adopt that process for our government. I have read much and researched, but, hardly ever find a viewpoint from a Swiss resident.

    Does your government, when they receive a referendum vote decision they don’t want, do what the British parliament has done on Brexit? Do they deny or want to deny the public vote decision? Are you asked to vote again, the way they did in Ireland, or, Holland, etc?

    It was interesting to read that as a satellite of the EU you still are dominated by their EU laws. How is that? Is it back to the Globalist demands. That old friend, The New World Order?

  34. avatar

    I do not believe there should be a second referendum about the same case. The citizen’s had the chance to vote and the outcomes were clear. Yet, I do believe that the UK needs another referendum about the next decision that the UK government is going to take; the agreement with the European Union.

  35. avatar
    EU Reform- Proactive

    Should there? Why & what should the REAL argument & reasons be? Let’s be fair:

    The original sovereign UK EEC membership referendum (to join) took place on 5 June 1975= 43 years ago. One has to concede, this was in accordance with UN, European & UK accepted democratic principles.

    It is on record that “material” additions to the original EEC’s treaty and “substantial” deviations and transformations occurred while morphing the EEC into the political, social & monetary Euro & Schengen zones- called EU. This was achieved- “step by step”= stealth by the EU Council & Commission over time- without “explicit consent” by its member parliaments and/ or its voters!

    BTW, “National Presidents” (meeting ~4 times/year in the EC) usually have only a representative function at home- no executive power!

    I can’t help but to view this as a deliberate “democratic oversight” and failure by all National governments with the complicit and tacit support by EU planners.

    In retrospect, it was a questionable & undemocratic process- to haunt the EU and all its Members in future. Some nations are demanding a correction! What’s wrong with that?

    The original choice by the UK to join the EEC in 1975 was never “democratically” questioned. Why is a similar process and its outcome to “leave” in 2016 suddenly undemocratic- even seen fraudulent? Double standards?

    Why is the “EU & Friends” so quick & persistent to label the change of heart by UK voters- after 41 years of loyal EEC & EU membership to LEAVE- as undemocratic, Brexit= total chaos, as kicking the “can”? down the road, a mockery of democracy” and more libelous accusations?

    One can’t overlook the hypocrisy how the EU & Friends are suddenly portraying themselves (falsely) as the champion of a sovereign’s “People’s Vote”- while making it impossible to ever have a meaningful referendum once in the EU= total capture!

    The unbending position (“because the supranational treaties & EU law say so”) by the EU bureaucrats is becoming counter productive. It is causing more political and social divisions, while increasing economic uncertainty all round.

    Instead- the “CoE” should take leadership and be concentrating its European human capital & technical capabilities on building a winning modern “European Economic Super Power” (“EESP”) NOT a bureaucratic and regulatory super monster- called USE at all costs- and rather based on:

    adopting the original EEC principles with the attainment of everyone’s sovereignty- and the eventual inclusion of all 800 mio CoE citizens! Not a select, shrinking, aging & foreign EU of ~420 mio- being paralyzed & stuck in endless bickering & controversy!

    Surely, such a compromise is/must be possible?

  36. avatar
    Paul X

    I think most would agree the whole Brexit affair has turned into a disaster, and the fault lies 100% with incompetent UK politicians and intransigent EU ones

    Unfortunately there is a naive segment of the UK populace that think a second referendum, with what will most likely be a remain result, is the answer to everything

    Well if anyone thinks that a second referendum remain vote will “put the matter to bed” and that two years of anmosity and at times, pure hatred, will simply be consigned to history, then they really haven’t got a clue

    • avatar

      “I think most would agree the whole Brexit affair has turned into a disaster, and the fault lies 100% with incompetent UK politicians and intransigent EU ones”

      I don’t see any other reason for the Brexit disaster other than Brexit itself and the fact that it is an impossible thing. The EU politicians have no more obligation to negotiate with the UK than they have to negotiate with any random party. But that is of course out of the question for a Brextard to admit after 2 years of living in Lalaland. Supposedly, the EU has more to lose from Brexit. Well, the facts have shown that it hasn’t… Admit that you were wrong and get on with it. The average voter is incapable of deciding on such matters and the whole referendum was a bad idea in the first place.

  37. avatar

    When the US military has put big power competition before anti-terrorism, when the US is withdrawing from the international order which it has built since World War II, when the US is starting a trade war in a global scale indiscriminately, we can see this is a moment of great instability. As we have all seen that the US big power competition is not a peaceful competition. It is so fierce that the outbreak of a big war is very likely. This is a moment collective security is required. BREXIT would render the UK very vulnerable. No sensible leader would be putting the country in such a risk. When at the international level, insecurity and uncertainly grow, calling for a second referendum is totally a very rational the reaction. BREXIT has passed its best moment. Everything has changed in the past 2 years. A responsible government should give the people a second referendum.

  38. avatar

    If EU’s bureaucratic is counter productive. Can the British people say that UK bureaucrats are very productive and better than that of the EU’s? I believe that efficiency is the pursuance of all government including the EU system. Why EU’s bureaucrats are counter-productive, it is probably due to the resistance by member states on grounds of domestic politics and the so-called sovereignty. What is sovereignty in this global era when terrorism, environmental degradation, deterioration of the ecosystem, refugees, money laundry, drug and human trafficking are all transnational in nature? The concept of sovereignty as perceived in the Westphalian Peace Treaty is too old to handle issue of the 21th century. Concept and mind need to change according to time and space. People celebrate the end of the Cold War and believe that liberal democracy becomes the only viable system for the human world. As we have seen that we are in a multi-polar system with the coexisting of all sorts of democracies, socialism and Islamism…. Political systems, states and people can come to an end but not history, as long as human exist. To overcome the anxiety of a changing era, we better open our mind for new things and particularly a new form of governments and transnational, regional and international co-operations. More importantly, to see things globally rather than nationally, otherwise, we would return to populism and old power politics. We cannot afford a third world war for the proliferation of weapon of mass destruction is already a fact.

  39. avatar

    If Trump repeatedly welcomes Brexit, which definitely means Brexit would benefit the US. Why? It is because the US long-term strategy is “divide and rule” or “hub and spoke”. A united Europe means the US cannot spine Europe around as it wants. It is just simple logic that the UK would like to be spinning around by the US. It is only with collective strength small European states can have more bargaining power against more powerful states such as the US, Russia, and China.

    • avatar
      catherine benning

      @ jthk

      I think Trump is only interested in Brexit, in and of itself, simply because he was asked and he, against the politically correct season of goodwill, felt the British people had voted and that Democracy, as we know it, should prevail. He personally could care less one way or another, but, as the US and the UK are selling the idealistic solution for a ‘Democratic New World Order,’ looks ridiculous when they refuse to acknowledge the peoples vote in their own society. How can you sell a line to all and sundry, when you deny its existence at home?

      I will give Macron one tick, and that is, he knows the French people and knows full well they would vote to be out of the EU. He admits he is leading his people against their wishes, further into a Globalist future of poverty they don’t want and he says so. The British government, on the other hand, deny the will and even the knowledge of what the British people want and voted for.

      Out Parliament is full of ‘chosen by their party Globalist drones’ who blatantly go against the wishes of their constituents. Those who voted them into office as representatives of their collective wishes. Not for them to use being an elected MP in order to represent their personal, hidden, agenda.

      What is horrendous is, that in full view of the world, British Parliament is shown to be so out of touch with those they rule over, felt it would be a win for the remain vote at the onset. And more importantly, still believe the public will vote for remain should they set up a second go at it. That tells you it must be a planned and rigged vote. As, no one in their right mind, other than school teachers who have indoctrinated the young since birth, or, indeed anyone at all who is in touch with the British, know full well they have ‘never’ been happy as part of the EEC/EU. That is those British who are in the majority, the ones who live outside of London, Birmingham and Bradford.

      And as far as the US being unable to spin Europe around in its own image, are you serious? What do you think they have been doing since WWII? The Marshall Plan? Why do you think the European people were so pro Obama? Followed by the Clinton freaks. With their musical chairs played between the two of them, still worshipped by blinded Globalist followers within that European bureaucracy. Globalism and political correctness are one and the same. It is a method of supreme rule and dominance. It removes any shred of Democracy, or, the will of the people. It negates Magna Carta, which was the first step to rule by the will of the citizen and not by an overlord.

      Here is a simplified version of Magna Carta. One of the central documents giving ‘rights’ and ‘freedoms’ to people in the middle ages.

    • avatar

      If regular change of office is the essence of democracy, I do not see why a second referendum is not democratic. Regular election and change of office is an important mechanism to cope with the changing the social, political and economic environment. When the global political economy has changed drastically and the British economic growth is heading towards a down turn. A second referendum is not an affront to democracy. Voice of the 12 million who have for whatever reason not casting their vote need to be heard particularly when the first referendum has just passed by a narrow majority.

  40. avatar
    Paul X

    Oh the irony of people who refuse to accept the result of a referendum, demanding another referendum…..

    • avatar
      catherine benning

      @ jthk

      This is a strange logic when the first Referendum has not been adhered to. Why would a second referendum help? If, time after time idiots feel it is fine to discard what the public want in a vote, unless, of course, they choose to put their cross where the defiers would like it to be.

      Once the first referendum has been put into practice and people see how that works for them and the choice then is to call another, asking if they want to change their mind, as it is not working out the way it was felt it would, by the majority, then go ahead. But, you cannot ignore what is offered first time, as, that negates any vote thereafter. Do you really feel the Leave voters will allow another agenda to take place prior to the original result being put into practice? You are a dreamer if you believe that.

      More, what you are asking will take us from Democratic rule to a despotic rule. And this, you think, sounds good for the advancement of human evolution? This is the reason the citizens of the UK, after we are out of the EU, must rid Parliament of those who feel as you. For, they are willing, once elected under false pretences, to go against the democratic will of the people by ignoring their wishes and lead us into open tyranny.

    • avatar

      They’re asking for a referendum on the final deal and not on the original question. Difficult for a Brextard to admit that the realities of life have contradicted what was initially sold to people in order to get the initial result…

  41. avatar

    So pathetic when people say “my country” as if it is their personal property and they inherited it from someone, or perhaps they have been in charge of running it since its founding.

  42. avatar
    Alex Black

    There is a saying .. ASSUMPTION IS THE MOTHER OF A ****UP !
    I am one of the 13 million who did not vote. Like Cameron I thought it a foregone conclusion the result would be Remain, no way on earth would people be stupid enough to vote Leave. The reason the Leave campaign are terrified of a second referendum, is because they know the vast majority of the 13 million abstainers and people like myself who made a disasterous assumption are now desperate to vote Remain.
    Beats me why the pro Remain commentators/interviewers/media do not make more of this obvious fact. Especially in response to ‘People just want us to move on’, or Leave’s ‘ ‘WE ALL KNOW another Ref would be just as undecisive’ . WE ?
    No ! Probably at least 10 million out of 13 million times NO. (Plus all the other people who did vote Leave and have since changed their minds).
    Another referendum would result in at least 60/40 (probably even higher) in favour of Remain. Conclusive ! Farage and Company know this only too well.
    All pro-remainers should be highlighting these facts, particularly journalists, media commentators etc.

    • avatar

      No problem with a second referendum so long as we can have another if remain wins !!!!!.

  43. avatar

    No problem with a second referendum so long as we can have another if remain wins !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  44. avatar

    The first referendum was carried out when people have no knowledge on how Brexit would affect the UK. Now people ought to be very clear. A British lawyer expressed in a Chinese TV program suggested that when people have no knowledge on what they are voting for, the referendum is illegal. She supports a second referendum. The British government is irresponsible to shed responsibility of Brexit to the innocent people who have no knowledge on politics and economy. There is not problem the collective wisdom of EU cannot solve. But there are many problem a isolated UK cannot solve alone in a global system. As we have seen when the British people opted Brexit for independence, Teresa May has already rushed to follow Trump albeit all European people hate him. It is very sure that EU is working for benefit of Europe, while Trump is for the American be great again. Teresa May’s government is talking about to spend money building more overseas military bases all over the world. By supporting the Brexit, the British people has now turn to making the Ameican Great again with money and life of its people.

  45. avatar

    Those politicians who support Brexit and those who are pushing blindly forward for Brexit ought to answer the people why the UK has been experiencing negative growth of the economy since the kick of the Brexit? Does this not telling people the market and the investment have no confidence on the performance of the UK political economic subsequent to Brexit? Is not Brexit a suicidal act? Have any of the two major party offered a clear picture for the British people where the UK would be leading to? What kind of future they are leading the British people to?

  46. avatar

    the govermnet and reamainers you are a embarrassment to our country you are making us look incapable and divided put your personal opinion aside and do what we have told you to do and leave the eu! You must respect the fact we voted to leave, we want to leave!
    Who would trust a second vote? I certainly wouldnt, the way you’ve all behaved is a disgrace.

  47. avatar
    Edmund Butler

    I wanted to go to the movie, but having seen the trailer I’d rather stay home. I think it’s been overrated. I’m going to start work on the seating plan for Johnny’s wedding reception in Poland in June.

  48. avatar

    Would the parties please stop saying Brexit is people’s wish. It is only a very limit no. of people’s wish. A very large no. had voted against and still many more have not cast their vote. Now the British people can be more realistic in voting. They should be given a second opportunity to vote. If the second referendum still favour Brexit, the people have to prepare Brexit with whatever deal or no deal even risk division of the UK for Brexit is offering both Scotland and Ireland reason to leave the UK. There are reports that foreign investment has started to flee the UK since the referendum. Theresa May’s government has the duty and responsibility to tell the people what is the situation since then. Do not just blindly pushing forward Brexit while ignoring the real change in the economy and related aspects. This is very irresponsible in this era when the global political economic situation is changing in such an extraordinarily high speed.

  49. avatar

    HAHAHA Let’s have a second vote…I love the push for this rubbish. Ok then; as long as there’s yet another vote, if ‘stay’ comes back…best two out of three. And if Labour win the next general election, we then have a re-vote on that; just in case some don’t like that result either. Modern democracy at work, the realm of the fool. Enjoy all,

  50. avatar

    i find it frustrating when so may people both in the UK and in Europe seem to believe those of us who voted for brexit hadn’t thought it through. Well there follows what was said in 1990 in the House of Commons by the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher She said > “The President of the Commission, Mr. Delors, said at a press conference the other day that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the Community, he wanted the Commission to be the Executive and he wanted the Council of Ministers to be the Senate” Basically what he was alluding to is a European superstate where all power regarding policy making sits in Brussels and made by individuals who are not accountable to the UK electorate. Now if the UK contributors to this chain of comments are happy for the UK to be absorbed into a EU superstate, with the same applying to the other EU member countries from where other contributions appear to originate, then I have no problem with that. But remainers have to realise that many people in the UK, of which I am one, do not want that. What I want is for the structure to be a group of individual sovereign nations trading together for the common good tariff free – basically the old common market – and not this unaccountable, incompetent and corrupt behemoth the CM has morphed into over the past odd years. I have no doubt the above is shared by the 17.4 million brits who voted for brexit. Also I do not want the UK Supreme court to be subservient to the EU Court of Justice. So should we have another brexit vote? I think not as it would be an affront to democracy – we were given a vote and we decided to leave. But if such a vote were to be put again to the UK public I would suggest we should all consider what Mr Delors said all those years ago and then ask ourselves – do we want the UK to be absorbed into a EU superstate? I wonder what the outcome would be if that question was to be a major part of the debate that would happen in the run up to such a second vote!

  51. avatar

    A second referendum is not an over-rule of the first one. It can be considered as a contingency in response to the current uncertainty in the global political economy when the world’s first and second largest economy are in trade war, and when the US has dramatically changed its foreign policy by declaring a trade war against its allies all over the world. Favourable conditions for Brexit two years ago have all disappeared. The economic growth of the UK has slipped from its 3.1% before the referendum to 1.4% now. If Theresa May cannot offer confidence for the British people that UK’s economy would not be affected by the Brexit, even in this era of turbulent changes. It makes sense to have a second referendum so that people can vote by taking into consideration of the present situation.

  52. avatar

    No. Because the 2nd EU 2016 referendum is invalid: ballot was imaginary deal vs real stay!

    Say a Vote for removing all taxes: No vote means taxation system stays the same as it is – a real option.Yes is fantasy world without taxes.

    Putting lie on ballot is not democracy or to be respected!

    Swiss got 400 referenda said that EU2016 referendum is invalid, because if ballot is misleading the vote is invalid.

    UK is fed up with “will of the people” Corbyn/May lie.

    WE must revoke Article 50 and stay in EU no need to waste money and effort on new referendum.

  53. avatar
    john Amand

    Yes there should be another Brexit referendum

  54. avatar

    If the British people want so much Brexit, why not leave at any cost? The current deadlock appears to show us no parliamentary member and party want to bear the blame to fulfill “wish” of “the British people”. A second referendum is apparently required. The British people can only accept Theresa May’s proposal or No Exit. It is the only way to make a full stop so that the UK can put more resources to confront the Trump Trade War. I must emphasize that the UK is more vulnerable to Trump Trade War after the Brexit. This is a bad assumption but real.

  55. avatar

    Is a general election good for the UK when a trade war in global scale is happening? Trump’s recent “grace” granted to Europe is just a probation till he can fix China. If China refused to yield, Trump will turn to Europe immediately. An isolated UK is most vulnerable.

Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

More debate series – Brexit – Britain’s place in Europe View all

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Privacy Policy unless you have disabled them. You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.