Voting for an election without an extension would almost certainly mean a no deal Brexit. _That_ is a subversion of democracy - the election is somewhat pointless if it happens after the major decision of the time has been taken.
Not automatically, no. There should be an election, but holding one while the Brexit deadline is still ticking is obviously insane, so that needs to be cancelled or extended first.
A referendum with the choice between remain and this deal would allow for this deal to be voted out without too much loss of face on the Leave-side — which is all that seems to matter to most of the backbenchers not in favour of an outright hard brexit.
An election before a referendum on the deal would make this election all about brexit (again) in a time where other priorities should get the focus.
What is it that you don't understand about democracy? A referendum was held in the UK in 2016. It was brought about by a Prime Minister who, along with a huge majority of the establishment including the BBC, thought that the result was a foregone conclusion. For sure, they said - most folk will vote to stay in the EU. But the voters decided otherwise. We voted `leave`. Abiding by that decision shows that democracy doesn't work anymore - and Brexit is an example?
That's a technical possibility. But in reality, MPs just don't have the incentives to do that. They just wouldn't get elected next time. It's unthinkable that the UK would choose to remain without a referendum. And the thing is that as of now, a referendum (and I'm not even saying what should be asked there) is also not a politically viable option.
As I also mentioned in another comment, after the facts where on the table (as it became clearer and clearer that the UK will not get a deal), the referendum could have been repeated.
Manipulating people and having them vote without all the facts on the table and then denying them that vote after the facts were on the table is not democracy.
I agree with you but that doesn't invalidate the initial vote. The only marginally democratically legitimate way to do a revote would be for the UK to ask to voters to choose between actually negotiated and realistic terms (or maybe multiple, e.g. hard brexit + any deal they can strike with the EU if ever) and staying.
Ah I thought it was extension but from other comments it seems they can just cancel Article 50, my bad. That requirement for a second referendum might be a good thing though, seems like that's the only way out politically (to be forced by an outside force) given how many of the heads party have said a second referendum would tarnish the democratic process (which is BS to me but that's their stance).
Which is why ballot initiatives and referendums are so often a terrible idea.
The problem is the executive have no ownership of the proposal and don’t feel any responsibility for it unless they were the ones campaigning for it. In a democracy the way to get something done is for someone to get elected on a platform to implement it and then own delivering it once in office.
I’m a Brit and Brexit is a classic example of the failure of referendums. None of the political parties wanted it and for several years after we had a Prime Minister who had opposed it. Result - years of confusion and recrimination. Even when it happens (actually it already has) there will be endless arguments about whether it’s a “real” Brexit. Elect leaders you trust and the let them lead. If you don’t like the results, vote them back out.
That's not how democracy works. If there is a referendum, and you don't like the result, you don't just do a second referendum.
If you'd do that, you could achieve any result you want, just by doing it over and over until. Due to voter's fatigue and/or daily sentiment, results will vary, so you can pick a result by deciding when to stop.
It might make sense (though still be questionable) to repeat the vote if major facts changed, but I don't see that happening. The stock market shouldn't have been a big surprise, Cameron's resignation neither, nor the Leave faction retracting some of their promises.
As much as I don't like the outcome of the first referendum, I think it would be fundamentally undemocratic to do a second referendum.
In theory Britain can remind everyone that referenda have never been binding, and always been frowned upon as unconstitutional, so we're ignoring it and staying in.
The practical chances of either at this point are, shall we say slim?
I'm waiting to see what happens when we inevitably have a longer extension and so have to conduct the European election.
Wanting the referendum to be overturned doesn't mean that one is undemocratic. My reasons for wanting the referendum overturned are the same reasons I don't want referendums in the first place. Namely I believe that referendums work directly against the way our democracies work. Currently we have a system where parties vi for our vote. If a party then does things that we don't agree with (e.g. promise tons of things and then renege on them) then at the next election they can be voted out. The key point here is that decision makers can be held accountable and decisions can be changed. In a referendum there is no going back or accountability. This provides the incentive to lie as much as possible to get your way. This was very evident in the referendum campaign where the out campaign variously lied about more money than is possible on the NHS, increasing immigration from Commonwealth countries and how much of our laws originated from the EU. So if the decision to leave for 2% of voters was based on these issues then the result of the referendum is based on a lie. Is that democratic?
Why is the democratic decision to leave not an "adult" decision?
To conduct the referendum and then not abide by the result would absolutely be undemocratic. The UK is already dragging it's heels on taking action WRT Brexit IMO. I think that they will drag it out so long that they say the mandate of the referendum has expired, and then re-rerun the referendum. They will rinse and repeat until they get the result they want.
As an example Ireland voted not to join the EU the first time they did a referendum, they simply had more referendums until they got a yes.
reply