A New Brexit Referendum Would Indeed Be A Betrayal of The First

Ilya Somin offers  a typically thoughtful case for why a second Brexit referendum would not be a betrayal of the 2016 result. His argument, as I read it, is this: Theresa May’s likely defeat on her dreadful proposed Withdrawal Agreement grants an opportunity to reassess the wisdom of leaving the EU. Given a referendum was the means of making the decision to leave, a referendum is a perfectly legitimate mechanism to test whether the public still wants to. Ergo, deciding to ultimately Remain in a second referendum would not betray the result of the first vote.I disagree.A second referendum so soon would violate the U.K. ’s convention of having one-off constitutional referendums, the results of which are respected for a generation. The U.K. has had major referendums in the past on remaining within the European Economic Community (1975), changing the general election voting system (2011), deciding whether Northern Ireland should join the Republic of Ireland (1973), and Scottish Independence (2014). The results of all these constitutional decisions have been implemented without discussion of the need to check again whether people really meant to vote as they did. In the case of the EU, the gap between the EEC vote and 2016 was 41 years.That is why, inthe government leaflet that was sent to all households during the referendum campaign urging people to vote remain, the government promised to implement the result. It told the public “This is your decision. The Government wi...
Source: Cato-at-liberty - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs