Represent People’s interests and stop disastrous Brexit
- Credit: Archant
Be careful what you wish for. And be doubly careful if you ever find yourself nodding along with Nigel Farage, no matter how tempting it might be. There’s almost certainly a great big lie behind anything he’s saying.
The lie behind his claim that “maybe, just maybe” he’s coming round to the idea of a second referendum is this: He’s not maybe, just maybe coming round to the idea. He’s desperate for it.
Few people want a second referendum more than Nigel Farage. The words “June 23 will go down in history as our Independence Day” now sit in his mouth like ashes.
Farage’s Brexit Ultras have watched impotently while Theresa May – hemmed in as she is by insolubility (Ireland), incompetence (Davis) and in-fighting (the entire Conservative party) – turned their Hard Brexit fantasy into the soft fudge of BINO (Brexit In Name Only) we’re now heading for.
This outcome satisfies nobody, except a prime minister more concerned with gaffer-taping together two wings of a fractious party in the interests of retaining power. For Farage, a second referendum gives him the chance to stir the pot once more, get in front of those Question Time audiences some more, and, maybe, just maybe, get another Leave Vote to hammer home his No Deal dream.
You may also want to watch:
And for us Remainers, dumped out of the ring in 2016 by the surprise Farage uppercut, the opportunity to climb back through the ropes and have another ding-dong, is appealing. Certainly, a second referendum has a sense of logic. If the will of The People changes, then The People should express it.
But would a second referendum really set to rights the disaster of the first, or merely solidify the dreadful divisions that vote created?
- 1 Camden's Levertons to arrange the funeral of Prince Philip on April 17
- 2 Lockdown easing April 12 live updates: North London shops and pubs reopen
- 3 Royal Free ITU nurse who swapped the Caribbean for a Covid ward
- 4 'It's a godsend': Hampstead pubs and shops back serving the community
- 5 Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe: Wait for second verdict could last 'until Easter'
- 6 Primrose Hill to close at night this weekend after antisocial behaviour
- 7 Locals celebrate as the Carlton Tavern finally re-opens
- 8 Hampstead, Highgate and Primrose Hill beer gardens reopening on April 12
- 9 The questions council 'must answer' after spending £23m on £10m office
- 10 Hampstead to trial unobtrusive electric vehicle charging points
Imagine the consequence of a narrow victory for Remain.What would it prove? That this time it was we who cared more? That the Remain-inclined who stayed at home were less complacent? That a small proportion of wavering Leave voters had been won around? What would that prove, except that we were still a nation split in two. And imagine the consequences of a narrow Leave victory, again with a narrow margin.
Would we Remainers not just fall back on the same arguments we’ve been articulating for the last 18 months, with no material movement (if polls are right) on either side. Consider also the fact that turnout would almost certainly be substantially lower than last time, since a significant rump of people are (fairly enough) bored rigid by the whole affair. Would the second result ever be seen to be legitimate? Would Farage ever shut up about a carve-up by the metropolitan elite? Remainers can argue all year (God knows we have been) about the iniquity of the first vote – its closeness, the pervasive lies, the effective mere 37 per cent of the electorate who voted to Leave, the fine points of legality. But that’s getting us nowhere. We’ve got to stop looking backwards, and start making reasonable demands on the people who caused this problem in the first place; our MPs.
Our system of government is called Representative Democracy. There’s a clue in the name.
It’s beyond time MPs stopped parroting this “The People have spoken” nonsense and started, instead, to represent The People’s best interests.
The vote of June 23, 2016 was always about so much more than membership of the European Union. George Osborne’s austerity, trolleys in hospital corridors, an utter absence of a social strategy, underinvestment in infrastructure, the size of our kids’ classrooms, the queues at the GP. How does a second referendum on Brexit solve any of this?
Brexit should be stopped. Full stop. It’s bad for our economy, our security and place in the world. Brexit will make Britain a second rate nation.
And perhaps, with that argument successfully conveyed, it would be possible to re-galvanise the nation. To have the reasoned, fact-checked debate we lacked in June 2016, and this time with a much clearer idea of the consequences. Perhaps Remain would win a convincing victory that would clear the way to reversing Brexit. Perhaps.