Sorry ma’am but only a People’s Vote will move the country forward
PUBLISHED: 16:21 07 February 2019 | UPDATED: 16:21 07 February 2019
The Queen has attempted to rejoin the current political extremes over Brexit by pleading for a (presumably) centrist common ground on the issue.
Become a Supporter
Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only continue to grow with your support.
As a staunch Remainer, this for me will be impossible unless and until we have a second referendum.
The first one was based on lies, alternative facts, deceit, project fear, financial irregularities and dubious ‘data management’ issues. As such, the vote was undemocratic. A second vote, based on the clear understanding of the reality of the our situation and devoid of psephological skulduggery, will produce a ‘fairer’ result which we can all accept.
Martin Richardson, Fenstanton
The People’s Vote campaign has been hijacked by those who want to promote their own love of the EU. All Remainers – including me – have been guilty of this hijacking. But it has to stop now.
We have tainted the People’s Vote campaign with arguments that have crowded out the case for a new referendum. Our opponents have exploited this.
The new referendum case should be:
• The 2016 referendum was corrupted by breaches of electoral law by Leave campaigners
• The Electoral Commission was grossly underfunded and toothless
• The 2016 referendum disenfranchised young voters, ex-pats and UK resident taxpayers with the wrong passport
• The Electoral Commission is demanding tighter referendum rules and enforcement
• In 2015, David Cameron misled the Commons by omitting to mention that the referendum might lead to a breach of Ireland’s Good Friday Agreement and so risk a new era of the Troubles
• Legal experts agree that referendum questions must be based on specific drafted legislation, not on vague ideas like ‘Leave’ or ‘Remain’
• The 2016 referendum did not – and could not – put Theresa May’s deal to the test
• Two thirds of voters want a new referendum (Populus poll December 2018).
Martin Yuille, Manchester M20
Graeme White (in issue 129) is correct to call for a two-stage referendum. But asking ‘Leave or Remain?’ as the first question repeats the problems of 2016, where the Leave vote was the sum of incompatible options.
Round one should ask people to choose the best Brexit option to go forward as the Brexit champion to the next round. All Brexit options that have widespread popular support should be in the first round of the 2019 referendum, no matter how unpalatable. That way everyone gets a fair chance at winning – necessary for the country to heal afterwards.
In the end, only one Brexit plan could be implemented. So the final question is: “Shall we follow this one Brexit plan or Remain in the EU?”
Michael Romberg, London W1T
• What do you think? Send your letters for publication to email@example.com and read all of our letters by picking up a copy of our newspaper every Thursday.
Become a Supporter
Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press with your support. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.Become a supporter