Cairsley wrote:It should be obvious to everybody by now that the United Kingdom can leave the European Union only with a deal worse than the one it currently has as a member of the European Union. That seems to be grounds enough for Parliament to do what it was elected to do, namely to govern for the common good of the nation and in this case to disregard the referendum result of last year, cancel the activation of Article 50 and reaffirm the United Kingdom's membership in the European Union. If some voters object, too bad. Theirs is not the responsibility of governing. Unfortunately, those in Parliament, whose responsibility it is to govern the nation, seem unable to recognize the basic, obvious, incontrovertible fact that the United Kingdom cannot come out of its negotiation with the European Union with as good a deal as it already has, and to act accordingly.
I think the referendum result cannot be so easily discounted. Most people rightfully accept the result of the EU referendum.
It is the responsibility of the government to take account of the result of the referendum once it has been called. To paraphrase Yes Prime Minister
(the earlier, good series), "a responsible government doesn't call a referendum until it knows what the result will be
". I would agree that one advisory referendum doesn't necessarily express "the" will of the British people. All the polls before the referendum indicated Remain would win, but what they didn't show was what a graph of polls in the Economist Magazine illustrated: that the trend was upwards for Brexit. Pro-Brexit happened to peak at the time of the referendum.
There is nothing to stop UKGov calling another referendum but it must make sense to most people to do that and the result must be respected - no excuses. Once the deal or lack of any deal is known in 2018, another referendum could be called on that, as I believe the LibDems suggest.
It seems to me that most people accept referenums may be used to settle such important questions. If governments wish to take "responsibility for governing" instead of settling such issues through referendums, they shouldn't call referendums. The government can decide to call a referendum or not, but it cannot simply discard the result as "too bad" for the majority of voters who contributed their votes. What you suggest could (and some would say should) lead to violence.