Monday 29 January 2018

Second referendum? There's no question, it's madness

In the sporadic debate about a second referendum, Wolfgang Munchau has made some valuable points. Firstly*, he notes that what Simon Jenkins calls the "second referendum adventists" are "as mad as the the flat-earth leavers" and goes on to quote Andrew Duff**, who says 


"The EU would not simply say: "great, come back, all is forgiven". Time has moved on. The European Commission has an action plan until 2025. David Cameron's deal will not be revived. On the contrary, the EU will want the UK to recommit to the principle of ever closer union. The UK would need to accept an end to the British rebate, and an end to several opt-outs (Munchau agrees with Duff that this would probably not affect the opt-outs on the euro or Schengen). But the various opt-outs on the charter of fundamental rights, and on a common immigration policy, would all have to go. Oh yes, the UK would be under pressure to join the banking union, too. All these things would have to happen for the European Council and the European Parliament to accept a British revocation."
I've been saying much the same in my posts. Moreover, second referendum advocates seem to assume that the UK could just revoke article 50 unilaterally, but Munchau notes that formal assent of the EU would be required. The UK could appeal to the European Court of Justice, which would probably stop the clock while it ruled, but 
"In normal circumstances, stopping the EU clock is an honourable practice and often leads to crisis resolution. When it comes to Brexit, however, almost anything could happen. A hypothetical British decision to stop Brexit in its tracks would be a highly calculated risk."
So none of that is going to happen. While Munchau thinks a second referendum is a total non-starter anyway, he has identified a specific reason he claims only he seems to have pointed out -  there can't be one because there isn't a way of drafting a simple question with a yes-no answer:
"The question proposed by advocates of a second referendum - do you accept the withdrawal agreement or do we you want to stay in the EU - does not qualify as people can logically reject both."
Munchau notes that it is impossible to ask a question that is binary, not a repeat of the last one, and that keeps the UK in the EU. Giving more than two options is never considered in a referendum. It's not that the electorate is too dumb for multiple choice, it's more a matter of how the result could be implemented if, as likely, there was no overall majority for the most popular choice. Sure, you could have a single transferable vote system. I was quite a fan of that system when I was a student. But I realised the downsides when I gave my wife and her parents, along with myself, STV ballot papers for us to decide which snack we were going to open: crisps, hoola hoops or quavers I think was the choice (this was the 1970s or 80s youngsters, pringles and doritos didn't exist). The outcome of this real ballot was that no-one got what they really wanted and the scales fell from my eyes.
The real threat to Brexit isn't a second referendum, of course. It's the Lords/Commons but, even more likely, the fact that there isn't a concensus in the Tory party about what the future beyond the transition should look like.

I do worry about the perfect storm of a Brexit collapse and a Corbyn government. Project Fear? Project Apocalypse Now more like!

*The Brexit Revocation Madness, eurointelligence.com, 19 Jan 2018
**Andrew Duff's discussion paper "Brexit: what if Britain changed it's mind?" is published by the EU-funded European Policy Centre at http://www.epc.eu/documents/uploads/pub_8208_brexitwhatifbritainchangesitsmind.pdf?file=pub_8208_brexitwhatifbritainchangesitsmind.pdf
***On The Real Hurdles For Brexit Revocation, eurointelligence.com, 22 Jan 2018

4 comments:

  1. Well what would you expect me to say Phil but 'EXIT BREXIT' the greatest act of self-harm the UK has ever inflicted upon itself in living memory.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BBC web site today :- 'What effect will Brexit have on the UK economy? A leaked government document suggests growth over the next 15 years could be up to 8% lower than if the UK had stayed in the EU.' I rest my case

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is the 'no deal' scenario in what seems to be an incomplete piece of work which does not take account of opportunities. So a worst case. The 'free trade deal' - the most likely case - is 5%. I would contend that 5% over 15 years - one third of one percent per year - is well within the accuracy range of such guesstimates. So I don't think this leaked report tells us anything much. In any event, I always assumed leaving would leave us worse off for 10-15 years, which is why I chickened out and voted Remain, on account of my age. I still contend old people had more incentive to vote Remain than Leave but seemed to vote in the best long term interests of the nation's young people, who will reap the long term benefits. But only if we get it right....

      Delete
  3. My alternative view is that older folk voted to shaft the younger generations in an act of utter foolishness as they looked back to the 1950's through rose tinted spectacles thinking times were good then.

    ReplyDelete