Letter: There Was Nothing Vague About the Brexit Referendum Question

Published on: 21 Oct, 2019
Updated on: 21 Oct, 2019

From John Perkins

In response to Andrew Eacott’s comment under: Guildford’s MP Abstains in Commons Debate and Repeats Call for ‘Confirmatory’ Referendum

Those who voted Remain might find the same problem trying to impute motive to 16 million others. Did they vote for adoption of the Euro, an EU army, union with Albania, access to cheap cigarettes and alcohol, or any of the possible futures?

What was vague about a simple closed question?

How detailed would a new referendum be? Votes on every clause or sub-clause, such as those articles which allow former EU officials to not pay any UK taxes on their pension? Perhaps just the major issues such as the “Divorce Bill” in general, the length of the transition period or the question of the border with Ireland?

Should everyone have to prove they understood it all before being allowed a vote?

Carrying out the referendum request to leave the EU was entrusted to MPs as representatives. There was no need for people to vote in detail because they believed in the ability of the government to do what was asked of it. Clearly, that belief was misplaced, in which case more competent government is needed – starting with the House of Commons.

Responses to Letter: There Was Nothing Vague About the Brexit Referendum Question

Andrew Eacott Reply

October 21, 2019 at 8:59 pm

I can’t speak for anyone else who voted Remain, but I can tell you that I did not vote for adopting the Euro (we’ve already decided that we won’t), supporting an EU army (not possible given that the UK – currently – has a veto), or union with Albania (sorry, did I miss a memo?).

I wasn’t asked any of those things. I voted to keep the best deal we have available to us and retain the status quo. It was incumbent on the Leave campaign, those who advocated for a change, to propose an alternative relationship with the EU and they have singularly failed to select one despite countless opportunities.

Since it’s proven impossible to find a consensus, both in Parliament and in the country, the only sensible way forward is to ask a more detailed question. A general election will almost certainly result in another hung parliament which leaves only one option – another referendum.

In terms of detail, I suggest perhaps the government publishes their economic impact assessment, presents a bill to each household telling them how much Brexit will cost them, and a clear proposal for what benefits we will gain for that cost. Once we have that, we will all be in a position to make an informed choice.
- John Perkins Reply
  
  October 22, 2019 at 2:33 pm
  
  https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/1185194799349010432
Steve Grove Reply

October 22, 2019 at 11:34 am

I am amazed that after nearly three and a half years we are still in the dictatorial EU.

The referendum question was: “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” There was no mention about deals; the question was a simple “in” or “out”.

The Remainers have hi-jacked the result simply because they do not want to leave the EU, and anything they can do to stop it is, in their minds, fair game.

Parliament is a disgrace and is ignoring the wishes of the electorate. Let us hope that the EU will not agree to another extension and we (and the EU) can get on with life.
John Schluter Reply

October 22, 2019 at 8:13 pm

I thank Andrew Eacott for his input and I fully agree. One of the major problems with the referendum was the lack of a definition of “Leave the European Union”. Maybe blame Cameron for that one.

What such a glib statement did do, however, was open the door for the Messrs, Farage, Gove, Johnson etc, to make wild, uncorroborated claims about the sunlit uplands and untold wealth following our departure. These promises of milk and honey were swallowed up by the poor souls who believed them.

One of Dominic Cummings edicts in the Vote Leave campaign was not to write a policy, not to commit to anything, just get over the line. Deal with details later… much later.

As for ‘dictatorial’, who voted for Mr Cummings?
John Perkins Reply

October 23, 2019 at 12:37 am

Who voted for Jon Lansman?
John Perkins Reply

October 23, 2019 at 3:07 pm

The referendum question was chosen precisely because it was closed and simple and therefore the best way to avoid argument over the question itself. It afforded a straight choice.

Given that those continuing to support their lost cause have argued that those voting Leave did not understand the question (and by implication that Remain voters enjoy superior intellect), it’s odd that they should now be advocating a more complex question.

John Schluter criticises various people for making what he calls “wild uncorroborated claims”, while simultaneously appearing to argue that Dominic Cummings’ policy not to commit to any detail was also wrong.

Mr Cummings is an advisor and has no political authority. As such, there is no need for anyone to vote for him, unlike members of the House of Lords, the Supreme Court or the European Commission.
John Schluter Reply

October 24, 2019 at 1:07 am

In response to John Perkins. I have just checked again and we still have a veto over Albania’s membership request (as current members of the EU). I would be interested to hear why you object to their membership by the way?

One more thing (as Columbo used to say), you talk about the potential problem of the UK being involved in an EU army. Why fear an army of which we are a part and who are on our side?
John Perkins Reply

October 24, 2019 at 3:02 pm

I would be interested to know why asking if anyone voted for union with Albania is interpreted as objecting to their membership.

At the risk of straying too far from the topic: Yugoslavians had an army of which each was a part and which was on their side. Some of them found they had much to fear from it.