The referendum was totally skewed in favour of the leavers. Had they lost 52-48 instead of winning, there would almost certainly be another refendum imminent. Voting to change the status quo is easy. Persuading people that what we have is as good as it gets, after forty years of rather stale bureaucracy (I'm the first to admit it) is far harder. A stay vote was always going to be thoroughly reversible. The leave vote is pretty irrevocable, just needing the details to execute it For that reason alone, a referendum based on a simple majority was simply wrong and, as it turned out during the campaign, thoroughly undemocratic. The threshold for such an apocalyptic change should have been stiff. I'd say a two-thirds majority on a minimum 75% turnout. Had the leavers won on that basis there would be no squabble. Not from me, and, I predict, not from David C or Kevin. But just watch the hawks here telling me what rubbish I'm talking. But wouldn't they just love the trade unions to be bound by such rules?
|