You are reading a single comment by @miro_o and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
This argument is based on the misrepresentation of a referendum being binding as opposed to advisory.
Not really, it’s based on the referendum being advisory but Article 50 being binding ... and 498 PM’s being elected at a general election having declared that position personally and in their respective party manifestos.
miro_o
welpeur
This argument is based on the misrepresentation of a referendum being binding as opposed to advisory. As someone correctly pointed out above, 44m did not vote Leave. For a situation with such complexity and profound impact for not just everyone in the UK now, but who are affected by this, and future generations, then it is absurd to defer a decision of such magnitude to the disgruntled, misled and poorly informed 'thug in the pub'. A referendum provides information to elected leaders who are supposed to deal with the depth and complexity of real facts to reach decisions in the best interest of their electorate, as such objectiveness is required, as is a two-way communication back to the electorate. More democracy is NOT undemocratic and is the rational and fair thing to do in such a situation, as the precedent set by other, better functioning democracies sets precedent for with second referendums based on better informed positions and ahead of decisions of profound importance.