Was the eu referendum fit for purpose? Watch

alanwales7832
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 10 months ago
#1
Summary: It is suggested that the EU referendum denied the voting public the right to vote yes/no to a proposed constitutional amendment. The suggestion is based on the following discussion.

Discussion: The EU referendum denied the people the right and the means to vote yes/no to a question that refers to a proposed constitutional amendment. This was achieved by splitting what should have been one question in two and likewise splitting the yes/no vote into two yes votes. For ease of reference, I quote the resulting questions.

1: “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union... [? Vote yes].”

2: “[Should the United Kingdom] leave the European Union [? Vote yes].”

The legislation required for the UK to remain a member of the EU was implemented in the 1970s. Therefore question 1 does not refer to a proposed constitutional amendment and as such is invalid and its yes vote ineffective.

Question 2 referred to a proposed constitutional amendment but denied the people the right to vote against the amendment by reducing the yes/no vote to a yes vote.

Conclusion: the inference of the discussion is that had the EU referendum been true to purpose then it would have been simply stated on the ballot paper: Should the United Kingdom leave the European Union? Vote yes/no.

PS: The conclusion concurs with a statement issued by the Republic of Ireland and I quote: “A proposal to amend the Constitution must first be introduced in the Dail as a Bill, setting out the text of the proposed amendment. The Bill cannot contain any other Proposal. If the Bill is passed by both the Dail and the Seanad it is then submitted to the people in a constitutional referendum so that they can vote for or against it.”
0
reply
ThomH97
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 10 months ago
#2
In what way do you think the two options overlap or leave out an option? Or are irrelevant to the conclusion we leave the EU?

Dunno what the ROI's procedures have to do with the UK either.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#3
Report 10 months ago
#3
Well it's better than simply using royal prerogative to get us into it, we should have had the referendum in 1992.
0
reply
alanwales7832
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 10 months ago
#4
(Original post by ThomH97)
In what way do you think the two options overlap or leave out an option? Or are irrelevant to the conclusion we leave the EU?

Dunno what the ROI's procedures have to do with the UK either.
I assume that you are aware that the process of constitutional legislation begins with a proposed amendment to the constitution that is made into a bill by a committee and introduced to Parliament as such. At this point it may be decided to hold an advisory referendum in which case the proposal and subsequent bill are represented by a simple question and a yes/no vote.
In the case of the EU referendum, the proposal and bill was represented by the question: “[Should the United Kingdom] leave the European Union [? Vote yes]”. Had the vote been yes/no then the EU referendum result would have been democratic and above board (I believe the result would have been the same]

The referendums of the UK and ROI structurally the same but while the UK’s referendums are advisory and independent of the legislation the ROI’s referendums are contributory and essential to the legislation.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 10 months ago
#5
Except the referendum paper didn't ask two questions, it asked one:

"Should the UK remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" The answers not being on the paper as yes/no are frankly irrelevant, because they were just spelt out in more detail.


If you want to discuss whether it should have been done with STV covering remain, leave and join the EEA, leave with a trade deal or leave without a deal, thus providing an actual mandate for one type of departure, that's another question and an argument I'm sympathetic to, but this OP is ridiculous
1
reply
ThomH97
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 10 months ago
#6
(Original post by alanwales7832)
I assume that you are aware that the process of constitutional legislation begins with a proposed amendment to the constitution that is made into a bill by a committee and introduced to Parliament as such. At this point it may be decided to hold an advisory referendum in which case the proposal and subsequent bill are represented by a simple question and a yes/no vote.
In the case of the EU referendum, the proposal and bill was represented by the question: “[Should the United Kingdom] leave the European Union [? Vote yes]”. Had the vote been yes/no then the EU referendum result would have been democratic and above board (I believe the result would have been the same]

The referendums of the UK and ROI structurally the same but while the UK’s referendums are advisory and independent of the legislation the ROI’s referendums are contributory and essential to the legislation.
I think the question in the referendum matched the options you call for perfectly and our MPs are intelligent enough to know which corresponded with which lobby.
0
reply
Bang Outta Order
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 10 months ago
#7
is..this your homework?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (107)
66.46%
No I haven't decided yet (33)
20.5%
Yes but I might change my mind (21)
13.04%

Watched Threads

View All