CCGPV wrote:Yes having normal elections is fine but the people calling for a "re-do" is dangerous. Delaying the action until the next election is setting a bad precedent too.
That depends, if only the people voting remain wanted a 2nd go, you'd have a point. But this is a situation where the overwhelming majority of UK citizens wanted to stay in the common market, some 70% or so, but only the hard Brexit minority gets what they want, and many people that did vote "leave" are saying "hey, this is not what I voted for". So, a bit different from just redoing votes until you get the result you want, this would be more a new vote along the lines of "is this what you wanted in 2016?" sorta thing.
How democratic would it be not to have a vote, when you pretty much know what you've negotiated is not what majority people voted for? You know, 350 mil per week to the NHS, no free movement of people, but free access to the common market, super easy trade deals that are much better than the EU's and such.
But I agree that it should be a rare exception and not the rule, and only for stuff that it is too long term for voters to interfere via other elections.
Will Brexit be done by 2022?
Schedule says so, but the real question probably is "will the UK government have a negotiating position by 2022?".
Richard28 wrote:Democracy does not stand still - a vote on the outcome of negotiations will let the country confirm if this is actually what they want.
Yup, voting is voting, not signing a suicide pact with blood.