Brexit leader Nigel Farage has revealed he and his party would refuse to legitimise a rigged second referendum by participating in it, as anti-Brexit politicians make clear their belief the British public should only be given the choice to cancel leaving altogether, or stay in the EU with a new treaty.
Speaking moments before the details of Boris Johnson’s new Brexit deal were announced in Brussels, Brexit leader Nigel Farage expressed his concern that when the deal is put to Parliament, a condition of it passing may be a second referendum.
A second referendum has been talked about by anti-Brexit activists at the highest levels since immediately after the results of the 2016 referendum became known, as it presents perhaps the best possible opportunity to cancel Brexit altogether.
Referendum re-runs have been used several times effectively in the past when the peoples of EU member nations have voted against the direction the bloc wanted them to go. Brexit supporters have been rightly suspicious, therefore, of the campaign to cancel the first referendum and re-run with a second.
Discussion surrounding a second referendum by those who would likely deliver it, including members of the so-called remain alliance in Parliament, do not want any new vote to have a full Brexit, what they call a “no-deal Brexit” to be on the ballot paper, giving the choices only as staying without change, or staying with a new treaty.
The Brexit leader said: “…we’re going to be stuck in this never-never land for years to come. It is the worst of all worlds… what if a referendum amendment passed? Let’s not call it a deal, let’s call it what it is, an EU treaty… if we had this passed on Saturday with a referendum amendment, that would be our democracy simply traduced.”
If the referendum, was a simple two-way question which prevented voters from choosing to actually fully leave the European Union, the Brexit Party would boycott the event, Mr Farage said. Speaking to Sky News from Brussels, he continued: “If the choice is the existing EU treaties or a new EU treaty, I will stay at home. I won’t vote, I won’t campaign, I would have nothing to do with it whatsoever. Even to have another referendum is wrong, but to have one and not put a credible leave option on the ballot paper would be a democratic outrage.
“It’s perfectly clear, every leading player on the leave-remain side said a leave vote means leaving the Single Market, the Customs Union, regulatory alignment, being in charge ourselves of this regulation. And this is what needs to be delivered.”
Now an agreement between Boris Johnson’s negotiating team and the European Union has been reached, the government faces a second, and arguably more difficult hurdle — getting it past Parliament. Theresa May already agreed a deal with the European Union in November 2018, but failed three times to get it passed by Parliament, a repeated failure that contributed to her ultimate fall from the leadership.
Noting it remained very unlikely that Parliament would vote to pass a deal on the fourth attempt, this time under Boris Johnson, Mr Farage said accepting a slight withdrawal delay to fight a general election on a joint Conservative-Brexit ticket promising a full withdrawal would be a way forward. He said on Thursday: “… if withdrawal agreement IV fails on Saturday as I think it will, Boris Johnson will drop the idea of this new treaty and there is the possibility of putting together a leave alliance for the next general election, and all the numbers and all the polls say… there is an opportunity for a Brexit alliance to fight the election to win a big majority in parliament.
“I would much rather we had an extension and a chance of a general election than accept this dreadful new EU treaty.”
Remain agitators have long talked of rigging a second referendum with questions that only allow acceptable outcomes to their worldview. With commendable honesty, ultra-remain British publication The Independent — formerly a daily newspaper but now online only — concluded in their assessment of potential referendum questions in 2018 that in their opinion allowing a full Brexit would be irresponsible for the government, as there is a good chance the British people would vote for it.
This paternalistic view on preventing the public from making decisions in case they decide something the political class disagrees with echoes the moved by the Labour Party in 2019 to block a snap general election. Because the outcome of a freely fought election could allow the British people to back a political party that would deliver a full Brexit, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to continue blocking an election going ahead until no-deal has been prevented from happening altogether.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.