Why doesn't Starmer hold another referendum?

Jane43

It would be more appropriate in a manifesto for the next general election, then if the manifesto is accepted by the electorate a referendum can be held. At the moment anything Keir Starmer does is wrong, I have never seen such hatred of a Prime Minister and I feel for his family.

I agree, that's a much better approach. It maybe that one or more party includes the intention of seeking rejoin the EU in their manifesto. As the majority feel the 2016 referendum outcome was the wrong decision and the UK is worse off as a result, that may prove to be a successful calling card.

I think referendums should be banned. We send people to Parliament with high salaries and expenses to make decisions for us, not to avoid decisions.

We need closer ties with Europe but no more referendums.

In a strong representative democracy there should be no need for referenda.

We elect our governments on their policies and if they don't carry out those policies we vote them out at the next election.

Cameron promised the referendum in 2010 because he wanted to stop the leak from the Tory party into what as then UKIP.

It was the single biggest mistake ever made by a British PM in my lifetime and we are living with the fallout of that terrible and incredibly costly mistake.

The irony is that the Tory party is now all but finished and Reform are carrying forward the message from UKIP!

Cameron's appeasement didn't work.

To put a policy in place that ensure another referendum wouldn't work and Starmer is far too intelligent for that.

He sees closer connection with Europe as the way to go as he is far more savvy than people seem to give him credit for.

Unfortunately many people voted Reform because they don't like Starmer, even though he remains in no 10 for another three years unless he either resigns (and he won't) or his party cause chaos and challenge his leadership- which in my opinion they would be completely bonkers to do.

We don't need more upheaval- or maybe it seems that some people really do?

I think Starmer would plan a step-by-step approach to making closer ties with the EU. There are areas such as defence and immigration where EU countries are keen to have the UK on board.
There would be a cost for joining the single market. But I remember the benefits for businesses which came in 1992, wiped out by Brexit. Culturally too, we put ourselves outside our European heritage. It was a tragedy which should and can be reversed.

Yes I agree it should be in the manifesto - much more democratic.

I think the Brexit referendum was one of the most divisive, unsettling and disastrous things we have ever carried out in the U.K.

It’s quite simple. The intention for this parliament was set out in Labour’s Manifesto, and that is what they are working to deliver.
commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10207/

I don’t think Starmer is vilified as much as Boris Johnson and Liz Truss. I felt for their families…. But more importantly, my own for having to put up with rising prices, poor NHS and an uncertain future.

It would be more appropriate in a manifesto for the next general election, then if the manifesto is accepted by the electorate a referendum can be held. At the moment anything Keir Starmer does is wrong, I have never seen such hatred of a Prime Minister and I feel for his family.

But if Starmer wants to realign the UK with Europe at some cost, can he legally just do it?
I agree that some aspects of the last referendum were problematic- no supermajority for example - but having been asked if we should leave, why not ask again before realignment?

ronib

So is it better that Brexit is reversed without a referendum? What price democracy?

The referendum was not particularly democratic.

Russian money, targeted 'dark adverts' on facebook which eliminated any right to reply (which I think is highly undemocratic), no supermajority and a 'promise' Cameron had no right to make and which he immediately ran away from (humming a little tune) ?

Evidence, if you wish, that BREXIT is being reversed?

So is it better that Brexit is reversed without a referendum? What price democracy?

Has Starmer actually said that he will "reverse Brexit", ie., rejoin the EU?
All I have heard is about forging closer links, which is a very different, sensible, idea.
I doubt that the EU would ever let us rejoin under terms that would be acceptable to us anyway.

So no, I don't think that Starmer is proposing anything that remotely requires a referendum.

Pure scaremongering by the other parties and the media outlets that support them, IMO.

Now the strange thing is, once Starmer said he was staying in post, the value of the pound rose.

No, that would be a terrible idea.

...'we ask big questions..

Pointless. People would now just use it as an anti Starmer vote as they used it as an anti Cameron vote 10 years ago.

We need to be more settled and the country functioning better before we as big questions of voters again.