|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Oct 24, 2023 7:04:17 GMT
Steve Baker, the so called hard man of Brexit, says he regrets that the Brexit referendum didn't require a supermajority of 60-40, as the close result split the country and made political progress difficult. He would like to see a 60-40 if a United Ireland referendum ever takes place.
Should referenda require a supermajority?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 24, 2023 7:10:27 GMT
I'm not particularly bothered either way but I think you would struggle to get the Scots to agree to that idea. (and the Catholics in NI come to that)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2023 7:21:30 GMT
Labour doesn't do referendums, though. They just get elected and do as they please. They obviously won't care about dividing the country when that's exactly what they did when in power, and on multiple levels.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2023 8:07:20 GMT
Steve Baker, the so called hard man of Brexit, says he regrets that the Brexit referendum didn't require a supermajority of 60-40, as the close result split the country and made political progress difficult. He would like to see a 60-40 if a United Ireland referendum ever takes place. Should referenda require a supermajority? I think there is a case for a good majority. Having seen the turmoil of the 2016 referendum which had a 52/48 majority it shows the divisions in society which can be raised. The problem is, when voting for a change, why should the 48% get their way to stay the same if 52% want it? 60-40 is a bit high. A majority of 1 seems a bit low. 51-49 would do. What do the Swiss do, they're always having referendums, aren't they? |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Oct 24, 2023 8:09:58 GMT
No ,once the decision is made to hold one 51% is the majority . The problem is not the level of the majority but that the minority don't accept the result .
I don't think the Brexit vote and following division would have been any different had it been 80% as the 20% would still have included the Westminster bubble and the noisy remain minority
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 24, 2023 8:41:43 GMT
Not just referenda but any constitutional change should require at least a two-thirds majority.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 24, 2023 8:57:09 GMT
To me it seems pointless to require a supermajority to vote “Out” when we didn't require one to vote “In”.
Indeed, when it comes to the EU, arguably no one voted “In”.
And that's a shit-tonne less than 52%.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Oct 24, 2023 10:02:23 GMT
Typical andrew he can't let the subject drop ........ it's OVER andy, done and dusted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Oct 24, 2023 10:09:41 GMT
Lets face it if there were another referendum and the results were thus: 17,410,742 voted to stay out and 17,410,743 voted to go back in, remoaners would use that ONE vote as enough to justify going back in.
Yet they demand a super-majority when things don't go their way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Oct 24, 2023 10:11:17 GMT
Lets face it if there were another referendum and the results were thus: 17,410,742 voted to stay out and 17,410,743 voted to go back in, remoaners would use that ONE vote as enough to justify going back in. Yet they demand a super-majority when things don't go their way. Or they'll keep having them until it does go their way. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Oct 24, 2023 10:33:34 GMT
It wasn't working and we voted leave.
It's that simple, it's over.
Time to look forward, not backwards.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Oct 24, 2023 10:40:27 GMT
No,does parliament need a super majority?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutchyns on Oct 24, 2023 10:50:12 GMT
Any madcap scheme that allows the losers to be declared the winners is an affront to the British sense of fair play. Also making the votes of one opinion more important that votes for the alternative opinion, to the extent that they are given greater value and hence require far fewer to carry the day, seems to fly in the face of what many would consider to be the essence of a credible democratic system. Dress it up in whatever fancy words you like, such as 'Super Majority', the very notion is nothing more than an attempt to rig the system in a way that can allow winners to officially be declared losers, and losers to become the official winners ....... mind you with schemes afoot to give 16 year olds the vote etc, this is just further proof that bad actors exist wanting to tamper with our voting procedure ..... I won't be giving their shamefully ludicrous suggestions the time of day.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 24, 2023 10:53:48 GMT
No,does parliament need a super majority? Indeed.
As I said previously: Remnants seem to think that a government elected with 40% of the vote is legitimate but a referendum won with 52% isn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Oct 24, 2023 12:11:37 GMT
I guess it depends on the nature of the referendum but hard to see how a simple majority is not enough. Best though to avoid referendums at all. We elect representatives. Let them do the job we elect them too.
|
|
