Second EU vote is an important matter of political principle

FASCINATING as it was to watch the live TV coverage of the internal Tory vote of confidence in their leader last Wednesday (“Hollow victory as May left weakened by party ballot”, The Herald, December 13) it is generally agreed now that this did not actually achieve anything at all in terms of bringing clarity to the current EU debate. Indeed the whooping and hollering and banging of desks of our highly-paid public servants seemed more in keeping with a 19th century public school debating chamber than anything approaching a modern democracy in the 21st century.

It is with astonishment therefore that I find today’s headlines dominated by Theresa May suggesting that her predecessor Mr Blair’s assertion that a second EU referendum in which her deal could be put to the British people is somehow “anti-democratic” (“May warns second vote would do ‘irreparable damage’ to UK”, The Herald, December 17). Really, is this the best argument that she can come up with rather than asking the people directly to give their view of her plan?

There are in fact parallels across the Irish Sea for have a second referendum. The Irish people were asked to approve the Treaty of Lisbon (to reform the EU constitution) in June 2008 and rejected it by a margin of 53.4 per cent to 46.6 per cent. However, in October 2009 a second referendum was held and the proposal this time was approved by a majority of 67.1 per cent to 32.9 per cent on an increased turnout.

What Mrs May is really concerned about is that her plan which currently is not pleasing anyone will be rejected by the British people in favour of remaining within the EU. She cannot claim to be defending democracy by opposing a second EU referendum. Arguably the referendum in 2016 was itself a “second referendum” on EU membership as there was a referendum in 1975 when the British people voted by a clear margin of 67.2 per cent to 32.9 per cent to remain within the EU. Presumably some of the people who voted “yes” in 1975 changed their mind and voted “no” in 2016. Yet it seems that Mrs May is of the view that we are not to be trusted to give our considered opinion on the most important topic of the day. Is that really a defensible or indeed properly democratic position for our Prime Minister to take?

The British people are perfectly entitled to say that they wish to lend their support to Mrs May’s plan or indeed that have changed their mind. It is an important matter of political principle that they should at least be given the democratic opportunity to engage in a decision which affects all of our and our children’s future.

John Smith,

9 Argyle Terrace,

Dunblane.

WE were forewarned in today’s edition (December 17) that the Prime Minister will urge MPS not to “break faith” with voters and further divide the country by holding another poll on European Union membership.

“Break faith with voters”? How much faith has already been broken by Theresa May’s appeasement of the English nationalists and the fanatical free-marketeers who are united in their inability to deliver what they promised prior to the 2016 referendum?

Mrs May has at no point during the past 30 months demonstrated that she recognised the concerns and indeed the fears of the 48 per cent of the UK electorate and 62 per cent in Scotland who voted to remain, not to mention of those who originally voted Leave but now recognise that they were hoodwinked.

Mrs May herself has already done “irreparable damage to British politics”.

John Milne,

9 Ardgowan Drive,

Uddingston.

AT this critical moment in our history, It is our misfortune to have as the nation’s political leader such a thrawn woman as Theresa May. How can she possibly say that “it would be undemocratic” to give the people another chance to say if they still want the UK to leave the European Union, now that we know and understand all the implications and problems this would cause for generations to come?

Surely giving us a second chance, to confirm that is still what we want or else to say that we have now changed our mind, is the only sensible and democratic course of action? Instead she declares that “a second vote would do irreparable damage to the UK”. That is complete nonsense. On the contrary, it would simply and sensibly give the people the right to say “we have changed our mind”, which is entirely possible and even likely after the last two years of detailed discussion and debate.

The whole Brexit fiasco has brought discredit to our political institutions, and if it goes ahead it will cause serious international, economic and social damage to Great Britain for many years to come. A final decisive referendum before the end of February is now absolutely essential, and if Mrs May will not allow this she should step down now and let someone with more common sense take over as Prime Minister. Iain AD Mann,

7 Kelvin Court,

Glasgow. I BELIEVE the negotiated settlement on exiting the EU is in the best interests of the country as a whole. We will continue to co-operate with the countries on the other side of the North Sea but there will no longer be forced unity and constraint on our actions.

Recently my attention has been drawn to the differences in the

British character and legal systems compared to those in southern and eastern Europe. The following example is of particular interest to us.

We have had sanctioned independence referendums but not the Catalonians. When frustration led the Catalonian Regional Government to take the matter into its own hands and initiate a referendum on independence, the Spanish Government ruthlessly attacked its citizens in that part of the country and the Catalan politicians, who had been responding to the wishes of their constituents, were jailed for rebellion. They remain in prison – some in solitary confinement – with no prospect of a trial.

I don’t think that could happen here but the extremes on both sides of the Brexit debate – No Deal or Remain – are so entrenched in their views, another referendum could cause civil unrest, whichever side came out on top. Naturally both extremes hate the compromise, but compromise is the only way of restoring a modicum of political peace.

Iris Clyde,

Voresheed,

Kirkwall,

Orkney.

● Have your say:

The Editor, The Herald, 200 Renfield Street, Glasgow G2 3QB; e-mail: letters@theherald.co.uk

SEVERAL weekend newspapers warned people that it would be unwise to book holidays until finalisation of the Brexit discussions. Will this include flights to the sunny uplands (located near Shangri-la and Nirvana)?

John S Milligan,

86 Irvine Road,

Kilmarnock.