I speculated the other day as to why Nigel Farage now wants a further referendum on the UK’s EU Membership. I don’t really mind why he’s had this change of heart, but welcome to the club, Nige.

Let’s have the second referendum.

Let me explain this a little more.

I do not like referendums (I prefer representative democracy), but I cannot see how the UK’s 2016 Brexit referendum can be reversed without a further referendum. I argued as such back in the summer of 2016 and I stand by that. British representative democracy is not in a healthy state, the UK’s FPTP election system does not mean that Parliament remotely reflects the balance of views in the country, and the balance between representative and direct democracy has not even been touched so far. The UK needs proper political and constitutional reform – but let’s do one thing at a time, and reversing Brexit is the imperative one. So a referendum.

But a referendum on what exactly?

Staying in the EU – on the terms that are available at the time the referendum happens – must be one option. Leaving with whatever terms of a deal are known must be a further option. And perhaps a no deal option too. Q1 – do you want the UK to leave? Q2 – with this deal, or no deal?

Which then leads us to: when could this referendum happen?

Before you can answer that you need to ask a further question: does this referendum need to happen before the UK has legally left the EU? The answer to that is a decisive yes as far as I am concerned – having left, voting to then re-join is a very different thing – not least because the terms of membership would be different.

All of this gets bound up in the issue of exit dates and transition periods, an issue that I examine in this blog post. At the time of writing, both the UK and the EU are working to the assumption that the UK leaves the EU on 30 March 2019, and then the UK has a transition period where it essentially does everything that EU membership entails, except having any role or say in the institutions. This option – as I argue in the linked post – is administratively and legally complicated, and I am pretty confident that within a few months everyone will be arguing to extend the Article 50 deadline, or trying to post date the exit agreement.

For the sake of a further referendum this is vital – trying to get a referendum organised on the final deal between now and March 2019 is next to impossible as David Allen Green rightly argues here. But push the actual date of exit back to the end of 2020 and suddenly the UK can buy itself more time – to negotiate further with the EU, and also to organise itself a further referendum before exit.

So the referendum would happen in 2020 I reckon.

A referendum then could work pretty well – if the Tories are still in power then, in the penultimate year of a 5-year parliament, they’ll be fantastically unpopular, and having messed around with Brexit for so long ought to be ready to be given a bloody nose by the electorate. The Tories would have to be on the side of Leave, except some of the nicer rebels.

And then how do you do it, and make sure that the Remain side wins?

Polls are looking a little better for Remain at the moment, but victory would be far from assured. So all of this is a risk, but it is a risk those who favour Remain are going to have to take. As the shape of Brexit becomes clear, that the UK made an error should also become clear. The strategy of the EU in this regard has been pretty exemplary up until now – the ball has been in the UK’s court to propose how to go about exiting, and in the absence of UK plans to be able to do it the EU does not look like the stubborn or difficult one. The UK is being hoisted by its own petard.

A crucial error was made prior to the last referendum about the right to vote – it was the same as for UK General Elections, namely no right to vote for 16-18 year olds, no right to vote for EU citizens in the UK, and no right to vote for Brits who have lived overseas for more than 15 years. All of these groups are the very people who will be most impacted by Brexit. So make the argument to change it. The argument for 16-18 year olds is probably the easiest one to make, but the other groups have clear merits too. The 3 Million are now very well organised so as to be able to push for the right to vote for EU citizens, and in the meantime record numbers of EU citizens have been getting UK passports too. Add to that the angry old men who will have passed away by 2020, and a newly politicised (on the electoral register) younger generation, and the demographics look better for Remain.

Then beyond that little lot the campaign for the next referendum would have to be radically different. Offensively critical of the lies that the Leave campaign told the last time. Critical that all their promises could not be kept. But also on the Remain side honest about what the EU is – none of the Cameron I can bend the EU the way I want to, I dislike it, but do vote to stay rubbish. A campaign fought with determination and gusto. And a campaign that was genuinely grassroots and pluralistic. Here are a few tips I wrote in April 2016 (oh well!), and some thoughts about the framing. Also in the absence of any unifying figure on the Remain side (and no, Blair, not you – even though you think it’s you), the campaign needs to use leading chracters from across all walks of life. And it needs to leverage the enduring (and burning) anger felt by Remain people, turning it into practical action. Last time the Leave side was more determined; next time Remain will be (and must be).

That’s how to do it folks.

Bring it on.


  1. Jon Woods

    Brexit fans argue that the limited sampling in many recent opinion polls is unrepresentative of a national swing to Remain. Their suspicion is logical: the larger the voter base, the greater the integrity and democratic weight. That is precisely why, in the referendum needed on the terms of the deal, we must enfranchise all those people denied a democratic voice in June 2016. More voters = improved democracy. What’s not to like?

    Those 16 and 17 year-olds … tax paying non-British residents… ‘ex-pat’ migrants absent for 15+ years – all will be personally affected by Brexit, For better or worse, we will inhabit the future together. No one should be left voiceless in this critical vote on our national destiny – and especially not the young.

  2. Mark Brady

    As of January 2018 the UK hasn’t suffered enough economic damage to get the Leavers back on side.

    This nightmare won’t end until we get at least a 2/3 majority for remain (like in 1975) so some time outside the Single Market might be required.

  3. Yves De Moor (B)

    I fully agree with your conclusion, a new vote would deliver another result. Since Brexit was proclaimed the British population are constantly confronted with negative forecasts for the UK economy, employment and the general level of your standard of living. Having said that, the rest of Europe must understand that Brits do not want a certain form of immigration and that prohibiting certain nationalities or even religions to expand in the UK is an important and justified issue to debate. Unlike Donald Trump for some Brits “shit countries” exist and Brits have the right to allow or disallow them. Nobody had the right of interference with the British public opinion. In the end we must respect their opinion on immigration and finally on Brexit and the right for a new referendum. It is never too late to admit a collective mistake, therefore the “leave” vote was too close. Bring it on, somewhere in 2019.

  4. Marcus Lasance

    We should have a second EU referendum sooner rather than later in view of the damage the first Brexit vote has already caused.

    It should be a binding referendum with a super majority as the referendum law already provides for.

    If the super majority is not achieved than the status quo should be remain in EU as is.

  5. steven hermans

    As a somewhat informed EU citizen, the ideal scenario for me would be to see Britain leave the EU, and then rejoin a few years later under conditions equal to everyone else. Accept the euro, no special exceptions.

    If not, I prefer the UK out, painful as it might be for them as well as us, and the whole world.

    • Jon Woods

      British exceptionalism is an ugly trait and I take your point, but that attitude typifies a generation soon to pass. The young of the UK have no nostalgic yearnings for blue passports; no obsession with striking out alone and shunning the benefits of pooled sovereignty; no instinctive dislike of foreigners. Adopting the Euro would be seen by them as a welcome liberation in their European adventures.

      Brexit embodies this stark conflict of visions between young and old. And we all know who can fight the longest.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *