Negative role of
the largest political parties, for many
months they have hindered the people's right
to take the final, definitive, sovereign
decision about brexit.
a. Labour party
In the "brexit" process the largest two UK
political parties have emphatically NOT
distinguished themselves in the practice of
democracy. For many months it has been clear
(e.g. see the principles outlined above) that "a
final" and decisive say, about leaving the EU or
not, should belong to the sovereign electorate.
In this context the Labour Partly, especially
its leader and some prominent shadow ministers,
have used the option of a new referendum like a
toy in the game of politics. "We are against."
"We would not entirely rule out a referendum but
a new general election would be much better."
"We still intend to vote for "brexit" but we are
keeping all options including a referendum on
the table". Aware of strong public support for a
second referendum Labour has been been dangling
this prospect in the sea of public debate like
bait on a fisherman's hook. This apparently
selfish tactic, seeking only own party advantage
and a chance to grab the power of state, has
harmed democracy by delaying the instigation of
a second brexit referendum. People need time to
consider such an important matter, they must
adapt and inform themselves in order to take on
the greater responsibility required in this sort
of direct governance by citizens. Some Labour
leaders have quite recently proposed that ONLY
IF the government's brexit proposal is defeated
in Parliament then might the decision – in a
time period expected to be of national chaos and
hectic haste – be generously (helplessly?)
chucked back to the people, leaving us to sort
out the mess created by our politicians and
"oligarchs", "representatives" of the people in
our democracy. The campaign and preparation for
a "final deal" referendum should have come many
months ago, with much broader than seen,
cross-party support by responsible, democratic
politicians.
Some fundamental errors of the Labour party,
mainly its leaders:
Background. Most of the political parties
currently in the Commons seem to have little
respect for the people as citizens of a polity,
here the UK. The people, acting through the
enfranchised electorate, have NOT been
adequately recognised as the supreme authority
in the state and as an "organ" or essential
actor in our political system of self
governance, democracy. The democratic proposal,
that the electorate should have the final,
binding, say about how we leave the EU or
whether we remain in it, was publicly proposed
in 2016 and has received strong public support.
The major parties failed utterly to
respond to this reasonable demand, which
required announcement well in advance of any
deadline, effective public information,
widespread debate, careful
preparation e.g. about franchise and wording of
ballot, many months of planning.
To the Labour party.
1. Their claim that gaining a general election
would be far superior to proposing and holding a
referendum on the final brexit "deal" (the
negotiated terms for leaving the EU under
Article 50 Treaty on european union). This may
be party political logic and instinct but it is
democratic nonsense. To say that a single issue
ballot of the whole electorate can be made
unnecessary by a general election is like
comparing a rosy, good apple with the whole
panoply of fruits and vegetables expected (or
promised) in a harvest. Britain's relationship
to the rest of Europe (mainly EU) is a single
albeit complex issue which demands and requires
the full attention of all the people. A single
parliament (opposition and governing group) and
single government (especially one like Theresa
May's which lacks a majority in the elected
House of Commons) have no legal nor
constitutional right to drag the whole
population over a "brexit" cliff WITHOUT
obtaining the full and well informed consent and
mandate of the people in a plebiscitary ballot.
2. The people's right to take the final decision
about "brexit" has by party political jousting
been relegated to a possible, not even a
confirmed role, of "back-stop" or last resort.
Some leaders of the Labour party have proposed
this for several months, recently (now late
December 2018) have several prominent tories
made similar suggestions (although the sincerity
of these suggestions must be regarded
sceptically). Only if the latest (of several
"definitive") of Theresa May's proposals to
leave the EU were to be rejected by Parliament
would then, possibly, the People be asked in a
referendum about their opinion. The result, so
our intrepid rulers, would probably not be
binding on government and others. According to
the ruling élite, the people cannot be trusted
to make an intelligent judgement about a complex
matter of state. In the context of "brexit" it
seems that the politicians fear that the people,
now better informed about UK and EU, could well
decide against the interests of the political
parties, their ambitions for power, their
cronies and donors.
--------------------------------
To follow, if time allows:
Part TWO (b)
Negative role of the largest political
parties, for many months they have hindered
the people's right to take the final,
definitive, sovereign decision about brexit.
b.
Conservative and unionist party
("Tories")
----------------------------------------------
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R ~ GB
http://www.iniref.org/
Link to site index
http://www.iniref.org/steps.html
Basic presentation
Contact: info@iniref.org