MPs were right to a take a second referendum off the table

The Commons has voted for a Brexit delay but rejected a second referendum. That does not guarantee that Brexit will be delayed or there will not be a second referendum. The will of parliament is, however, now very clear.

Our haphazard Prime Minister will now attempt a third, and possibly even a fourth, attempt at passing the Withdrawal Agreement. It may pass thanks to panicking Brexiteers but that is by no means certain either.

If it does pass, then we must appeal for an extension to build a majority in parliament around a sustainable solution and a clear direction, which may well be based on enhancing the political declaration to reflect the desire for a close political and economic relationship.

Whatever way forward is found, MPs were right to reject a second referendum. The “people’s vote” crowd seem to imagine that the campaign during such a referendum would involve an urbane discussion about whether this is a good idea and whether we should think again. No, it would be an almighty mess and it would greatly deepen our constitutional crisis and emasculate parliament even further. The crumbling party political system would break down totally.

A second referendum would be a bitter culture war bringing out the very worst in everybody. A vicious debate about democratic betrayal, treachery, elitism, nationalism, snobbery and xenophobia. The country would be horribly divided even further across generations, class, and regions, and between urban and rural Britain. It would be twice as toxic as the last referendum. I don’t say “don’t do it” out of fear of the far right, to hell with them, but I fear it would not heal the social fabric of this country nor its imploding political system.

A second referendum would be democratic, but it would have no more democratic credentials than the first. A narrow win for Remain would be a strong possibility, but can you imagine what would happen to our politics afterwards? Just look at the disaster that is our national debate right now and think about what effect the cancelling of Brexit would have on Leave voters. How could it be argued that it fairly cancels out the first vote?

The argument is made, of course, that the first one was corrupt. It wasn’t democratic, say Remain campaigners, because of dark money or Russia or overspending. All these things need to be taken into consideration and are arguments for overhauling UK electoral law and the introduction of regulation for online political advertising. We cannot, however, be sure whether they swung the vote that was decided by a relatively narrow, but very clear, majority. Public perception after a second referendum would likely be that British democracy is a swizz.

There is democratic legitimacy behind the UK leaving the EU. In 2015 the Conservative Party won a majority on a manifesto promising a referendum. In May 2015 MPs passed the European Union Referendum Act. In June 2016 the UK voted to leave the EU. In February 2017 MPs voted to trigger Article 50. In May 2017 Labour and the Conservatives both promised in their manifestos to respect the result of the referendum and won 82.3% of the vote between them.

The Conservatives formed a government.

The original leave vote shouldn’t have been that much of a surprise. Although it is often said that the EU wasn’t listed in voters’ priorities, surveys still show the UK has been a consistently Eurosceptic country, especially since the Maastricht treaty in the early 1990s ceded more sovereignty. What if Leave won a second referendum?

Hardliners would take this as an endorsement of the hardest Brexit. Remainers ought to consider that as many MPs surely have.

It is time our elected representatives realise they have a duty to pull themselves together and manage this properly. Yes, at the moment it is very much about damage control because of how badly it has been handled from day one, but they need to find a way forward and then we may find room for a more optimistic outlook.

Then, with withdrawal agreed, it becomes a matter of securing a sustainable, dynamic, close partnership with the EU, that is mutually beneficial economically and politically. In doing so we must prevent the insular, parochial minority – whether they be from the right or left – from shaping the future of this country. We have to sort ourselves out. And a second referendum is not the way to do it.