My MP, Alistair Jack, recently wrote to me, and other constituents, explaining why it was his intention to support Teresa May’s deal. The full text of his letter may be found here. In his letter he argues against a second referendum, saying that “we cannot play the best of three, five or even seven, with the results of a democratic referendum.” This argument is frequently deployed to undermine the credibility of a second referendum, but in truth we now know clearly what the choices are facing us, and there is every reason to suppose that the outcome of a second referendum would be decisive whatever the result might be.
Here is my full response to Mr Jack.
Dear Alistair Jack
Thank you for your letter summarising your reasons for supporting the Prime Minister’s Brexit deal. I have read your letter carefully, and I too am of the opinion, that the deal is a tribute to the “resolve, stoicism and resilience” of Mrs May.
I have a problem, however, in that I consider the deal unlikely to satisfy many of those who voted in favour of Brexit, and am concerned that, when these numbers are put together with those who clearly still wish to remain, an exit on the basis of Mrs May’s deal is unlikely to be one with which most people will be satisfied. It will in fact represent the one compromise we should not accept; the compromise of our democracy.
Your arguments against a second referendum are unconvincing. Three former Prime Ministers are in favour of a referendum, as are a significant number in the Conservative party, including Justine Greening and Joe Johnson.
Tony Blair, when recently interviewed on Andrew Marr, made it clear that he would, at this point, feel able to accept the outcome of such a referendum, even were it to result in his least favoured option, that of exit on WTO terms.
Of course there are those attempting to muddy the waters as regards what may be considered democratic, but my own feeling is that the British people must own the decision, and that this can only be achieved by a second referendum; ultimately, this offers the best prospect for the future health of our democracy, regardless of outcome.
In so saying, I do not underestimate the potential of some serious social unrest, amongst those who would inevitably feel cheated were the outcome to be unfavourable from their point of view. I think however, that we store up problems in our future, if we do not use a fundamentally democratic instrument to determine our way out of the current impasse.
Yours sincerely
Stephen Shellard
Carruchan 