Politics these days plays heavily on the language of emotion. Fewer words have been coined in modern times with the same emotional resonance as Brexit. Now though we have another term that is causing a schism across political lines. 'People's Vote' is the phrase that has strongly divided public opinion amongst politicians and the populace alike. Apart from the Leave side's opposition to any form of second referendum, there is also a danger of using the term "people" to describe only one section of the population. When Prime Minister Theresa May speaks of “the will of the people” to leave the European Union, she is talking about less than a third of Britain’s overall population. And, on the other side, when there’s talk of “a people’s vote” it serves to antagonise those who can justifiably argue that over 30 million people already voted in 2016.
Therefore what we call any new referendum is going to be crucial. And "a people’s vote" is not necessarily the best option even if that term has been useful in gathering support for the idea. It feeds into the climate created by such politicians as President Donald Trump in America when he uses the term "people" to refer mainly to those who vote for him and those who agree with his political point of view.
Britain right now is a very divided society in which the language of emotion has clouded many of the harsh realities that will have to be faced in the event of any form of Brexit. At the same time, there is still a sense amongst many that ‘remain’ belongs to a metropolitan elite content to preserve a status quo that has been favourable to their prospects and lifestyle. Any new vote has to make a genuine effort to reach across the current political divide.
Right now the term “People’s Vote” seems likely to lead the Remain campaign back down the same path as 2016. If we have learned anything from the last two years, it is that people react to referendums with heads not hearts, emotions not economics. Over 30 million ‘people’ voted last time around. Several million of these must be convinced to change their vote in a second referendum if the Britain is not to make a departure from the European Union. Choice of language therefore is crucial. There has to be a tone of conciliation and a philosophy that strives for unity across four parts of a Union within which two parts have segments of their population seeking exits of a different kind. The language of a second referendum has to avoid any suggestion of going over the heads of those who voted Leave last time around.
This is not about holding another referendum with a result already pre-determined. That would be a subversion of democracy. Any new referendum genuinely has to be about testing the will of the public as a consequence of Parliament being unable to reach agreement. Alternative suggestions to a people’s vote include a “Final Say” referendum or the “public vote” that Keir Starmer has called for at the Fabian Society’s New Year Conference. This reiterated the fact that the Labour Party’s conference of September 2018 had already left the door open on a second referendum, particularly in the event of not getting a general election.
Each of these options all sound quite similar to those opposed to them. Therefore I would suggest something radical in British politics that is already utlised in Ireland. Perhaps since so much of the present debate revolves around the border in Ireland, that seems appropriate. There seems no other way out of this impasse now than putting informed choices and hard facts into the debates preceding a new referendum and to postpone leaving until the elusive consensus has been reached.
That could happen in the form of a Preferendum in which voters would have a series of options moving the debate away from its present binary form. Rather than simple leave versus remain options, several realistic choices would be placed on the ballot with the final decision reached by a count of the public vote on the basis of proportional representation. In this way, a more educated and reasoned set of arguments might precede the final decision which will affect us all for decades.
To those who cry foul about the threat to British democracy, we can again look across the water for precedent. In 1918 the Irish people voted for their monarchy free version of national sovereignty on the island as a whole. Had that decision not been overturned there would be no mention of a backstop today. As it is, Ireland has become symbolic of all the challenges Britain faces in leaving the European Union. It’s too big a question to come down to that simple binary choice offered to us back in 2016. Nobody wins if everybody loses out as a result of Brexit and on the other hand everybody wins if it’s a success. Right now though, without proper plans, there is no way it can be anything but a disaster.