Although I campaigned, both locally and nationally, for Britain to remain in the EU, I accept the democratic decision of the British people. I stood as a Conservative candidate on a manifesto commitment to implement the result of the referendum.
Turnout for it was larger than at any election since 1992. No Prime Minister or party in British history has ever received as many votes as the vote to leave did. So the Government has a duty to deliver the referendum result and achieve the best possible result for the whole country. It is doing so, and I do not believe anyone could have done better than our Prime Minister, which is why I am supporting her.
The 2016 ballot paper presented voters with an unambiguous choice to remain in the EU or to leave. The consequences of either decision were communicated by campaign groups on both sides through a variety of print, audio-visual and digital media. The Government also sent a document to every household in the country on the benefits of staying in the EU. We explained that this was a once in a lifetime vote, not like a General Election, where the country can change its mind a few years later.
But the voters did not agree with us, and we lost. So, I agree with the Prime Minister when she said, ‘In the summer of 2016, millions came out to have their say. In many cases for the first time in decades, they trusted that their vote would count; that after years of feeling ignored by politics, their voices would be heard. To ask the question all over again would be a gross betrayal of our democracy – and a betrayal of that trust.’
Some campaign groups are suggesting that another referendum would be a good idea because Members of Parliament are voting more than once. Firstly, a vote in parliament can be arranged in a matter of hours. Secondly, MPs are discussing the method of withdrawal, not the question itself.
It is true that there have been some demographic changes since 2016, but we always knew that would be the case during this period, but that is true of any election. Indeed, when the Coalition Government introduced the Fixed Parliament Act, it was a factor we considered. There are changes to the electoral register every year, and we don’t hold annual elections at any level.
In addition, there have been a number of conflicting opinion polls recently, so I am not convinced that any such second vote would be as clear cut as campaigners are suggesting.
In addition, I believe there are a number of practical considerations, including the length of time such a poll would take, nine months at a conservative estimate, so creating further uncertainty for businesses and the country as a whole.
Even deciding what the question would be would be contentious. A look at the Electoral Commission’s website for some of its guidelines to see that this is a complex issue.
And what if the results were the exact opposite of 2016, but on a lower turnout. Which would then have the greater legitimacy?
For all these reasons, I am not convinced that another referendum would be helpful in moving us forward. Rather, I believe it could result in even greater long term bitterness and division in the country.
Patrick McLoughlin - March 2019