In order to justify arguments against a People’s Vote, Alexander Brown attempts to identify and debunk what he refers to as several ‘myths’ that are often relied upon.

Regardless of where you stand on the People’s Vote, however, his article hardly shows the strength from which to make that decision.

For starters, the reasons for a second referendum are surely more than the seven he identifies.

Where is the mention of the changing demographics? He acknowledges the argument that ‘people may have changed their minds’, but not that there are now over two years’ worth of young eligible voters that had no say in the original referendum.

Likewise, there are 2016 voters at the other end of the age range that have since deceased. From this I would ask: why should the future be in the hands of the dead rather than the hands of a statistically more educated younger population? This major hurdle needs addressing first if his argument is to be even remotely convincing.

Let us also analyse the statement that ‘people may have changed their minds’. The 2016 referendum asked if the UK should ‘Remain’ in, or ‘Leave’, the EU.

However, given the complexity surrounding the UK’s final leave from the EU as well as May’s recently overturned 585-page deal (which was essentially a subscription to remain in the EU in everything but name, but with no say in EU decision-making), the question is dramatically misleading.

It assumes (and even suggests) that leaving the EU is a simple choice that the UK has the capacity to make, much like asking a child, ‘Do you want waffles?’, regardless of knowing if there are any in the pantry.

It’s not about changing your mind, it’s about giving the original question much needed clarity.


Follow Concrete on Twitter to stay up to date


What do you think?