Okay yeah your referendum system is a lot different. Thanks. So in your system, how many years should pass before it’s okay, democratically-speaking, in your mind, to have an reversal referendum on something?
That's the point I was making... there is no "OK" period. We do things when it is necessary to do them.
In politics... world affairs.... things happen suddenly. A former Prime Minister, Harold Wilson once said "A week is a long time in politics." He was alluding to how rapidly things can change.
Ask yourself.... did you know how things were going to change for America when you got out of bed on the morning of 11 September 2001...?
This process of responding to unforseen events is a natural process for us. The disgrace of Brexit is that everything that has happened since June 2016 was not unforeseen. It was very much foreseen and many of us shouted long and loud at the time
But we were howled down by slogans such as "Project Fear." That became a catch phrase for everything. All warnings were automatically dismissed as "Project Fear".... and yet... the Brexiters issued their own Project Fear warnings about things such as migration:
12 Million Turks Moving To Britain
People actually believed that 12 million migrants from Turkey were poised to come here at a moment's notice if Britain voted remain.
Of course it was a lie. The Daily Express knew it was a lie, or at the very least, a flawed statement (a retraction was later printed) but they printed it just the same because it fitted their agenda. But the headline gained traction with the voters. By the time the retraction was printed, the headline had done it's work.
Is that how democracy works..? Not in my view it doesn't.
Bob might argue that the end justifies the means, but if those are his standards, then what gives him any moral right to lecture me on democracy...?
A referendum can be called at any time. There is no time restraint. Of course, I don't propose that we keep having them until we get the result we want.
What we want is a vote that is taken on the knowledge we now have that we didn't have in 2016. A vote that, this time, is based on an honest campaign because by heavens, we'll watch those bastards like bloody hawks next time. They won't get away with the lies, propaganda and criminal activity that they got away with then.
If a second referendum, after a fair and honest campaign resulted in a Leave outcome, returned by a voting public that is now aware of the consequences of leaving the EU, I would accept it because it was fair and took all the factors honestly into account.
If we vote with our eyes open, there can be no arguing with that.