Yet Another Look at the UK Referendum of 23 June 2016  

Barry and Margaret Williamson
September 2018

Introduction

For the thinking people of the UK, 2016 was a year divided into two halves; the dividing line fell somewhere in the early hours of Friday 24 June. We were in the Netherlands at that time, on our way to Germany, Poland, Sweden and the far north of Scandinavia. At one moment, Europe was the free and open continent it always hoped to be after centuries of conflict. An hour later the whole magnificent project was thrown up in the air, ready to come down again in pieces. And all on the spin of a crooked coin!

Who Voted and How did they Vote?

17.1 million people voted to leave which is:

52% of those who voted

37% of those who were on the Electoral Register

32% of those who were eligible to vote

26% of the 'British People' as a whole

Were the 17.1 million voting to leave the EU in any way representative of the British population as a whole?

In fact, they were proportionally:

·                     Older rather than younger

·                     Retired, unemployed or not working rather than employed

·                     White rather than BAME

·                     Male rather than female

·                     Living in areas of industrial decay rather than prosperous
           London and the Southeast

·                     In social-economic class C2 or DE rather than AB or C1

·                     In rented social housing rather than mortgage holders or private
           renters

·                     Unqualified or with low qualifications rather than graduate or
           equivalent

·                     Conservative rather than Labour

·                     Readers of the tabloid press rather than the broadsheets           

Who was Eligible to Vote?

Tories talk and write about the referendum result being the 'democratic will of the British people'. But who are these 'British people'?

British citizens, living in the UK and registered on the electoral register.

About 900,000 Commonwealth citizens (from 54 countries) who are resident in the UK.

EU citizens resident in the UK were ineligible to vote unless they were from Malta or Cyprus (who are in the Commonwealth), or the Republic of Ireland (the 1921 Anglo-Irish Treaty gave equal rights of residence, travel, work, etc to citizens of both countries). About a third of a million Irish citizens live and work in the UK.

Unlike in general elections, Commonwealth citizens in Gibraltar were allowed to vote in the EU referendum. 

 

To register as an overseas voter, British citizens must have been registered in a UK constituency less than 15 years ago.

Members of the House of Lords are usually ineligible to vote at UK General Elections, but were allowed to vote in the EU referendum.

A person may not be on the electoral register by their own choice (about 5 million) or due to ineligibility such as not yet being old enough (18 or more on voting day), being in prison, or not possessing UK citizenship.

British citizens who had lived abroad for more than 15 years were not allowed to vote, even if they were legally on the electoral register.

3 million or more EU citizens legally resident in the UK (compare Commonwealth citizens).

In total, the electoral commission reported that the size of the electorate on referendum day was 46.5 million and 72.1 per cent of that number (33.5 million) turned out to vote.


Could  there have been a Different Result?

Dominic Cummings, a former adviser to Michael Gove, was the campaign director for the Leave side in the EU referendum. In his 20,000-word blog post Cummings dismisses the idea that the Brexit vote was caused by an unstoppable tide of populist feeling. Cummings writes that if only one of a series of very variable circumstances had gone differently, the result would have changed.

According to Cummings, who ran the Leave campaign, they won because:

1. Three big forces (the immigration crisis, the financial crisis and the euro crisis) created conditions in which the contest was competitive. 

2. Vote Leave exploited the situation imperfectly but effectively.

3. Cameron/Osborne made big mistakes.

He argues that if just one of these had been different, it is very likely Remain would have won.

We think there are other ways in which Leave might have lost:

4. If fewer lies had been told on the Leave side.

5. If the media had been more balanced in its reporting, and the BBC less gagged.

6. If fewer false news stories had circulated in social media.

7. If more young people had ensured that they were on the electoral register and had actually voted.

8. If 16-year olds had been able to vote, as in the Scottish independence referendum.

9. If British expats living outside the UK for over 15 years had been eligible to vote.

10. If the result was expressed as a percentage of the voting age population: only 17.4 million out of 51.3 million (or 34%) voted Leave.

11. If the Referendum Act had set a threshold for the result (say 60%) or for a minimum turnout (say 80% or more), as happens in most other countries.

12. If it had been clear whether the Referendum was advisory or legally binding (or 'mandatory', as the Tories are now claiming).

Was this the Way to Run a Referendum?

The result of the referendum was on the narrow margin of 52/48%, with only 37% voting Leave out of the total number of registered voters. This cannot possibly be regarded as the 'will of the British people'. In Australia, which has held 44 referenda since 1901, it is compulsory to vote, the vote is on a detailed proposal which has already gone through parliament (not just Yes/No to a vague proposal), and a majority of states have to agree with the overall majority vote. How different it would be if rules such as these had been applied in the UK.


How was Brexit Triggered?

Mrs May following her unelected rise to power, proposed using the Royal Prerogative (an Anglo-Norman noun for a Tudor invention) to trigger Article 50 without reference to parliament. The issue changed from parliament taking back control from the EU to parliament taking back control from the Queen and the Prime Minister. But how?

By the end of September 2016, step forward the unlikely combination of London businesswoman Gina Miller, born in Guyana, and her co-campaigner, London-based Spanish hairdresser Deir Tozetti Dos Santos, supported by crowd funding and the People's Challenge group set up by Grahame Pigney, a UK citizen who lives in France.

It took a High Court Hearing before 3 judges, then a Supreme Court Hearing before the 11 most eminent judges in the land, to consider the matter. The final ruling that parliament should decide came on 24 January 2017, about 4 months after the legal process began.

What was the result? 

A very short bill giving Mrs May power to trigger Article 50 was passed with no amendment by a large parliamentary majority, with the 'Opposition' three-line-whipped to support it. The House of Lords is threatened with closure if it dares to amend or slow the passage of the bill. Self-interest rules.

 Here is the bill that triggered Article 50 on 28 March 2017:

"BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

Power to notify withdrawal from the EU

(1) The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom's intention to withdraw from the EU.

(2) This section has effect despite any provision made by or under the European Communities Act 1972 or any other enactment."

Lunatics have taken over the parliamentary asylum and established a delusional Tudor court. Mrs May as Henry VIII wielding a Royal Prerogative (only I and the Queen can decide), David Davies as Cromwell (now beheaded) and Boris Johnson as the Court Jester (no longer amusing). Nor is there anything amusing about the treacherous Nigel Farage playing the part of a latter day Lord Haw-Haw. Former GP Dr Liam Fox, Secretary of State for International Trade, reminds us of the Greek civil servants in a newly set-up department, who went on strike when they found there was no work for the department that wasn't already being done by lots of other departments! Who would know whether or not Fox has his friend Adam Werritty with him on his foreign trips?


Lots of Cons; Where are the Pros?

So far, we have counted about a hundred negative effects of Brexit, the latest being the loss of registration and certification for our nuclear energy industry by leaving Euratom, UK citizens continuing to pay mobile phone roaming charges which have been banned in the EU, Ulster police being unable to cope if the Northern Ireland border were re-established, British driving licences and vehicle insurance no longer being recognised and queuing at major ports such as Dover, Cairnryan and Holyhead. There are no positives other than the vainglorious claims of ultra-right wing nationalists, interested simply in the survival of their narrow world view, defined only by power and money. How can free trade and unrestricted imports from around the world help the UK's struggling industry and agriculture?


Conclusion

If you want to enjoy the freedom to roam over this wonderful continent of Europe, with its unparalleled mix of languages, cultures, religions, cuisine, history, architecture, art, music, landscape etc (and yet, despite the diversity, working at peace together), then go and do it soon!