Thread by @jonworth

There is only one coherent case against a #PeoplesVote - it’s if you oppose direct democracy and favour representative democracy.

Any other argument is incoherent.

1/

“Respect the 2016 referendum!”

A small majority voted for Leave, but without knowing how or on what terms. Now we know that detail, would everyone vote the same way?

2/

“My constituency voted leave!”

Maybe in 2016. But now? Are you sure? Even if you are sure, what is the problem with putting it back to the people?

3/

“There’ll be violence!”

Seriously that’s not an argument. Threat of violence to stop a vote happening - that’s what happens in dictatorships!

4/

“You’re just wanting more votes until you get the ‘right’ result!”

No. Clarity is vital. 2016 had one clear option (Remain) and one vague one (Leave, but no agreed plan). This time it’s different (if it’s May’s Deal vs. Remain)

5/

“We need to focus on [my hobby horse issue] instead!”

Yes there are major other problems in the country. But try solving any of those while you’re going through with Brexit and damaging the economy!

6/

“It’ll destroy the Labour Party!”

A majority of Labour voters voted Remain. A massive majority of Labour members back Remain. NOT backing a #PeoplesVote is more likely to destroy Labour!

7/

“I’ve promised my constituents Brexit will happen on 29 March!”

Ok. But at what price? A point must come where that cost - perhaps No Deal, perhaps the callousness of May’s Deal, is too high for you.

8/

“Everyone knew what they were voting for. There’s no need for a further vote!”

Oh really. News to me. The central question - hard vs. soft Brexit was unanswered in 2016. Now it is answered.

9/

We’re going to hear these sorts of cases made all the time in the next week. They need dismantling forcefully, thoughtfully and carefully.

A #PeoplesVote is the only viable way out of the #Brexit mess.

/ends