In a moment of strange, almost eerie, recollection earlier today I pinpointed the precise instant that I became a contrarian, way back in 1980.
This thread seems designed to keep me in practice. Being told to be quiet, not the question the majority, and to accept opinion after opinion presented falsely as fact is just food and drink, yummy.
What kind of wonderful democracy wants to silence a minority? Especially a minority of 48%? That doesn’t seem wise, surely it’ll end in tears.
Having a look at our constitution is a good idea. Oh dear there is no written document, just a collection of statutes, common law, parliamentary conventions and interpretations of these. The one thing these point to is the sovereignty of parliament, which can change the nebulous constitution by passing a new statute. Sovereignty of parliament note, not of the people in a referendum. I thought this was about the most coherent argument in support of Brexit, the the EU dilutes the sovereignty of parliament. But it seems that many who want this principle upheld and reinforced don’t want parliament to decide about Brexit. They want the dictatorship of the majority as defined by an x in a box on a single day instead. Odd.
Sovereignty of Parliament includes making law to give the electorate decisions on vital matters like joining the Common Market and leaving the EU. When that is done, there is a high expectation by the electorate (not unreasonable surely) that Parliament will abide by the result. What if Parliament had refused to honour the 1970's Common Market referendum result and not joined? But it wouldn't have happened.
As a member of the minority, Stan, I hope you'll keep voicing your opinion. But the Tories and Labour are right that the result of the 2016 referendum must be honoured. Then we get into - what is honouring it, and we all go round in a circle. I see David Owen in the Sunday Times seems to agree with you on the Norway option. Hmm...