‘People’s vote’ or Brexit?

by Amit Roy

BREXIT is like the Kashmir problem – there is no solution to it.

Talk of a second referendum is getting stronger, but even if one was held, it is unlikely to bring the warring sides together.

For a start, there is no guarantee that a second referendum – called a “people’s vote” in some circles – would produce a result that would allow the UK to remain a member

of the European Union.

But even if the vote was narrowly in favour of scrapping the result of the first referendum in 2016 – 51.9 per cent to 48.1 per cent in favour of leaving the EU – this would not be

accepted by Brextremists.

The Labour party conference is debating the compromise motion: “If we cannot get a general election, Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including

campaigning for a public vote.”

However, Labour’s shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, insists a second referendum should be about the actual deal and whether the government should be sent back to conduct

further negotiations. In his opinion, the people’s vote should not give people the option of reversing the result of the first referendum.

He expressed fears that another referendum would reopen “all sorts of xenophobic feelings and a rise of the right”, adding “I don't want to revive Ukip in any way or even the

far-right”.

To which Labour MP David Lammy responded that it would be “farcical” to have a vote without the option of remaining in the EU.

“A people’s vote is the only realistic option to save this country from the car crash of Brexit. No Tory or DUP MP is likely to vote for a general election. Turkeys do not tend to vote for Christmas. We’ve now got to turn up the noise until we secure a public vote which gives us the option to remain in the UK.”

Meanwhile, the prime minister Theresa May wants to stick to her ‘Chequers deal’, which Brexiteers such as Boris Johnson, David Davies and Jacob Rees-Mogg say keeps the UK too closely tied to the EU. It would not allow Britain to strike free trade agreements with countries such as the US, China and India.

Other Tories oppose Chequers for the opposite reason – they say the British economy will suffer and jobs will be lost.

Many trade unionists, whose members voted in droves for Brexit, have woken up to the fact that when the UK leaves the EU, ordinary workers will suffer the most.

Unite assistant general secretary Tony Burke criticised Conservative MP Sir Bernard Jenkin for claiming Jaguar Land Rover was “making it up” by warning a hard Brexit would

wipe out its profits and cost tens of thousands of jobs.

Burke said: “Tell that to 1,000 lorry drivers who bring components to and from the UK and the EU each day. Tell that to 10,000 track workers in Jaguar Land Rover working in

production and design that the crisis is being made up. And tell that to thousands of workers in the supply chain, including our steel workers, who rely on these contracts.”

It would be too cruel to say these are the very people who were duped into voting for Brexit – and it would be poetic justice if they lost their jobs or saw a fall in their

standard of living or generally suffered as a result.

So what do we do now? Something akin to a government of national unity? Despite all the talk of a second referendum, I find it hard to see the process of Brexit being reversed

at this late stage. Maybe Britain should have an understanding with the EU that it could rejoin the club in, say, five years if being outside was seen not to work.