For and against Referenda
Twitter can be a very depressing and shallow means of communication and I often seriously consider ceasing to read or post on it. I continue to do so for two reasons
1) The great majority of news organisations and serious political journalists are on it, and reading what's coming up gives one a very up-to-date idea of what people are talking about.
2) Sometimes you find links to articles on other platforms which are well worth reading.
Today I found a thread which had links to two articles, one each for and against referenda and specifically the EU membership referendum.
As John Rentoul wrote of Paul Evans,
"Paul is one of the few who was against referendums before one produced a result he didn't like."
He wrote an article in 2010 called
"Why referendums should be banned,"
And a follow-up here a few days before the 2016 referendum about why he would happily have exchanged what he would consider the wrong decision on Brexit for a ban on future referenda.
John Rentoul also flagged up in the same thread a link to an article on the "SpinnerHugo" blog, also posted shortly before the referendum, called
"In praise and defence of the referendum"
which very effectively puts the other side of the argument.
Put together the articles by these two people represent a balanced and thought-provoking view on the case for and against referenda.
(BTW John and Paul obviously think the plural of referendum is referendums, so when I quote them I have used the form they employ. When forming my own words however I stick stubbornly to the view that the plural of referendum is referenda.)
SpinnerHugo later wrote of the referendum that
"At some point it was inevitable, and would probably have been lost at any later point too."
Must confess I agree with that.
I believe that a referendum of some kind on Britain's relationship with the EU became inevitable at the moment Gordon Brown broke the election promise to hold one on the EU Constitution by ratifying the Lisbon treaty which is about 95% identical to it without a referendum.
1) The great majority of news organisations and serious political journalists are on it, and reading what's coming up gives one a very up-to-date idea of what people are talking about.
2) Sometimes you find links to articles on other platforms which are well worth reading.
Today I found a thread which had links to two articles, one each for and against referenda and specifically the EU membership referendum.
As John Rentoul wrote of Paul Evans,
"Paul is one of the few who was against referendums before one produced a result he didn't like."
He wrote an article in 2010 called
"Why referendums should be banned,"
And a follow-up here a few days before the 2016 referendum about why he would happily have exchanged what he would consider the wrong decision on Brexit for a ban on future referenda.
John Rentoul also flagged up in the same thread a link to an article on the "SpinnerHugo" blog, also posted shortly before the referendum, called
"In praise and defence of the referendum"
which very effectively puts the other side of the argument.
Put together the articles by these two people represent a balanced and thought-provoking view on the case for and against referenda.
(BTW John and Paul obviously think the plural of referendum is referendums, so when I quote them I have used the form they employ. When forming my own words however I stick stubbornly to the view that the plural of referendum is referenda.)
Both Paul Evans and SpinnerHugo voted remain but it is pretty clear that neither is basing their opposition to or support of the principle of calling a referendum on their liking or not liking the result of any specific plebiscite. Both wrote their articles before we knew how the 2016 vote would go.
SpinnerHugo later wrote of the referendum that
"At some point it was inevitable, and would probably have been lost at any later point too."
Must confess I agree with that.
I believe that a referendum of some kind on Britain's relationship with the EU became inevitable at the moment Gordon Brown broke the election promise to hold one on the EU Constitution by ratifying the Lisbon treaty which is about 95% identical to it without a referendum.
Comments