British European Union referendum

I couldn’t not comment on this referendum. The country is split in two with 1.3 million votes separating them. The leave-supporters are pleased and the remain-supporters are desperately unhappy. Most people expected the result to be the other way round. Another group which is hugely discontented is that of the Brits who have been resident in Europe for more than fifteen years, and have been disenfranchised by Mr Cameron. The reason for this is not clear and seems difficult to defend since these Brits are in the front line, living and working in countries of the EU. There are said to be some two to three million of us and if this is the case and we had been able to vote, then the referendum result would have been reversed. This is therefore a vote which leaves an unpleasant taste in the mouth. It is not ‘job well done’.

There is a petition which is trying to influence this result, called: EU Referendum Rules triggering a 2nd EU Referendum. The head is: We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60% based on a turnout less than 75% there should be another referendum. When I looked a few minutes ago, there were 3.75 million signatures; it will therefore have to be debated by Parliament. The Scottish government says it is trying to block the Brexit. Others are saying that a referendum is only consultative, that Parliament is not obliged to heed the result. Britain is held by most to be the home of parliamentary democracy; it would be extremely malodorous if our legislators chose to override the vox populi. It looks very much as if out is out, as the European Commission likes to put it.

Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty is the mechanism for leaving the EU; unfortunately, there are no explanatory details in the treaty. Despite Mr Juncker and others saying that Article 50 must be invoked without delay, it remains Britain’s decision when to announce that she is leaving. There is nothing to be gained by doing things precipitately. These are uncharted waters and Britain has chosen to be the guinea-pig. Before formally invoking Article 50, the Tory party has to choose a new leader and the Labour party will very likely have to do as much.

Immigration is said to have been the main theme of this referendum, the power behind Brexit. But I think that an even more powerful factor was the unelected nature of the European Commission, that unelected functionaries can tell elected members of Parliament what their laws must be, what they can and cannot do, whom they can or cannot extradite –  this has always been a major sticking point. When Katya Adler, the BBC’s European editor, asked Jean-Claude Juncker, the Commission president, if this were the end of the EU, he growled “No” and with a scowl left the press conference. This was exactly the kind of arrogance that the British abhor in an unelected representative. Other Europeans are even blaming him for Brexit as he pushes for “more Europe” including a European army which Britain is dead-set against. Juncker is a divisive force; his election was opposed by Cameron and he is on record as saying that Brexit will not be an amicable divorce.

Of course, it didn’t help the Remain cause that the world and his wife were telling the British voters that if they voted to leave, World War Three would start the following day. President Obama, Christine Lagarde and the hundreds of eminent scientists, economists, church leaders, Nobel Prize winners, blue-chip company bosses all saying sign here, not there, doubtless provoked a backlash.

Sovereignty and take back control are powerful concepts in a campaign. They won the day. Now, cool heads and time are needed. Festina lente.