Instead of pushing the country over a cliff?
OK, this is pretty out-there, but I have to say it, sorry!
Invoking Article 50 is not the brave thing to do.
A truly brave leader might stand up and say:
"Mistakes have been made. Referendums are great tools of direct democracy, but most countries have a written, considered constitution and do not base decisions that will affect the future of everyone alive today for the rest of their lives on the electoral flip of a coin as my predecessor did.
Lies have been told, on both sides, but there is even evidence that another country was involved in engineering the result. A country whose leader believes that a weakened Europe and UK is in his best interests.
This is very difficult, but I have decided that on balance I cannot proceed with the Article 50 declaration. I will instead schedule the dissolution of Parliament for a general election and a further referendum on the European question.
The voters of the UK must have a further say on whether they wish to go ahead with such a momentous change. The referendum must unfortunately again be a 50.1 wins decision. Future constitutional changes must be made with no less than two thirds of the votes cast. I will stand down as Prime Minister, but if my party will allow me, will lead it on the basis that it is in the UK's best interests to remain an active member of one of the world's largest trading blocks, even though it does need reform to address the democratic deficit presented by the European Parliament."
That would be a very brave leader. One who might even get my vote.
Invoking Article 50 is not the brave thing to do.
A truly brave leader might stand up and say:
"Mistakes have been made. Referendums are great tools of direct democracy, but most countries have a written, considered constitution and do not base decisions that will affect the future of everyone alive today for the rest of their lives on the electoral flip of a coin as my predecessor did.
Lies have been told, on both sides, but there is even evidence that another country was involved in engineering the result. A country whose leader believes that a weakened Europe and UK is in his best interests.
This is very difficult, but I have decided that on balance I cannot proceed with the Article 50 declaration. I will instead schedule the dissolution of Parliament for a general election and a further referendum on the European question.
The voters of the UK must have a further say on whether they wish to go ahead with such a momentous change. The referendum must unfortunately again be a 50.1 wins decision. Future constitutional changes must be made with no less than two thirds of the votes cast. I will stand down as Prime Minister, but if my party will allow me, will lead it on the basis that it is in the UK's best interests to remain an active member of one of the world's largest trading blocks, even though it does need reform to address the democratic deficit presented by the European Parliament."
That would be a very brave leader. One who might even get my vote.
Comments