The Observer view on giving voters their say on Brexit

[nitpicker]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/14/observer-editorial-need-to-give-voters-their-say

The Observer view on giving voters their say on Brexit

Sun 14 Apr 2019 06.00 BST

(snip)
Six months is ample time for our politicians to grasp the nettle. But parliament remains gridlocked, with no majority in favour of anything, and it is difficult to see what more time can do, by itself, to fix this. The EU has been clear that while it is open to redrafting the non-binding political declaration, it will not reopen negotiations on the withdrawal agreement on the terms of our exit. So a majority of MPs backing the existing withdrawal agreement remains the only way for Britain to leave with a deal. That looks implausible. The DUP is unlikely to shift its position on the backstop and the hard Eurosceptic flank of the Conservative party has little incentive to fall in line when it can hold out for the new no-deal cliff edge at the end of October. And even as cross-party talks continue, a Conservative-Labour compromise on a softer form of Brexit is a remote possibility because it would probably split both parties irrevocably. For Labour, there is no way of ensuring that any guarantees Theresa May offers with regard to the future relationship would be binding – she or her successor could look to build a different coalition of support in parliament altogether to shape the relationship after the withdrawal agreement is passed.

The gridlock is a feature of a two-party, majoritarian political system that is only capable of resolving questions that divide along party lines, not those that cross it. It’s why a general election is unlikely to provide much clarity, even if it were to deliver a majority rather than a hung parliament. Neither of the two main parties looks capable of rallying around an unambiguous Brexit position, with clear water separating them.

The only way out of this ruinous stalemate remains a confirmatory referendum on the withdrawal agreement. The principled case for this, which the Observer first made more than two years ago, remains as strong as ever. There was no firm Leave proposition on the table in 2016. Voters were told by the Leave campaigns that Brexit would result in Britain seizing back control, all the while freeing up vast sums of cash for spending on public services and boosting businesses. All that the result provided was a mandate for the government to negotiate the best exit terms it could get.

Now there is a firm deal, it would be unthinkable for parliament to ratify it without putting it back to voters, particularly given the gulf between what they were promised and what has been achieved. The reality of Brexit, with all its tough trade-offs – and the fact that there is no way of achieving a clean break from the EU that respects the Good Friday agreement – is embodied in May’s withdrawal agreement. The idea that voters should not get a say on the terms and conditions of the most important postwar decision facing Britain is preposterous. If the merits of that principled argument are not, in themselves, enough to convince, the pragmatic case becomes stronger with each passing week: there is clearly no other resolution to this gridlock in sight. Before the European elections, Labour will have to decide whether it is in favour of a soft Brexit compromise or confirmatory referendum. Labour MPs should vote for May’s withdrawal agreement on the proviso it gets put to voters. Not only is it the right thing to do, it will benefit Labour electorally: in almost every Labour seat, most Labour supporters voted to stay in 2016. As Richard Corbett, the Labour party leader in the European parliament, warns, a failure to do so would risk Labour leaching votes to other parties in the European elections.
(snip)