Muddled mandates and the EU Referendum

Brexit means Brexit were among the first words spoken by Theresa May when she was anointed by Conservatives as our new Prime Minister. She swiftly followed that up by appointing prominent Brexiteers to key Government roles to direct the UK withdrawal from the EU.

Brexiteers argue that the outcome of the EU referendum provides the UK with a clear and unequivocal mandate to take the country out of the EU. Well, not quite: the result delivered confused and conflicting mandates.

Firstly, two out of the four countries which comprise the UK voted to remain: overwhelmingly so in the case of Scotland. Brexiteers do not therefore have a UK-wide leave mandate. It is important to remember that Scotland and Northern Ireland are countries not English counties. Scottish and Irish voters delivered a clear and unequivocal Remain mandate which deserves as much respect as the UK-wide vote: quite how that can be achieved is, at present, unclear.

Secondly, during the campaign Brexiteers offered voters all sorts of different alternatives to UK membership of the EU - the Norwegian model, the Swiss model, UK in the Single Market, UK outside the Single Market etc. Consequently, there was no single definitive leave mandate. Many of the leave voters I spoke to during the campaign were convinced that UK access to the Single Market would be guaranteed post-exit: if that is not the case will they still be so keen to leave?

There is a distinct difference between giving a government a mandate to negotiate exit terms with our EU partners and a mandate to put into effect whatever deal is finally arrived at as that may not meet the expectations of those who voted to leave on 23 June.

Thirdly, at the 2015 General Election just under two thirds of the electorate did not vote for the current Conservative Government and 48% voted to remain in the EU on 23 June. Clearly, 48% did not amount to a winning score, but it was still a sizeable mandate from almost half of voters to remain: will their voice simply be swept aside and ignored in the rush to Brexit? Where is the political and democratic legitimacy - the mandate - for a Party elected with just over a third of votes at the last General Election casting aside the expressed views of almost half the electorate in the referendum? Add to that the election of a new Prime Minister chosen by 331 Tory MPs - not the nation - and more questions about mandates and legitimacy arise. Yes, of course, all of the above is within the Parliamentary and Party rule books, no laws have been broken, but none of this adds up to a clear and unequivocal mandate from the electorate.

What we need - and what the Lib Dems have called for - is a general election with our Parliament deciding future constitutional arrangements both within the UK and with our EU partners. After all, is that not what the Brexiteers were seeking: Parliamentary democracy?

* James Lindsay is a Lib Dem member in Harborough.