Right: deadly campaign: MP Jo Cox, who supported the Remain vote and (lower pic) the man who allegedly stabbed and shot her.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments opposing Britain leaving the European Union
1. The leave margin was too narrow and too few people voted
There is concern that the decision to leave the European Union is one that will have very far-reaching consequences. Critics of the referendum have therefore argued that it is one that has to be either approved or rejected by a significant percentage of voters.
A petition to have the EU referendum re-run has attracted over 4 million signatures. The prelude to the petition, on the Internet site on which it can be accessed, states, 'The margin between the results of UK voters for leaving the EU, and the UK voters to remain in the EU, is too narrow. Although a total voting turnout of 72% is high, it is still far too low for such a critical vote, and below a minimal 75% turnout.'
This petition argues that a 60% margin is the lowest level of support that would justify a decision being taken and that at least 75% of the electorate should vote. The petition states, '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.'
The petition also calls on the European Parliament to give the people of the United Kingdom an opportunity to remain should a second referendum clearly show that the minimal 75% turnout was reached, and with the voters in favour of staying in the EU by a margin of at least 20%.
Those who argue for a large voter participation rate and a large decision margin do so because they claim that the implications of the vote are so great that the action should not be taken without the backing of a strong majority of all citizens.
It is also stressed that this petition, which was in existence before the referendum result was known, is not partisan. It has not come into existence because those who want to remain within the EU are unhappy with the referendum result.
On May 16, 2016, over a month before the vote was taken, one of the leaders of the exit group, Nigel Farage, indicated that if the remain group secured a narrow majority he would call for a second referendum.
Farage stated, 'In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.'
Concern has been expressed; however, that if a second referendum were held the result may be no clearer cut. There are those who are worried that Great Britain could find itself with two inconclusive referendum results regarded as not binding by significant proportions of the population.
Prior to the 2016 referendum being held, Prime Minister David Cameron warned of the dangers of ongoing demands for referenda. Cameron stated, 'You cannot have neverendums. You have referendums. When people start talking about a second referendum before you have even had the first, you are demonstrating you are losing the argument.'
The underlying problem appears to be that there may be no national consensus on this issue. Where this is the case, it may not have been appropriate to attempt to solve the question via a referendum.
2. The Brexit vote operates in the interests of some voting blocs in Great Britain but not others
One of the major objections raised about the decision to leave the EU is that it was taken by a group of voters to advance what they believe to be their interests; however, it has been taken to the perceived disadvantage of other voting blocs.
The underlying reason why many want an overwhelming majority to support whatever decision is taken regarding the United Kingdom's membership of the EU is to prevent the possibility of one section of the electorate effectively imposing a decision on another.
It has been suggested, for example, that the age split in the vote is concerning as the oldest section of the electorate was significantly responsible for a decision which will have the greatest long-term impact on the younger members of the electorate who did not support it.
In a report published in The Times on June 24, 2016, it was stated that 'Polls showed that British pensioners were about three times more likely than the youngest voters to want a permanent break with the E.U.'
A 19-year-old, interviewed by The Times after the vote to leave, stated, 'To people my age it's pretty obvious. We stay.' Referring to his EU passport the young man when on to explain, 'It ensures a lifetime of freedom to travel and work in any of the union's 28 member states, each with its own culture to explore, its own charms and opportunities. So my generation has the most at stake in losing that.'
The effect of this demographic split has also been stressed by Felix Salmon in an opinion piece published on June 24, 2016. Salmon stated, 'This vote is...the grimmest of reminders of the power still held by the older generation, not only in the UK but around the world. Young Britons-the multicultural generation which grew up in and of Europe, the people who have only ever known European passports, voted overwhelmingly to remain. They're the generation that just lost its future.'
It has also been noted that this was a regional and class-based vote with a majority of white, working- and middle-class regional England determining the decision. It was not taken by the cities (especially London), by Scotland or by Northern Ireland. Felix Salmon observed, 'Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU; Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain. England drove this result, and specifically Little England-the older, whiter areas outside the big cities.'
It has been noted that this geographic and class distribution also reflects levels of education. In an analysis published on June 27, 2016, The Telegraph noted, 'According to the polls, university graduates were the most likely people to want to remain in the EU - while those with a GCSE or equivalent as their highest qualification were more likely to back Brexit.
This was a pattern that was reflected in the results - with the Brexit vote correlating with areas with high shares of people with no education.'
Real and perceived differences in life opportunities were a major factor in shaping voting behaviour in the EU referendum. Critics have noted the virtual impossibility of achieving a consensus solution that works in the interests of all.
3. The decision to leave the EU is politically destabilising for Great Britain
It has been noted that the Brexit decision has prompted politically instability within Great Britain.
The first casualty is the current Prime Minister and Conservative leader, David Cameron. When the leave vote was confirmed, Cameron announced that he would step down as Conservative leader and Prime Minister in October, 2016.
In his official statement outside 10 Downing Street, Cameron, who was one of the leaders of the Remain campaign, said the decision warranted a change in leadership. He stated, 'I will do everything I can as Prime Minister to steady the ship over the coming weeks and months, but I do not think it would be right for me to try to be the captain that steers our country to its next destination.'
Five candidates have nominated to succeed David Cameron as the Conservative party leader. Once two candidates have been determined, party members will vote for their leader in September. This jockeying for leadership has been condemned as destabilising within the party and the uncertainty as to who will lead has been criticised as being unsettling for the country as a whole.
British Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who was also a supporter of a Remain vote, has refused to resign in response to the referendum outcome. This however, is not promoting stability within his Party, as prominent Labour spokespeople have demanded that he leave. Labour MPs are currently considering a motion of no confidence in their leader. Dame Margaret Hodge, one of those who submitted the motion to Parliamentary Labour Party chairman, has claimed that Mr Corbyn had 'failed' a 'test of leadership'.
The United Kingdom's European Commissioner, Lord Hill, has chosen to stand down in light of the result of the referendum. This is not contributing to stability, as no decision has yet been taken as to whether Lord Hill will even be replaced. Asked whether the United Kingdom would be sending anyone to Brussels to take Lord Hill's place on the Commission, Downing Street replied, 'It will be for the next prime minister to decide, following discussions with European partners, what role the UK plays in the European Commission, given we remain a full member of the EU until we have left.'
More potentially destabilising in the long term is that as a result of the vote to leave the EU there is now the possibility that Scotland and Northern Ireland may choose to secede from the United Kingdom.
62% of those who voted in Scotland chose to remain with the EU. This means that a decision taken largely in England is now going to take Scots voters in a direction they do not want to go.
In 2015, Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish First Minister, indicated that Scotland's government could use a vote to leave the EU as a catalyst to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence. Sturgeon stated, 'If Scotland had voted to stay in and the UK as a whole votes to come out... it's highly likely that will trigger an overwhelming demand for a second referendum on independence...The democratic outrage of being taken out of Europe against our will, I think it would be almost inevitable.'
It is only two years since Scotland held a referendum to determine whether they would remain part of the United Kingdom. Then, some 45% voted to leave Great Britain, with a clear majority indicating they wished to remain. In a snap poll commissioned by The Sunday Times immediately after the Brexit referendum result, 52 percent of Scots claimed they would vote to leave the United Kingdom if a new referendum were held.
Even without a Scottish independence referendum, the Brexit vote could trigger a constitutional crisis. The legislation governing the Scottish Parliament says it cannot pass laws incompatible with EU law. A clean break with the EU would require these laws to be amended, which would normally require the consent of the Scottish Parliament. If the Scottish Parliament were to refuse and Westminster tried to impose this change a crisis in law, administration and politics would result.
There is also concern that Northern Ireland might also decide to leave the United Kingdom rather than leave the European Union. Northern Ireland depends on the EU for significant subsidies-nearly 90 percent of its farmers' incomes come from EU funding. 55.8% of Northern Ireland voters decided to remain with the EU, presumably at least in part because of their recognition of their economic reliance on the EU. Being a member of the EU has also helped to ease historical tension between Eire and Northern Ireland. When both were members of the EU there was easy movement across their shared border. Once Northern Ireland ceases to be a member of the EU, this easy access will end. The re-establishment of a formal border could destabilise good relations.
4. The action may undermine the European Union causing increased political, social and economic dislocation
There are those who are concerned that the Brexit result in the United Kingdom may lead other UE states to hold referenda that see them decide to leave the Union also.
On Friday June 24, 2016, Geert Wilders , the leader of the Dutch anti-immigrant PVV party, argued that The Netherlands should hold its own referendum on whether to leave the European Union following Britain's vote in favour of exiting the bloc.
Wilders stated, 'I congratulate the British people for beating the political elite in both London and Brussels and I think we can do the same. The Dutch would like to be in charge again of their own budget, their national borders and their immigration policy. We should have a referendum about a "Nexit" as soon as possible.'
In Italy the largest threat to remaining within the EU seems to come from the anti-establishment Five Star Movement, which recently had candidates elected as mayors of Rome and Turin and wants a referendum on leaving the eurozone.
In France, Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, has suggested that the French could follow Britain in leaving the EU, hailing the Brexit vote as the beginning of 'a movement that can't be stopped'.
Le Pen has stated that if she wins the French presidential election next April, she will hold an in/out referendum on the country's membership of the EU within six months. Other political leaders within France do not support this position; however, that only 41% of France is in favour of remaining within the EU, the extent of popular opposition to the Union may be sufficient to give Le Pen victory in the French presidential elections.
The recent Ipsos Mori survey found that 55% of France appeared to want to go to a referendum on whether their country should remain in the EU and that currently 41% claim they would vote to leave. The figures are higher in Italy where 58% would like a referendum and 48% would like to leave.
The same survey felt that many Europeans felt that Britain's vote to leave the EU would encourage other European states to do likewise. Only 18 per cent of EU respondents disagreed with the statement that if Britain left the union, other countries would follow while 48 per cent said they agreed.
It has been argued that if a couple of additional members states were to leave the EU a flow-on effect would be created, with the Union becoming a less viable economic, administrative and political entity and other states choosing to leave both because they were influenced by the example of others and because a reduced EU had less to offer them.
There have been warnings that should the EU collapse or be substantially reduced this would have dire political, economic and social effects, with negative repercussions for Europe and the rest of the world.
Prior to the Brexit vote, British Prime Minister, David Cameron, suggested that the United Kingdom's exit could lead to the breakdown of the entire EU and create the sort of nationalistically fuelled instability that had been the precursor to two world wars.
In a speech delivered on May 9, 2016, Prime Minister Cameron stated, 'The European Union has helped reconcile countries which were once at each others' throats for decades. Britain has a fundamental national interest in maintaining common purpose in Europe to avoid future conflict between European countries.' Cameron is clearly indicating that the EU has created common purpose between nation states that have had a history of belligerent interaction. The implication is that to undermine the EU is to increase the likelihood of war between these nation states.
It has further been suggested that the collapse of the EU would make the question of dealing with the influx of migrants and refugees into Europe even more difficult, increasing social and political instability within Europe and within those regions these people are fleeing.
It has also been suggested that the demise of the EU would have a devastating impact on the world economy. An unwinding of the EU would have huge repercussions for economies all over the world. The world's largest economy, the United States, has investments and trade ties with the EU that would be negatively impacted by a breakup of the EU.
A comment written by Andrew Beattie and published on Investopedia on January 30, 2016, states, 'This shrinking of the global trade and financial uncertainty could cause a worse global recession than that of the 2007-08 global financial crisis. The high growth economies that sell to the EU and US would slow down along with the rest of the world. Even China, which has diversified its trading partners, would see a decline as the western economies suffer losses on a national level along with every level of investor from institutional to retail to pension fund.'
5. Leaving the EU would have adverse economic consequences for Great Britain
There have been many predictions that leaving the EU would be economically harmful to the United Kingdom. Apart from the negative impact of the uncertainty that would inevitably be created, the negative impacts on other economies would have a flow-back effect on Britain. In a global economy, anything that harms the world economy is likely to harm individual members of it.
In addition to this, by leaving the EU Britain would surrender a large number of economic advantages to which its membership of the Union currently entitles it. Prime Minister Cameron outlined a number of these in his speech of May 9. Cameron stated, 'We are part of a single market of 500 million people which Britain helped to create. Our goods and, crucially, our services - which account for almost 80% of our economy - can trade freely by right. We help decide the rules. The advantages of this far outweigh any disadvantages.
Our membership of the single market is one of the reasons why our economy is doing so well, why we have created almost 2.4 million jobs over the last 6 years, and why so many companies from overseas - from China or India, the United States, Australia and other Commonwealth countries invest so much in the UK.'
Cameron concluded, 'The overwhelming weight of independent opinion - from the International Monetary Fund to the OECD, from the London School of Economics to the Institute for Fiscal Studies - also supports the fact that Britain will suffer an immediate economic shock, and then be permanently poorer for the long-term.'