Best of 3?

Statement on that petition:

"The EU Referendum Act received Royal Assent in December 2015. The Act was scrutinised and debated in Parliament during its passage and agreed by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The Act set out the terms under which the referendum would take place, including provisions for setting the date, franchise and the question that would appear on the ballot paper. The Act did not set a threshold for the result or for minimum turnout."

For once, CF finds himself in agreement. 

Dry your eyes, kids ...


Anonymous said...

I would have expected that details about what levels of turnout, and what percentage of that turnout voted to remain or leave, would be required for any action to be taken, would have been stated before the referendum took place. I would have expected that what action would be taken in each case would have been stated in advance as well. It appears that the plan was for the remain side to win so that UKIP would be sidelined and the government simply hadn't considered the possibility that the remain side would lose. Cameron said that he would invoke article 50 straight away and that he wouldn't resign, he never expected to be in a position to have to honour these pledges. When the Brexit side won, the government didn't have a clue what to do because they never expected it to happen.