Hacker News Reader

Comment by oddlyaromatic | Hacker News Reader

I think parent was referring to the "let's fund our NHS" idea... The one on the big bus.

In my opinion the referendum was too simple to mean much. So much about leaving was not known. When a concrete deal is proposed and the terms and consequences are more clear, I think the public should have another vote on whether that specific deal passes muster. Leave voters surely did not all intend "leave in any way possible no matter what the conditions".

View on HN

I think much about remaining was not known either. One thing that was clear was that a vote to remain was not a vote for the status quo.

But sure, it would have been nice to have been provided with more detail on what sort of Brexit we'd have. Perhaps the government at the time could have given greater clarity regarding that. Although, given the fact the government underwent a massive reshuffle, and the fact that the UK still has to negotiate terms with the EU, it might have been rather a challenge.

What was unknown about remaining?

For one thing, how much further the "ever closer union" would go. There had already been chattering about an EU army, and it was only until after the referendum vote went through that we got concrete details on it. There was also the prospect of other countries joining the EU. Was that going to happen or not? We simply didn't (and still don't) know.

I agree it would have a been a challenge, if not impossible, to truly give details on the meaning of Leave before those details were negotiated. The Leave vote has of course put the UK on the path to a specific deal. Does enough of the public want to pull the trigger on a specific deal that it would survive another vote is an interesting question to me.

I wasn't really close to this one (Irish, and living abroad at that) but I'm surprised to hear that Remain was not a vote for, approximately, the status quo.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com