Sparkling British from the North Downs perhaps???

Ooooooh! You really got me with that one.

When you vote in a one off referendum, you don't get the chance to change your mind. That is rather obvious.

Christ, even with an election you usually have to wait 5 years.

Just tell me what you would say if we voted Leave again in your daft second referendum.

Did you happen to see the interview that Blair had with Andrew Neil tonight? He was arguing some not so dissimilar points to my own and was asked this question. His response was very certain. He said that whatever the result was would have to be accepted by everyone. His reasoning, as far I can recall it, was that we all know much more about the subject and can now make an informed decision, which in 2016 we could not. Alongside this he said was that a line needs to be drawn or we will be debating this for years to come.

I think this is right. It would obviously, with hindsight, have been better to have announced in 2016 that we would hold a confirmatory referendum when the terms were known, should the decision have been to leave. However, neither that result nor the current mess was anticipated.

Well, I've read quite a lot of what you've put up.....You make the discordant argument that we apparently shouldn't be able to influence parliamentarians with referendum results....However, MPs are only in parliament because they won voting contests.....So essentially you are picking and choosing what parts of democracy you like and....oh look....it appears it's just those parts that suit your own politics.

I wonder if there had been a referendum on whether we should have entered into Blair's Iraqi war and it came back 'no'.....I wonder if you would have made the same argument.

Did you happen to see the interview that Blair had with Andrew Neil tonight? He was arguing some not so dissimilar points to my own and was asked this question. His response was very certain. He said that whatever the result was would have to be accepted by everyone. His reasoning, as far I can recall it, was that we all know much more about the subject and can now make an informed decision, which in 2016 we could not. Alongside this he said was that a line needs to be drawn or we will be debating this for years to come.

I think this is right. It would obviously, with hindsight, have been better to have announced in 2016 that we would hold a confirmatory referendum when the terms were known, should the decision have been to leave. However, neither that result nor the current mess was anticipated.

Have you changed your mind?

Didn't think so..

Also your "reasoned argument" is fatally floored, in that you keep insisting that it is for Parliment to decide but it is not. There was a referendum. That it when Parliment give the choice to the people. It was for the people to decide and they did.

However there are people like yourself that will only accept a vote if it goes their way. I can think of a few tin pot countries where the govenment use the same idea to stay in power for decades. Is that now the UK as well?