With Theresa May firing the starting pistol on Brexit over the weekend, the world is coincidentally full of referenda (referendums?).
Hungary has just voted in a referendum to prevent the EU from telling it how many migrants it should take. A turnout of 50% was required but the vote only achieved 43%; however 98% of those supported the government's stance. Naturally, the Hungarian PM claimed it as a victory with a spokesman calling it 'binding politically and legally'. Hmm ...
We could learn from the Hungarians on phrasing a question. Do you want the European Union to be able to mandate the obligatory resettlement of non-Hungarian citizens into Hungary even without the approval of the National Assembly. In its English translation, the question probably requires the reading age of an intelligent eighteen year old but really only invites one answer: the one it received.
Hungary had only been asked to take 1,294 migrants: about 0.1% of its existing population and the equivalent of the UK taking about 8,000. They went to the expense of a referendum for that? The cost of the vote must have well exceeded the cost of housing the refugees.
Meanwhile, in Colombia, a country that has been ravaged by drug wars for over 50 years, they held a referendum on the FARC peace deal which was rejected by a tiny fraction over 50% of the population, even more finely balanced than the Brexit result. The opponents wanted heads on plates, not reconciliation.
As to our Brexit one, with its simplistic question and 'advisory' result, everyone has been interpreting the result as 'meaning' whatever they wanted it to mean. We are now told that it was not about a hatred of Westminster/banker's bonuses/austerity/human rights/taking back control/fishing quotas ... but it was about migration, pure and simple. Apparently the voters have given their verdict with 'emphatic clarity' (TM).
But there are parliamentary rumblings ... as former Tory minister Stephen Dorrell succinctly put it: focussing negotiations that were about economic policy on immigration would be an 'odd' move ... To pursue a pure objective on immigration - that way lies madness.
Referenda may be the latest tool of 'democracy' but they are blunt and silly ways to make coherent, joined up policy. Just ask the Swiss.
