Bonefishblues wrote:mjr wrote:Bonefishblues wrote:Yep, got it, I remember all the politicians mentioned that now you say it. Nigel 'Advisory' Garage, Boris 'Tell us what you think' Johnson, Call me Dave 'Best of Two, or Three, or as many as it takes' Cameron.
No, I have a clear recollection of events, thanks. The population went to vote in the clear understanding that the result would be enacted. That's the point I am making. I'm making no comment on its legal status, and whether that was or wasn't known, and how widely.
But assuming that you are correct, perhaps others on the Forum can confirm that I am deluded and that they didn't have that expectation?
They don't seem to be answering, so I'll challenge your recollection with academics noting in Jan 2016 "strictly speaking, it has no legal effect. It will be purely advisory and, in law, the government could simply ignore the result. In this it contrasts with the legislation for the electoral system referendum in 2011, which required the minister responsible to enact the result" (another legal expert wrote similar in the FT around that time but it's paywalled) and by the vote several newspapers and even, grudgingly, well down the page, the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation had reported it would be advisory.
Vote Leave's notorious Dominic Cummings relied on its advisory nature when arguing for people to vote Leave so the UK could get concessions from the EU and then hold another "referendum on the final terms of Brexit, if the first vote is for Out".
So I think it was well known but maybe not mentioned that much by politicians because firstly, people would ask them why they were keeping the final decision power, and hey, everyone thought Remain would win, so it was pretty irrelevant.
But anyway, if it had been binding, the disenfranchised UK citizens would have won their court case already and thrown the result out anyway!
I completely agree with all you say except your assertion that it was well known.
...but let's even leave that to one side.
cf my point in bold above. That is my point, the whole point, and nothing but the point I am making.
Another aspect about the "Will of the people" is what that actually was.....
If someone voted for the £350 m to the NHS, that is no longer part of the deal....
If someone voted for some of the more xenophobic claims about EU nationals working in the UK, that is no longer part of the deal
If someone voted because there would be all the trade deals in lace on day 1...that is no longer part of the deal
There is a big question about how many actually voted for what we have now. Remove the votes for all thise who did NOT vote for what we have now and see what happens