People's Vote in London shows the need for second referendum

They came with their posters, their placards and their simple requests: a final say on any Brexit deal that is decided upon. The organisers say that is was the “second -best attended demonstration of the century” with only the protests against the Iraq war in 2003 attracting more people.

It’s quite the accomplishment for a cause to mobilise so many people on a dreary Saturday in the middle of October and yet there are still some turning their noses up at the numbers, saying that the turnout is nothing compared to the millions who voted back in June 2016.

I think they’re forgetting that we were all able to pop along to our local primary school to express an opinion rather than having to gather in a central area like they did for the Roman census.

“But we made our decision two years ago,” I hear you cry.

Well, we didn’t really.

We stated an interest in a prospective change and gave our consent for the government to explore the opinions available to the country. We were asked “should” the UK remain a member of the EU or leave it. Surely, it’s no different to being asked to vote in an online poll as to “should” pineapple be put on pizza?

It’s just as divisive a topic but neither questions actually cause a legal change in status.

The fact is that when we first went to the polls, it was because the government had determined that the people wanted to have a say in whether they stayed or left the European Union. Fair enough, there had been calls for that although if I’m totally honest, I hadn’t been aware of any serious calls until the referendum had actually been announced. The thing is, that doesn’t really stack up now that there are calls for a referendum on how the final Brexit deal will look and how our relationship with Europe will be in the future.

Personally, I think that we should be looking for a second vote on the matter, especially given that the result was so close. We live in a democracy and that means that the people ultimately rule. It doesn’t mean that we can only vote once on a matter: we can keep changing things until it perfectly suits us and those around us.

It’s especially poignant to note that the former Brexit minister, David Davis, has been vocal on the topic of referenda in the past when they were brought up in the House of Commons in 2002. He opined that referenda were dangerous, especially when the electorate were not fully informed of the facts because “in a democracy, voters have to know what they are voting for".

Mr Davis was really quite impassioned in his stance that all information should be clearly laid out for the public to see so that “people can view all the arguments for and against and when those arguments have been rigorously tested". Sound familiar at all? It sure sounds to me like the argument behind the “People’s Vote” march.

Isn’t it funny how easily your words can be used against you?

I doubt Davis even remembered uttering those words so long ago but now they create the arguments contrary to his stance. So passionate was he about ensuring that public accountability and fairness was top of the agenda that he seemed to predict the future by talking about people having to “vote on a blank sheet of paper and … trust us to fill in the details afterwards". Now, is that or is that not exactly what we had to do in 2016?

I really couldn’t have phrased the argument better myself. I suppose that’s why he’s an MP and I’m not. Then again, I wouldn’t take too kindly to being told to conform to party principles that I disagreed with in the way he appears to have.

So really, a second vote isn’t such a barmy idea after all. The Evening Standard analysed more than 150 polls and found that the majority in the UK now wish to stay within the EU and perhaps I’m clutching at straws here, but I think that’s down to the deal that we’re now being presented with.

We’re being told "this is what you voted for". No, it’s not. We didn’t really vote for anything. We voted for an idea. We voted based on scaremongering and false promises.

Those who voted to leave were taking a gamble: throwing a set of dice and hoping for a double six. It’s like when you were young and taking part in the lucky dip at a school fête – you were hoping for a good packet of sweets rather than a novelty rubber that you’d lose in five seconds flat. The stakes however are higher here. For some reason, the Brexiteers seem to think that we can leave but keep the best parts of being a part of the EU. I hate to say it, but that’s not how life works in reality. You can’t quit a job but still be entitled to the staff discount.

“If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be democracy.” More wise words from David Davis in 2012.

Humans do change their minds, but in this case, we aren’t asking for a re-run of the original referendum. The request of hundreds of thousands of people is simpler than that: allow the public a final say on the agreed deal.

Maybe it’ll be a resounding “Stop” and we’ll go back to how things were or perhaps the public will give it the rubber stamp it needs. If the government are confident in themselves, then what do they have to fear by asking for one more vote?