Yorkieguy
Established Member
Hold on a minute!
Given how much effort David Cameron put into re-negotiating Britain's relationship with the EU, and the fact that he recommended to the electorate that we should remain in the EU, but the electorate (democratically), voted to leave, it's understandable (in my view), that he stood down. He hardly 'legged it' and 'sulked'. (Sunak 'legged' in on D-Day in Normandy last week, and Cameron stood in for him).
I know it's eight years since the referendum, but in the lead up to that from 2013 onwards.
David Cameron did all he could to renegotiate Britain's relationship in Europe, and when it came to a referendum, on 9 June 2015, members of the House of Commons voted by 544 to 53 in favour, endorsing the principle of holding a referendum, with only the Scottish National Party voting against. In contrast to the Labour Party's position prior to the 2015 general election under Miliband, acting Labour leader Harriet Harman committed her party to supporting plans for an EU referendum by 2017.
What was the catalyst that sparked it all off?:
At the European Parliament election in 2014, the UK Independence Party (UKIP) secured more votes and more seats than any other party, the first time a party other than the Conservatives or Labour had topped a nationwide poll in 108 years, leaving the Conservatives in third place.
Why was UKIP so successful?
In 2004, former 'Iron Curtain' impoverished countries know as the 'A8' gained entry to the EU, namely:
- Czech Republic.
- Estonia.
- Hungary.
- Latvia.
- Lithuania.
- Poland.
- Slovakia.
- Slovenia.
Under Ed Miliband's leadership between 2010 and 2015, the Labour Party ruled out an in-out referendum unless and until a further transfer of powers from the UK to the EU were to be proposed. In their manifesto for the 2015 general election, the Liberal Democrats pledged to hold an in-out referendum only in the event of there being a change in the EU treaties. The UK Independence Party (UKIP), the British National Party (BNP), the Green Party, the Democratic Unionist Party and the Respect Party all supported the principle of a referendum.
When the Conservative Party won a majority of seats in the House of Commons at the 2015 general election, Cameron reiterated his party's manifesto commitment to hold an in-out referendum on UK membership of the EU by the end of 2017, but only after "negotiating a new settlement for Britain in the EU".
In early 2014, David Cameron outlined the changes he aimed to bring about in the EU and in the UK's relationship with it. These were: additional immigration controls, especially for citizens of new EU member states; tougher immigration rules for present EU citizens; new powers for national parliaments collectively to veto proposed EU laws; new free-trade agreements and a reduction in bureaucracy for businesses; a lessening of the influence of the European Court of Human Rights on British police and courts; more power for individual member states, and less for the central EU; and abandonment of the EU notion of "ever closer union". He intended to bring these about during a series of negotiations with other EU leaders and then, if re-elected, to announce a referendum.
In November that year, Cameron gave an update on the negotiations and further details of his aims:
The key demands made of the EU were: On economic governance, to recognise officially that Eurozone laws would not necessarily apply to non-Eurozone EU members and the latter would not have to bail out troubled Eurozone economies: On competitiveness, to expand the single market and to set a target for the reduction of bureaucracy for businesses: On sovereignty, for the UK to be legally exempted from "ever closer union" and for national parliaments to be able collectively to veto proposed EU laws; and: On immigration, for EU citizens going to the UK for work to be unable to claim social housing or in-work benefits until they had worked there for four years, and for them to be unable to send child benefit payments overseas.
The outcome of the renegotiations was announced in February 2016. The renegotiated terms were in addition to the United Kingdom's existing opt-outs in the European Union and the UK rebate. The significance of the changes to the EU-UK agreement was contested and speculated upon, with none of the changes considered fundamental, but some considered important to many British people. Some limits to in-work benefits for EU immigrants were agreed, but these would apply on a sliding scale for four years and would be for new immigrants only; before they could be applied, a country would have to get permission from the European Council. Child benefit payments could still be made overseas, but would be linked to the cost of living in the other country.
On sovereignty, the UK was reassured that it would not be required to participate in "ever closer union"; these reassurances were "in line with existing EU law". Cameron's demand to allow national parliaments to veto proposed EU laws was modified to allow national parliaments collectively to object to proposed EU laws, in which case the European Council would reconsider the proposal before itself deciding what to do. On economic governance, anti-discrimination regulations for non-Eurozone members would be reinforced, but they would be unable to veto any legislation.
The final two areas covered were proposals to "exclude from the scope of free movement rights, third country nationals who had no prior lawful residence in a Member State before marrying a Union citizen" and to make it easier for member states to deport EU nationals for public policy or public security reasons. The extent to which the various parts of the agreement would be legally binding is complex; no part of the agreement itself changed EU law, but some parts could be enforceable in international law.
On 20 February 2016, Cameron announced that the UK Government would formally recommend to the British people that the UK should remain a member of a reformed European Union and that the referendum would be held on 23 June, marking the official launch of the campaign.
Research by the Electoral Commission confirmed that its recommended question "was clear and straightforward for voters, and was the most neutral wording from the range of options that were considered and tested":
with the responses to the question (to be marked with a single (X)):
So the electorate can hardly say it was kept in the dark or hoodwinked.
The impetus which brought about the referendum came from the electorate, the members of the House of Commons voted by 544 to 53 in favour of a referendum, and David Cameron as PM, recommended to the electorate that they should vote to remain. However, the electorate, (those who bothered to vote that is), democratically voted to leave, and are living with the consequences. I think Cameron did his level best, politely, in an even-tempered, level-headed way, with none of the egotistical bumptious bombast and buffoonery of Johnson or Farage, about whom, rather too many of the electorate can't tell the difference between a Court Jester and a Pied Piper.
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum
David.
