The dead ruling over the living

editorial image

Life’s too short to respond to every point in Mr R. Moore’s long letter about Brexit (‘Unfair criticism of our MP’, October 5). But his views should not go unchallenged.

Mr Moore’s claim that the “arguments were fully scrutinised by the voting public” at the time of the Referendum just doesn’t hold water. Only very recently have detailed Brexit impact statements been published. Even at this late stage we do not know what Brexit entails. Back in June 2015 people voted on the basis of their gut feelings, rather than a rational appraisal of the facts.

What no supporter of Brexit ever explains is why the decision to leave the EU cannot be reconsidered, no matter how unwise it turns out to have been, and no matter what deceit was involved in reaching it. A rough calculation shows that about 1.4m people eligible to vote in the Referendum have since died, while about 1.75m young people have reached voting age. For how long are the dead to rule over the living? The main reason Brexiteers oppose a People’s Vote is presumably that they suspect they might lose it. But do they really want us to withdraw from the EU against the people’s will?

Ultimately it is for Maria Caulfield’s constituents to decide whether their elected MP has done a good job. The impression her newsletters give is that she spends her time on issues which are really the responsibility of local councillors and the Police Commissioner, while paying very little attention to her constituents’ concerns about Brexit. It is now more than 200 days since Ms Caulfield promised to hold a Brexit meeting in Lewes, and a date has still to be fixed.

Richard Powell

EUnity Lewes, 
St John Street, Lewe