YOUR correspondent, Molly Scott Cato MEP (‘People’s vote’, Postbag, July 12), supports another referendum on EU membership.

She says that it would be a vote either to accept or to reject the terms of leaving, with an option to “remain”.

This is yet another attempt by the losers in the 2016 referendum to find a way to overturn the democratic result. 

If such a referendum were to happen, it would retrospectively change the terms of the deal that the government gave to the electorate for the 2016 referendum, in that when we were given the job of deciding whether our future should be in or out of the EU, there was no mention at the time that there would be a subsequent referendum on the terms of leaving, knowledge of which might have changed some people’s voting intentions.

In fact, it would probably have increased the vote to leave!

Therefore, holding another referendum would be undemocratic because it would be a breach of that deal.

READ MORE: LETTER: Fresh vote needed over Brexit, says MEP

In all likelihood, because Article 50 has been triggered, the UK cannot simply “remain” in the EU, it would have to re-join the EU and this would mean starting from scratch and going through the formal accession process and renegotiating the terms of a new membership.

The UK would probably lose its annual rebate and its “opt-outs”, and may even have to join the Euro. Would we get to vote on that deal I wonder? 

The decision that the majority made in 2016 (bravely in my opinion) was not a short-sighted decision, it was about regaining sovereignty for the longer term.

It will take years to see how it all works out, and in that time the EU may change dramatically as a result of the many crises that it has either brought upon itself or simply failed to tackle.

Its track record at recognising and solving its own problems is very poor, dogged as it is by the arrogance of its governing elite and by so many conflicts of interest. We are better off out of it, moving on and making Brexit work. 

N SCRASE
Taunton