I noticed comments and response to my own comment, tended to mostly by Remainers, there is still the inability to accept the result and so continues the recriminations that has marked many arguments about Brexit since.
I see no inability to accept the result; merely some people disagreeing with your position and the reasoning you give for it. Even on a larger scale I'd suggest that the vast majority of people regardless of their political lean do accept that the outcome of the referendum was withdrawal from the EU.
You will however probably find a number of points of concern from remain-leaning people, including but not limited to:
- The issue of the UK's EU membership was arguably too complex to be reduced to a single binding referendum, as evidenced by the amount of effort required to renounce it.
- The simple leave/remain question was ambiguous in that it left the timeframe and exact nature of withdrawal open to interpretation and revision by campaign groups and the government, as is well illustrated by the vast difference between the Brexit promised by the Leave campaign and the Brexit we have actually received.
- The pool of eligible voters deliberately excluded citizens of EU and EEA nations other than Ireland who were resident in the UK and thus materially affected by a decision to leave, as well as a smaller number of British citizens living in the EU who were no longer eligible (or who had never been eligible) to vote in the UK.
And beyond all of that I think it's fairly safe to say that very very very few people had any desire at all for the withdrawal process to be conducted in the shambolic manner it has been so far. How can anybody seriously defend Johnson's about-face on the Withdrawal Agreement that he'd described only months earlier as being "oven-ready"? Iain Duncan Smith's admission that he'd voted for said agreement without actually understanding it? The reckless contempt for the Good Friday Agreement? Converting Kent into the Toilet of England? The shameless power-grab of the Internal Market Bill (which even with the removal of the sections of greatest concern to the EU as announced today is still hugely undermining to the powers of the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Senedd)?
Let's not forget also the "deadline" of the end of this month is one set by the UK government and one that could have been extended even if only to give a bit more breathing room, what with Covid and all.
unlike Ireland we haven't been made to vote again and again until the "correct" answer was the result
The fact that people persist with this line even now is quite frankly pathetic. After the first rejection of each amendment to the Irish constitution the Irish government sought and received amendments to the relevant EU treaties (Nice and Lisbon, respectively) that resolved the points of contention and allowed for the passing of both amendments. It's hardly any different in principle to the routine practices involved in passing legislation in any bicameral Parliament.
The one exception to that is the much vaunted Australia style deal - because it's no deal at all
It's actually even worse than that - Australia's had a
number of industry-specific trade and mutual-recognition agreements with the EU for a some time now (especially concerning agriculture, as the EU is a significant customer for Australian beef and lamb exports), and is currently several years into negotiating a comprehensive FTA. By comparison the UK will have only the agreements it's managed to cobble together this year, and this is a significant difference given that the UK's trade with the EU is not only worth nearly six times more than Australia's but also much more diverse.