I keep hearing from the Remain camp that we must respect the wishes of the 48 per cent who wanted to remain in the EU.

I have still to find anyone who will tell me how that would have worked had the result of the referendum been reversed. How would the wishes of the 48 per cent who wanted to leave the EU have been respected in those circumstances?

Would it have meant withdrawing to the EEA, for example?

And those who did not wish to join the EC/EEC in the first place had to just live with it for decades.

In a binary vote, often the case in democracies, the side that does not "win" just has to live with it.
Whether it's for 4 or 5 years or decades that's the way it is.

A majority of eligible voters DID NOT back brexit.

They won't even tell you what respecting the 48% means in real terms.
Nick Clegg tells us that he fully respects the result of the referendum but wants us to carry on paying budget fees, accepting FoM, accepting EU laws and regulations and behaving as if we haven't left at all.
Is that how the 48% want to be respected?

I'm fine with that.

LOL, where have we heard that feeble point before?
Even fewer of the eligible voters DID NOT back remaining.

17.4 million voters are not fine with that.
You could only muster up about 16 million who agree with you.

Doesn't matter leave is the change in the status quo and needed a majority of eligible voters to be seen to have anything like a mandate. It didn't happen, so now we need to find a sensible solution that isn't economically ruinous.

The same for the 47% of Austrians who last Sunday voted for the far right, to take back control from the EU to their government and control immigration and if not given that ,then an Auexit.

I'm afraid you are wrong. It needed a majority of voters, and that's what it got.

No conclusion can be drawn about the opinion of those who did not vote. For all you know, they may all have wanted to leave.

Are you saying that if a government is elected by less than 50 % of the eligible voters ( I'm not sure any government has ever had that many votes) then they don't have a mandate to do anything at all ?

Or do you just make new rules up to suit your position ?

By the way did you ever find the links to the dozen polls ?

As a Remainer, I can state that if the referendum result had been reversed, I would have expected the government to respect the views of the minority, and not try and slip devious moves under the Parliamentary carpet. The May government is behaving disgracefully, its credibility has been shattered and it has been proved to be untrustworthy.

I think you're right about the probable voting intentions of the people who did not vote.

Had it not been for the Cox murder and Nigel Farage's dodgy poster, both happeing a week before the vote, I feel sure that the majority for Leave would have been much higher.

Can you point me to where that's made clear? I don't recall reading - not even in the small print - in the Govt. leaflet that was sent to every home in the UK that a majority vote for exit would only be considered in the event that a majority of eligible voters turned out. Funny. You'd think something as important as that would have been written in large print so that no-one was in any doubt. Even the esteemed David Dimbleby didn't seem to be aware of it.

A majority of people who actually voted did back Brexit, and that's how it works I'm afraid.

Including people who didn't vote in the figures is utterly pointless and meaningless, unless it is simply to point out that they did not vote.

Still no answer. Would 52:48 in favour of Remain have meant that we would not fully remain in the EU?

If the vote had been reversed then surely the status quo would exist, no need to respect the views of the minority

At least Brexit doesn't wear a toupee and doesn't have an orange face either.

We'd have withdrawn by 48%. Then the arguements would be over which 48%.

The problem with that scenario is that, had the UK voted to Remain, there would be no 'status quo' because the EU is a constantly evolving institution. It continues to acquire more and more powers from national Parliaments through the numerous treaties.

The status quo was never on the ballot paper. It was a choice between leave or gradual, further integration.

Referendums are different and are treated different in most other countries of the world who more routinely use them to decide important issues. You'll find minimum requirements to effectuate change in pretty much all of them in order to ensure there is a strong mandate to deliver change.

Of course, we didn't necessarily need minimum stated requirements in our referendum because it was only an advisory referendum anyway. It was always going to come back to the politicians to sort it out, and they now have to respect the reality that a majority of eligible voters did not back brexit.

As one of the remainers I'm expecting them to take into consideration those in the middle ground. Be they remainers or Brexiters.

No everyone is an extremist who wants WTO rules imposed or giving up our country to be a state within the EU.

I also appreciate that the vote is binary and those who "won" can take lead. However the vote doesn't give brexiteers a carte blanche on the outcome.

The vote is over, we're all brexiteers now and so all our views should be equal.

Have we got anyone with a "i'm a member of the 48%" tattoo like they did in the Scottish referendum?

The government will respect the minority by doing what the majority wanted.

To my mind, respecting the 48% simply means accepting responsibility in the event that leaving the EU proves to damage the country's economy.

Rights come with responsibilities. You have won the right to get your way, you must take the responsibility for it all ending in tears if that indeed ends up being the case.

Before that, no, the vote was to leave and leave is what will happen.