Does buyer’s remorse affect the EU referendum result?

image

I’ve seen a screenshot of the results of a ComRes post EU referendum poll, asking voters if they are happy with the results of the referendum result.

The polls shows that 1% of Leave voters are unhappy with the result. Given 17.4 million people voted Leave this is 174,000 unhappy Leave voters.

There was a winning margin of 1.3 million votes and even if all of the 174,000 Leave voters actually have buyer’s remorse and would have voted Remain, it would still have been a win for Leave, albeit with a reduced winning margin of 0.95 million votes.

For Remain to be able to claim buyer’s remorse is a significant factor they need to be able to show that at least 4% of Leave voters were unhappy.

For the sake of full disclosure: I voted Remain

Edited to add:

This morning a Twitter user @jabd1980 hit me up with the following very pertinet question:

Twitter pic regrexit

So I went onto the ComRes website and found a margin of error calculator. So I stuck in the figures of 33.5 million for the population size (total number who voted) and sample size of 1,069 (given on the screenshot) and got a margin of error of 3.0.

This means the buyer’s remorse effect is just on the edge of the margin of error. But only just.

 

Advertisements

EU referendum result breaks the law

EU ref results as percentage of whole electorateYes, the result does break the law. However, it is not a law that invalidates the result, but it is one rather ironically, that has the word “union” in it.

The EU referendum result gave a 51.9% Leave to 48.1% Remain result on a 72.2% turnout.

The graph here shows that when you look at the whole electorate (not just those voting) you will see only 37.4% of the whole electorate voted Leave and 34.7% voted Remain, with 27.8% of the electorate not bothering to vote.

Why does this matter? Only a few weeks ago the Trade Union Act 2016 came into law and this has impacted upon me and millions of other trade unionists. The government have “modernised” (a euphemism for “massively restricted “) the way strike ballots work as follows (taken from the government website):

The Trade Union Act will ensure industrial action only ever goes ahead when there has been a ballot turnout of at least 50%.

In important public services, including in the health, education, transport, border security and fire sectors, an additional threshold of 40% of support to take industrial action from all eligible members must be met for action to be legal.

As a country we can  take the massive decision to withdraw from the EU based upon 37.4% of the electorate voting for it but cleaners in a school who want to take strike action need to have a 50% turnout and meet an additional threshold of 40% of support from all eligible members to take strike action.

It would not be enough to get a simple majority as with the EU referendum.

So there you have it, the EU referendum results breaks the law: the law relating to trade union strike ballots.

By the way, I am not posting this because I think the referendum result is invalid; I voted Remain but I do accept the result. I am posting this to make the point workers have had a second class democracy imposed upon them. 

Dodgy graphic from West Midlands Combined Authority

image

I was alerted, via Twitter, to the above dodgy graphic from the newly established West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA).

A quick glance at the graphic and the numbers shows it to be very misleading. Design triumphed over clarity. 

It took me all of five minutes on Excel to knock up the bar chart below. This gives a much more accurate representation of the relative amounts spent. Why couldn’t the WMCA couldn’t do this?

image