EU Referendum Result - Latest Update

I have received well over a thousand emails from local residents who have signed the petition for a second EU referendum, or who are requesting that Parliament votes to reject the referendum result.

I am therefore writing again to clarify that I would not vote to trigger Article 50 unless a second referendum had been held.

I have always been passionately pro-European, and I campaigned very hard for the Remain campaign both in my constituency and elsewhere in the months leading up to the referendum.  Whilst I don’t believe that the EU is perfect, I am absolutely certain that we are better off remaining within it and working from within to make it fit for purpose for the 21st century.  I am proud that this support is shared by so many local residents in Dulwich and West Norwood and that Lambeth and Southwark voted overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU on 23rd June. I share the devastation that many residents feel about the referendum result.

The referendum result was extremely narrow and within a day of the result being announced it became clear that the key promises made by the Leave campaign were, quite frankly, completely dishonest.  This is a pattern of behaviour we have come to expect from Boris Johnson in his former role as Mayor of London where he presided over the decimation of London’s police service, and repeatedly failed to tackle London’s housing crisis.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage has admitted that it was ‘a mistake’ to promise £350million extra funding per week for the NHS as a consequence of Brexit, and former Tory leader Ian Duncan-Smith now claims that he never supported this pledge despite being photographed almost daily in front of the Leave campaign bus emblazoned with this slogan.

Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan, key architect of the Leave campaign has said that he has no intention of limiting the numbers of EU migrants coming to the UK because the UK will have to accept the free movement of workers in order to remain within the European Single Market, in complete contrast to the claims made during the Referendum campaign that leaving the EU was the only way to reduce migration.

Large numbers of people voted Leave on the basis of these claims and it has become very clear that they have been deliberately misled.

I strongly believe that 16 and 17 year olds should be able to vote in UK elections and should have had their say on proposals that will impact on them more than any other generation.

The blatant dishonesty of the Leave campaign, combined with the closeness of the result and the exclusion of 16 and 17 year olds from the ballot, to my mind create a very strong case for a second referendum. This second vote should give electors aged 16 and above the final say in accepting or rejecting a detailed proposal on the terms under which the UK would leave the European Union, a decision the consequences of which would reverberate for decades. Electors should know in detail what the UK’s economic relationship with the EU would be, what the approach to immigration would be and what the impacts on our ability to travel to EU countries would be etc.  I will do everything possible to ensure that Parliament explores this possibility to its fullest extent and would of course once again strongly campaign against these proposals to leave the European Union. 

I will always vote on this matter in a way which represents the overwhelming view of my constituents that we should remain in the EU, but it is worth noting that there were many more constituencies that voted Leave, than voted Remain.  I do not think that it is realistic to expect the majority of MPs to vote against the referendum result that their own constituencies delivered.  This is one of the reasons that I believe a second referendum is our best chance of remaining in the EU.

The government has so far provided very little detail about the Brexit process and I will be pressing for full Parliamentary involvement in and scrutiny of this at every stage. The mechanism for triggering Article 50 is not yet clear, but it is critical that this should take place via a vote in the House of Commons. I will write to both shortlisted Tory leadership candidates next week to press them to ensure that this happens. I would not vote to trigger Article 50 unless a second referendum had been held, and would campaign and vote for a Remain result in such a referendum regardless of the details of the proposal.

I have signed Early Day Motion 243 ( which calls for a second referendum, and I hope that this will reach the required threshold of support for it to be debated in Parliament. 

Over the coming months I will continue to represent the overwhelming view of my constituents that the UK should remain in the EU.

Showing 16 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • John Fletcher
    commented 2017-02-02 22:30:47 +0000
    Your vote yesterday must have been a terribly difficult choice to make. I’m impressed that you stuck with your original principles. Thank you for reflecting the local mood.
  • John Schofield
    commented 2017-02-02 14:15:09 +0000
    Good for you voting against the Article 50 bill Helen.
  • John Fletcher
    commented 2017-01-29 10:24:14 +0000
    I agree with Dan that this further clarity would really help us to know where things now stand. Thanks, Helen, for keeping us informed and for going into considerable detail in doing so.
  • Dan Sutherland
    commented 2017-01-27 00:57:33 +0000
    Helen, Thank you for your clarity on this issue earlier last year. Can I just ask you to confirm you will still be voting in accordance with your constituents views on this issue and not following the whip announced by Mr Corbyn today. Best regards, Dan.
  • John Schofield
    commented 2016-11-17 10:28:08 +0000
    Helen, if you agree with the following analysis, as I do, I hope you will use your influence within the parliamentary labour party to ensure it acts accordingly:
  • Gary Shearin
    commented 2016-11-03 15:57:55 +0000
    Good work. With today’s high court ruling, we now have a chance to ensure everyone understands what is actually on the table (and at risk), and what was Leave Campaign BS.
  • Richard Corbett
    commented 2016-09-06 13:11:54 +0100
    Quite right – well done!
  • Richard Corbett
    commented 2016-09-06 13:11:49 +0100
    Quite right – well done!
  • Uber Estimate
    commented 2016-07-29 06:59:22 +0100
    Thanks ! I really appreciate your help .

    If you are looking for Taxi for your daily ride and want to calculate estimated fare for your Uber taxi ride then try out Uber Estimator at:
  • Uber Estimate
    commented 2016-07-19 12:45:07 +0100
    Brilliant and erudite, all that we ask for in an M. P. thank you

  • Derek Hill
    commented 2016-07-10 23:31:55 +0100
    Helen – I think the position you are taking is a good one. It is your job as our MP to represent your constituency as well as being true to your own beliefs. But we are in a mess and I don’t envy you and your colleagues in parliament as you try to navigate through the next few months to give everyone greater clarity about our future. And in doing so to mitigate risks of damaging instability in our our communities, our economy, our government, our country and our neighbours.
  • Paul Dolman-Darrall
    commented 2016-07-09 16:15:00 +0100
    Well done for changing your position. Whether we Brexit or not, regardless of what might happen, you made the right choice.
  • Darren Welch
    commented 2016-07-08 23:25:36 +0100
    wow,,what a despicable act of sour grapes,,the arrogance is astounding,,your not fit for public office you should resign
  • Raymond Samuel
    commented 2016-07-07 00:00:09 +0100
    Brilliant and erudite, all that we ask for in an M. P. thank you
  • Ian Edgley
    commented 2016-07-06 11:00:07 +0100
    Good work Helen. Thanks
  • Neale Boulden
    commented 2016-07-05 22:41:21 +0100
    Good stuff Helen. Now get behind your party leader. You know it makes sense.