REFERENDUMS can be more trouble than they are worth.

Unless they provide a conclusive result that is accepted as the will of the people, they cause more lasting division.

The result of the EU referendum cannot be described as ‘the people of the UK have spoken’.

The result was too narrow with under 52% voting to leave and had it been carried out a few weeks earlier or later the result could have been different.

The Scottish Independence referendum in 2014, while more conclusive than the EU vote, was at 55% to 45%, still narrow enough for campaigners on the losing side to accept it’s over for a generation.

Since then, we have been in a constant pre-campaign state in Scottish politics and it overshadows everything else.

Brexit has had the same effect across the UK since 2016.

The number of days spent on arguing over the result and whether there should be a second referendum that could have been focused on the serious and urgent problems that need attention is staggering. That applies to Holyrood as much as Westminster.

In my lifetime two big referendums have provided a decisive result.

The first being the 1975 EC membership vote when 67% were in favour to 33% against and the devolution vote of 1997 was overwhelmingly in favour of a Scottish parliament with 74% voting yes.

They cannot be argued with.

And then the Alternative Vote referendum on changing the electoral system which was 68% to 31% in favour of the status quo.

The 1979 devolution poll was  similar to the EU referendum, with just under 52% in favour of change.

Of course, it was scuppered by the requirement that 40% of the electorate had to vote yes to devolution.

Perhaps that is not a bad thing. If we want to change the status quo then there has to be a threshold reached that is accepted as being enough people to constitute the will of the people.

Not necessarily based on turnout, but say 60% to effect a change.

So, should we have another EU referendum? Most probably, given the closeness of the result.

More than two years has passed so it is fair to ask, now that you know what this means we put the question again.

Should we have another Scottish independence referendum?

It would be fair to have another referendum once the UK leaves the EU. When that is certain and if Brexit happens in March then the UK that Scotland voted to be part of is different now than it was then, especially when EU membership was a significant part of the campaign.

Should we then have a simple 50% plus one vote to require a result?

That wouldn’t solve anything and we would be in the situation we are now with Brexit. There is also the nature of referendums compared to the cycle of elections.

Referendums and Elections are not the same thing but in one respect they are.

Voters can and will be influenced by the arguments, slogans, personality and behaviour of politicians.

Millions of pounds are spent by parties and campaign groups in a bid to secure the result they want.

In 2016 no sooner was the Brexit result announced when many claims of the leave campaign were being found to have been false.

The NHS will not be getting £350m a week

Had that been a general election those found to have been less than honest, or downright lying to the voters, would suffer their wrath at the next election.

Ask Nick Clegg how the voters feel about thinking they have been taken for mugs.

In a referendum when the people vote for irreversible change like independence or leaving the EU these falsehoods and behaviour of politicians found to fall below standards is not as easily addressed.

Referendums need to provide a definitive, conclusive majority for it to be accepted as the will of the people.