Brexit and the Consequences

timsk said:
At',
If you've read my posts carefully and given them even cursory consideration - you wouldn't need to ask this question. Firstly, the Illiberal Undemocrats haven't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning a general election but, nonetheless, I'm happy to play along with your 'pigs can fly' fantasy. . .

Assuming PPC's stick to their respective party's manifesto and, once elected, vote accordingly - then I'd accept that outcome. Just to be crystal clear, if Jo Swinson somehow manages to become PM and there's a vote in the HoC to revoke Article 50 - it's fine for her own party's MPs to back it because that's the manifesto they were elected on. However, for the sake of argument, if the vote to revoke Article 50 is carried by handful of rogue Tory MPs whose manifesto was clearly to deliver Brexit - with or without a deal - then no, I would not accept the outcome as the parliamentary democratic process would have been abused - just as is happening now. My position is rational, clear and very simple. It all comes back to MPs - of all parties, irrespective of their views on Brexit, showing humility and acting honourably.
Tim.
Click to expand...

It’s the duty of MPs to represent ALL their constituents, not just those who voted for them. It’s also their duty to act in the best interests of the country and to support the manifesto of the party they represent.

Putting a referendum into this mix puts a real spanner in the works since they might find themselves representing a constituency where there is a huge majority contrary to the policy of the party the MP represents. Do they put their constituents first or what? It sure muddies the democratic waters.

ps: i’m not trying to make any sort of remain case here or excuse rebel remainers - just pointing up a dilemma
 
barjon said:
It’s the duty of MPs to represent ALL their constituents, not just those who voted for them. It’s also their duty to act in the best interests of the country and to support the manifesto of the party they represent.

Putting a referendum into this mix puts a real spanner in the works since they might find themselves representing a constituency where there is a huge majority contrary to the policy of the party the MP represents. Do they put their constituents first or what? It sure muddies the democratic waters.

ps: i’m not trying to make any sort of remain case here or excuse rebel remainers - just pointing up a dilemma
Click to expand...

Agree! Notwithstanding that, MPs stand and are elected on their manifesto – 2017 currently. Regardless of their duty to country/party/constituents if they can't honour their manifesto commitments they should resign and stand for re-election on what they now stand for. Regrettably they don't, so it's not surprising things are in such a mess. No wonder MPs en bloc (IMHO) rank below used-car salesmen/estate agents/boiler room scammers.
 
0007 said:
Agree! Notwithstanding that, MPs stand and are elected on their manifesto – 2017 currently. Regardless of their duty to country/party/constituents if they can't honour their manifesto commitments they should resign and stand for re-election on what they now stand for. Regrettably they don't, so it's not surprising things are in such a mess. No wonder MPs en bloc (IMHO) rank below used-car salesmen/estate agents/boiler room scammers.
Click to expand...

You are living in cloud cuckooo land.

So which MP, Party or any body in any leadership role conducts them selves as you suggest?

I recall Clare Short and Robin Cook resigning for their principals against Bliar and Lord Carrington assuming responsibility over the Falklands but not much else.

Are you really being practical here or just seen the light since the referendumb have peaked guardians of our democracy into action.
 
Atilla said:
You are living in cloud cuckooo land.

So which MP, Party or any body in any leadership role conducts them selves as you suggest?

I recall Clare Short and Robin Cook resigning for their principals against Bliar and Lord Carrington assuming responsibility over the Falklands but not much else.

Are you really being practical here or just seen the light since the referendumb have peaked guardians of our democracy into action.
Click to expand...

Further to 0007's point about honoring commitment to the manifesto.

When MP's decide to jump ship and cross the floor, they should be made to resign and fight a by election. This should be mandatory as the electorate could well have a different opinion.
 
Have we reached peak Labour yet? It's getting childishly boring, I thought Jo Cox's family had specifically asked not to use her name for political purposes, but the Corbynites just can't help themselves (n)(n)
 
counter_violent said:
Further to 0007's point about honoring commitment to the manifesto.

When MP's decide to jump ship and cross the floor, they should be made to resign and fight a by election. This should be mandatory as the electorate could well have a different opinion.
Click to expand...


Fair enough. Change the rules. (y)
 
If the hysterical left wing don't calm down, Boris is going to have to suspend parliament again.
 
barjon said:
It’s the duty of MPs to represent ALL their constituents, not just those who voted for them. It’s also their duty to act in the best interests of the country and to support the manifesto of the party they represent.

Putting a referendum into this mix puts a real spanner in the works since they might find themselves representing a constituency where there is a huge majority contrary to the policy of the party the MP represents. Do they put their constituents first or what? It sure muddies the democratic waters.

ps: i’m not trying to make any sort of remain case here or excuse rebel remainers - just pointing up a dilemma
Click to expand...
Hi Jon,
Yes, I agree with you! Even so, as 0007 and c_v point out, MPs aren't abiding by the manifestos on which they were elected. Going back to my own MP, Dr. Sarah Wollaston, it's fair and reasonable that she voted remain - even though the majority of her constituency voted leave. Obviously, she couldn't possibly have known that prior to the referendum. However, come the 2017 general election, she was re-elected by people like me because she said she'd abide by the result (even though she didn't agree with it) and signed up to the Tory manifesto of leaving the EU on March 29th with or without a deal. She's reneged on that commitment spectacularly which is what my beef is about - along with every other leaver in the country whose MP has behaved in a similar way. In her particular case, she ought to have resigned when she left the Tory party to trigger a by-election.

Your example of MPs finding themselves representing a constituency where there is a huge majority contrary to the policy of the party they represent is - as far as I'm aware - uncommon and is not the cause of the current gridlock. That situation may have arisen at the time of the referendum but, in the vast majority of cases, a general election did/will resolve the issue. So long as MPs show humility towards those who elect them and act honourably - I don't think there's a problem.
Tim.
 
Hey Manchester. The Conservative Party Conference pumps close to £25 million into your local economy each year. Remainers have just voted against letting it happen. Just wanted you to know: they don't care about you, or your jobs, they care about Brussels.
 
Toxic Labour.


labour twots.jpg
 
Excellent analysis and commentary from the UK Column team on the state of parliament at this juncture in the Brexit process. Wouldn't it be exciting if Boris has pre-empted the extension law, by persuading the EU not to extend, remoaners will be crying into their soy lattes with that one. [emoji23]

 
Signalcalc said:
Excellent analysis and commentary from the UK Column team on the state of parliament at this juncture in the Brexit process. Wouldn't it be exciting if Boris has pre-empted the extension law, by persuading the EU not to extend, remoaners will be crying into their soy lattes with that one. [emoji23]

Click to expand...


Means absolutely diddly dot what anyone thinks.

It's all about Parliament, HoLs and our historic institutions and laws protecting our democracy.

So much rubbish is spewed from the average layman who thinks just because his views were asked on a non-binding advisory referendum that his views should now become law.

People like Boris Johnson, Jacob Reece-Mog, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage are stroking those deceptive non-factual lies. Same lies spread by the likes of Cameron and Osborn about the significance of an ill-thought-out Referendum.


Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
Atilla said:
Means absolutely diddly dot what anyone thinks.

It's all about Parliament, HoLs and our historic institutions and laws protecting our democracy.

So much rubbish is spewed from the average layman who thinks just because his views were asked on a non-binding advisory referendum that his views should now become law.

People like Boris Johnson, Jacob Reece-Mog, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage are stroking those deceptive non-factual lies. Same lies spread by the likes of Cameron and Osborn about the significance of an ill-thought-out Referendum.


Two wrongs don't make a right.
Click to expand...
As long as they get us Brexit who cares [emoji16]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
European Level 2 question
Replies
1
Views
3K
theknifemac
theknifemac
C
New! eSignal MarketCenter 3
2 3
Replies
41
Views
9K
Ghost Dog
G
Atilla
Trump Presidency and the Consequences
160 161 162
Replies
3K
Views
362K
Atilla
Atilla
N
trading for prop shops
Replies
1
Views
7K
Directional
Directional
B
companies listed on more than one exchange
Replies
3
Views
2K
grantx
G
Top