Brexit negotiations

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:Perhaps they should have clarified what it means before the referendum and then we wouldn't have to worry about our kid's future?

You really do lay it on thick. You do know there are countries out there not in the EU don't you?

I'm sure your kids will just get on with things as most people will, I guarantee you that it won't define their lives.

There sure are countries outside the EU but the economically successful ones i.e. Russia, USA, China and the Arab States etc all have massive natural resources to exploit that we don't and/or trading agreements with key partners like the one we're about to give up.

And your personal guarantee that it won't define my kids' lives means diddly squat.

wanderlust wrote:And your personal guarantee that it won't define my kids' lives means diddly squat.

If your kids do let it define them, they'll have you to blame.

I still don't understand why you feel the need to keep banging the same tune on a football forum. If you really feel that strongly, go and do something positive to make change.

I'm guessing though, you're all bark and no bite, like most keyboard warriors.

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:MPs are not bound by how their constituencies voted on brexit. It was a referendum which was meant to advise parliament but in no sense does it bind the MPs to vote the way their constituents voted.

MPs often ignore what their constituents want. The most obvious example would be the free votes held in the past on the death penalty.

You are correct in what you say but there clearly was an overwhelming Brexit vote in the Parliamentary constituencies of all political persuasions that it was clear what the country wanted, even though the actual overall total vote was quite close in itself.

30% of Tory constituencies, 40% of Labour constituencies and 100% of the minority party constituencies (apart from 2 LD) voted to Remain at the original referendum so it's clear that if these MPs wanted to represent their electorate they would and should decline the party Whip.
Moreover, Augusts independent poll showed that 113 constituencies that originally voted Leave have now switched to Remain so what's the story with those MPs? Shouldn't they also decline the party Whip?

Well yes they should because they are clearly putting party politics ahead of the wishes of the people that elected them.

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:MPs are not bound by how their constituencies voted on brexit. It was a referendum which was meant to advise parliament but in no sense does it bind the MPs to vote the way their constituents voted.

MPs often ignore what their constituents want. The most obvious example would be the free votes held in the past on the death penalty.

You are correct in what you say but there clearly was an overwhelming Brexit vote in the Parliamentary constituencies of all political persuasions that it was clear what the country wanted, even though the actual overall total vote was quite close in itself.

30% of Tory constituencies, 40% of Labour constituencies and 100% of the minority party constituencies (apart from 2 LD) voted to Remain at the original referendum so it's clear that if these MPs wanted to represent their electorate they would and should decline the party Whip.
Moreover, Augusts independent poll showed that 113 constituencies that originally voted Leave have now switched to Remain so what's the story with those MPs? Shouldn't they also decline the party Whip?

Well yes they should because they are clearly putting party politics ahead of the wishes of the people that elected them.

So taken your percentages as stated that leaves 70% of Conservative and 60% of Labour constituencies voted for Brexit.

In the 2015 General election Conservatives won 330 seats (or 231 for Brexit) and Labour (or 139 for Brexit)

As there are 650 seats in Parliament that totals (including the two Lib Dem seats you mention voted for Brexit) 372 seats for Brexit and only 278 for Remain or roughly 57% to 43% in favour for Brexit.

A clear and unequivocal mandate from the country.

As for poll predictions, they have been notoriously wrong in recent years - not least in predicting the outcome of the referendum!

The only known mandate MP's have is how their constituents actually voted when they did.

The only way to gauge the final right of leaving the EU is by putting the final result of the country's negotiation to leave again to the country to vote on.

That's what I'd try to make happen if I were an elected MP of any party and whether I supported Brexit or not.

wanderlust wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:I’d also support a referendum on the final deal, but mainly because of the lack of information provided as to what a leave deal would look like at the time of the vote. To the point where leaving the single market (which was never on the table) now looks a certainty.

The whole notion of ‘we voted leave, so leave’ is an over simplification, it’s far more complex than that and what one group would say is leaving another says is not.

Clarify what it means then let the people decide.

Perhaps they should have clarified what it means before the referendum and then we wouldn't have to worry about our kid's future?

Well yes they should have, but clearly they didn’t need to. Because by leaving it undefined Brexit could be absolutely anything to anybody.

Unfortunately the government aren’t able to define it without pissing off a significant number of people - it’s that weak leadership that will cost us.

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:MPs are not bound by how their constituencies voted on brexit. It was a referendum which was meant to advise parliament but in no sense does it bind the MPs to vote the way their constituents voted.

MPs often ignore what their constituents want. The most obvious example would be the free votes held in the past on the death penalty.

You are correct in what you say but there clearly was an overwhelming Brexit vote in the Parliamentary constituencies of all political persuasions that it was clear what the country wanted, even though the actual overall total vote was quite close in itself.

Most MP's do wish to represent their constituents want even if it conflicts with there own personal views and I dare say if a referendum was taken on the death penalty and the country expressed its wishes accordingly, prior to the MP's free vote, then it wouldn't have been repealed at that time.

We are where we are for two simple reasons in my opinion, firstly because Cameron called an unnecessary referendum in the first place (he thought he would win it easily and shut up once and for all the Eurosceptics in his party) and secondly because Corbyn was so luke warm on rallying the Labour Party to fight for Remain which is basically an organisation that expounds and represents the ethos of socialism.

I agree with you about Cameron and Corbyn but would add one other significant reason. The EU has always been presented in a negative light by the right wing press with its obsession with made up stories about banning bendy bananas. When Cameron ran his project fear campaign there was very little about the positives of EU membership and this allowed the brexit campaign to frame the debate in purely negative terms (they even lied about Turkey joining the EU and us having no veto).

The bottom line for me was that if Farage, Boris, UKIP, Trump and Putin thought it was a good thing then it definitely wasn't!

Remain represents the ethos of socialism?

T.R.O.Y wrote:Remain represents the ethos of socialism?

Corbyn wouldn't agree, going off his past voting record on the EU.

I don’t think anybody who can define socialism would agree.

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:MPs are not bound by how their constituencies voted on brexit. It was a referendum which was meant to advise parliament but in no sense does it bind the MPs to vote the way their constituents voted.

MPs often ignore what their constituents want. The most obvious example would be the free votes held in the past on the death penalty.

You are correct in what you say but there clearly was an overwhelming Brexit vote in the Parliamentary constituencies of all political persuasions that it was clear what the country wanted, even though the actual overall total vote was quite close in itself.

30% of Tory constituencies, 40% of Labour constituencies and 100% of the minority party constituencies (apart from 2 LD) voted to Remain at the original referendum so it's clear that if these MPs wanted to represent their electorate they would and should decline the party Whip.
Moreover, Augusts independent poll showed that 113 constituencies that originally voted Leave have now switched to Remain so what's the story with those MPs? Shouldn't they also decline the party Whip?

Well yes they should because they are clearly putting party politics ahead of the wishes of the people that elected them.

So taken your percentages as stated that leaves 70% of Conservative and 60% of Labour constituencies voted for Brexit.

In the 2015 General election Conservatives won 330 seats (or 231 for Brexit) and Labour (or 139 for Brexit)

As there are 650 seats in Parliament that totals (including the two Lib Dem seats you mention voted for Brexit) 372 seats for Brexit and only 278 for Remain or roughly 57% to 43% in favour for Brexit.

A clear and unequivocal mandate from the country.

As for poll predictions, they have been notoriously wrong in recent years - not least in predicting the outcome of the referendum!

The only known mandate MP's have is how their constituents actually voted when they did.

The only way to gauge the final right of leaving the EU is by putting the final result of the country's negotiation to leave again to the country to vote on.

That's what I'd try to make happen if I were an elected MP of any party and whether I supported Brexit or not.

Not sure about your logic here when the point was about whether or not MPs should represent the wishes of their constituents or be told by their party that they should go against what their constituents have asked them to do.
Even with your dodgy figures it means that 278 MPs defied the wishes of their constituents and if the polls are accurate, or even if they are 10% out - which is highly unusual as the average error margin is 2% - it means that currently the majority of MPs in this country are going along with Brexit against the wishes of their constituents.

Are you are arguing that opinion polls have been notoriously wrong in recent years and yet the EU membership opinion poll was unquestionably right?  

The passing of time is an interesting factor too. The parties are insisting on carrying through the views expressed in an opinion poll that took place two years ago but times have changed so why the fixation with pushing through a marginal historical opinion poll?

It's interesting that the vast majority of arguments against leaving the EU are based on the economic impact it will have. Whilst it is true that economic decline tends to affect the less well off rather far more than the rich who can afford to hedge against it, it is something of a stretch to suggest that remaining is a "socialist" measure, especially as it's the capitalist employers who are leading the way in pointing out the problems they have already identified. If we go down that route would it be fair to say that the xenophobic lies that drove the Leave campaign e.g. "70 million Turks will be joining the EU" is representative of Fascist ideology?

-------

https://boltonnuts.forumotion.co.uk/viewtopic.forum?t=18695