Kicking out 21 MP’s

[Danllan]

They may well vote with the Government tommorow. It could have been a protest today

I am afraid that's just wishful thinking. They know best, nothing else matters but that they get their way.

 

[Henarar]

I am afraid that's just wishful thinking. They know best, nothing else matters but that they get their way.

Been like that for decades so they are not going to change now

 

[FlyBy]

I am afraid that's just wishful thinking. They know best, nothing else matters but that they get their way.

You would like MPs to just parrot the party line at all times?

 

[caveman]

You would like MPs to just parrot the party line at all times?

Even a simple tin of Ronseal does what it says

 

[FlyBy]

Even a simple tin of Ronseal does what it says

In which case Theresa May's deal should have passed without a hitch. Would that have made everyone happy?

 

[Danllan]

You would like MPs to just parrot the party line at all times?

I would like MPs to respect the express wish of the people at all times.

We have a 'representative' democracy, which means that we elect 'representatives' as opposed to delegates to use their judgement to make decisions for us. Fair enough, although not perfect it's a sufficiently good system for most of the time, because we can't be having endless national referenda on all issues down to the extension on the new runway at Middlesbrough Airport - assuming there is one . But where, on a specific issue, the electorate's will is known, they must heed it, end of story. And for those patently opposed to that will to pretend otherwise and continually prevaricate is contemptible.

I would also like MPs to adhere to keep their promises. In the case of the Conservatives, that means leaving the EU, CU, SM and all.

 

[Austin7]

I would like MPs to respect the express wish of the people at all times.

We have a 'representative' democracy, which means that we elect 'representatives' as opposed to delegates to use their judgement to make decisions for us. Fair enough, although not perfect it's a sufficiently good system for most of the time, because we can't be having endless national referenda on all issues down to the extension on the new runway at Middlesbrough Airport - assuming there is one . But where, on a specific issue, the electorate's will is known, they must heed it, end of story. And for those patently opposed to that will to pretend otherwise and continually prevaricate is contemptible.

I would also like MPs to adhere to keep their promises. In the case of the Conservatives, that means leaving the EU, CU, SM and all.

 

[alex04w]

This isn't true at all. They will certainly support a GE, just not until a law banning no deal is passed. Otherwise they all think Boris will just lie and change the election date until after the leave date. Don't worry, you'll almost certainly still get an election booked by the end of the week or next week at the latest.

The no deal legislation has to be one of the most pointless pieces of legislation ever conceived.

There is a clear parliamentary convention that says no parliament can bind its successor.

So Corbyn gets his 'no deal' legislation passed and an election is called. If the conservatives win a majority, the first piece of legislation they will pass will be one revoking the Corbyn 'no deal' legislation.

Then Johnston will push ahead with leaving the EU on 31st October with or without a deal.

 

[FlyBy]

I would like MPs to respect the express wish of the people at all times.

We have a 'representative' democracy, which means that we elect 'representatives' as opposed to delegates to use their judgement to make decisions for us. Fair enough, although not perfect it's a sufficiently good system for most of the time, because we can't be having endless national referenda on all issues down to the extension on the new runway at Middlesbrough Airport - assuming there is one . But where, on a specific issue, the electorate's will is known, they must heed it, end of story. And for those patently opposed to that will to pretend otherwise and continually prevaricate is contemptible.

You don't specify which people's wish you'd like them to respect. Last I checked an MP's responsibility was primarily to their constituents. If an MP is from a constituency that backs Remain, then why should they put the wishes of people outside their constituency ahead of their own constituents? What happens when those constituents now wish something different to three years ago? Should that MP now put the wishes of the previous population of their constituency (many of whom may have died/moved away/changed their mind) ahead of the wishes of the current population?

I would also like MPs to adhere to keep their promises. In the case of the Conservatives, that means leaving the EU, CU, SM and all.

Do these promises include those made by the Leave campaign MP's during the referendum campaign, or can we casually brush those under the table? How about Daniel Hannan saying 'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market' back in April 2016? Or does that not count because he's only an MEP and therefore can lie at will?

 

[Widgetone]

You don't specify which people's wish you'd like them to respect. Last I checked an MP's responsibility was primarily to their constituents. If an MP is from a constituency that backs Remain, then why should they put the wishes of people outside their constituency ahead of their own constituents? What happens when those constituents now wish something different to three years ago? Should that MP now put the wishes of the previous population of their constituency (many of whom may have died/moved away/changed their mind) ahead of the wishes of the current population?



Do these promises include those made by the Leave campaign MP's during the referendum campaign, or can we casually brush those under the table? How about Daniel Hannan saying 'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market' back in April 2016? Or does that not count because he's only an MEP and therefore can lie at will?

I believe Kate Hoey of Labour is an ardent Brexiteer, when she represents a remain constituency? A rebel, has she had the whip withdrawn?

 

[Danllan]

You don't specify which people's wish you'd like them to respect. Last I checked an MP's responsibility was primarily to their constituents. If an MP is from a constituency that backs Remain, then why should they put the wishes of people outside their constituency ahead of their own constituents? What happens when those constituents now wish something different to three years ago? Should that MP now put the wishes of the previous population of their constituency (many of whom may have died/moved away/changed their mind) ahead of the wishes of the current population?



Do these promises include those made by the Leave campaign MP's during the referendum campaign, or can we casually brush those under the table? How about Daniel Hannan saying 'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market' back in April 2016? Or does that not count because he's only an MEP and therefore can lie at will?

The only express wish outstanding is to leave the EU. All promises made publicly. MEPs don't count because they are irrelevant other than as signals to the main parties - that includes the Brexit Party MEPs I voted for.

 

[FlyBy]

I believe Kate Hoey of Labour is an ardent Brexiteer, when she represents a remain constituency? A rebel, has she had the whip withdrawn?

No, because grown up parties generally accept that MP's are allowed to have their own opinions, and that if those opinions run against the wishes of their constituents they will be either deselected locally or pubished at the next election.

 

[FlyBy]

The no deal legislation has to be one of the most pointless pieces of legislation ever conceived.

There is a clear parliamentary convention that says no parliament can bind its successor.

So Corbyn gets his 'no deal' legislation passed and an election is called. If the conservatives win a majority, the first piece of legislation they will pass will be one revoking the Corbyn 'no deal' legislation.

Then Johnston will push ahead with leaving the EU on 31st October with or without a deal.

It's not pointless at all. No-one is trying to tie the hands of future government, simply to prevent the current government from announcing an election and then changing the date once parliament is suspended to force through a no deal before the election.

 

[fudge]

Didn't bj say more or less what he was going to do before he was elected and still got most votes from con mp's and the rest of the party

I’we lost track of all the things Johnson has said. Most of them turnout to be bollox. Typical journalist like Gove and Rees Mogg.

 

[czechmate]

Who's the most popular then?

A bloke with a lump of willow apparently

 

[Henarar]

A bloke with a lump of willow apparently

he certainly knows how to wave it

 

[B'o'B]

The only express wish outstanding is to leave the EU.

This is true, but that express wish gives no direction to the way in which the UK leaves, hard/soft/deal/no deal. Also, no time frame was given as to when we should leave.

 

[Boohoo]

This is true, but that express wish gives no direction to the way in which the UK leaves, hard/soft/deal/no deal. Also, no time frame was given as to when we should leave.

I don't remember hard or soft being mentioned before the referendum, I only remember leave or remain.
Cameron stated that if there was a vote to leave, article 50 would be activated on the 28th June 2016, this would be followed by 2 years of negotiations and if a deal couldn't be reached we would leave and operate on WTO rules.

 

[Danllan]

This is true, but that express wish gives no direction to the way in which the UK leaves, hard/soft/deal/no deal. Also, no time frame was given as to when we should leave.

It was made on the understanding, from the Government's own referendum pamphlet, that voting to remain meant staying inside the SM and the CU (it avoided mention of ECJ judgements, being bound by EU 'treaties' i.e. constitutions, and EC Directives & Regulations) - it was implicit that voting to leave meant removing the UK from the SM and CU. All this was stated explicitly by David Cameron and others during the campaign on many occasions. People voted based on these this information.

As has been stated, there was an assurance given by David Cameron (and others too) as to the time of triggering Art. 50, and we are all able to add two years to any given date, so there was a clear time frame.

 

[B'o'B]

I don't remember hard or soft being mentioned before the referendum, I only remember leave or remain.
Cameron stated that if there was a vote to leave, article 50 would be activated on the 28th June 2016, this would be followed by 2 years of negotiations and if a deal couldn't be reached we would leave and operate on WTO rules.

Hard or Soft certainly was discussed along with how easy it would be to negotiate at deal.
The referendum question was “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union? Yes or No”
That leaves quite a lot left to sort out.