Brexit - the next steps

[Nearly Sane]

Latest YouGov opinion poll


CON: 35% (+1) LAB: 22% (+1) LDEM: 20% (-3) BREX: 12% (-) GRN: 6% (+1)

[ippy]

Not only can you not spell "pigeon" but you are clueless about the constitutional role of Members of Parliament. They are representatives not delegates. This was exemplified by Edmund Burke in his address to the voters of Bristol when he told them that an MP  owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.

The politicians were mandated to apply, (expected to apply whatever the result of the referendum was to extricate the UK from membership of the EU or not), all of it not bits of it, the result of the 2016 referendum and a large number of them are still doing their best to renege on that mandate.

Because the EU vote was a mandated in or out vote it makes your reference to Edmund Burke irrelevant and not even loosely connected in this case, perhaps it's you that needs to be sharpening up your skill base?

Regards to you H H, ippy.

[Nearly Sane]

The politicians were mandated, (expected to apply whatever the result of the referendum was to extricate the UK from membership of the EU or not), not bits of it all of it, the result of the 2016 referendum and a large number of them are still doing their best to renege on that mandate.

Because the EU vote was a mandated in or out vote it makes your reference to Edmund Burke irrelevant and not even loosely connected in this case, perhaps it's you that needs to be sharpening up your skill base?

Regards to you H H, ippy.

Drivel

[SteveH]

I shall continue to call the PM, Boris, just as I referred to Thatcher as Maggie.

Only her supporters generally called her "Maggie". I always called her "Thatcher", "that bloody woman", or worse.

[Roses]

Only her supporters generally called her "Maggie". I always called her "Thatcher", "that bloody woman", or worse.

I didn't say 'Maggie' in a polite way.

[Nearly Sane]

I didn't say 'Maggie' in a polite way.

'Maggie! Maggie! Maggie! Out! Out! Out!'

[Roses]

'Maggie! Maggie! Maggie! Out! Out! Out!'

Definitely OUT! OUT! OUT!

Now it should be

BORIS, BORIS, BORIS! BYE, BYE, BYE!

[ippy]

I didn't say 'Maggie' in a polite way.

She's at at the top of my list of UK people that figured in recent history I most detest,  'The Wicked Witch is Now Indeed Dead'.

Regards, ippy.

[Roses]

She's at at the top of my list of UK people that figured in recent history I most detest,  'The Wicked Witch is Now Indeed Dead'.

Regards, ippy.

She had dementia in her later years.

[wigginhall]

The politicians were mandated to apply, (expected to apply whatever the result of the referendum was to extricate the UK from membership of the EU or not), all of it not bits of it, the result of the 2016 referendum and a large number of them are still doing their best to renege on that mandate.

Because the EU vote was a mandated in or out vote it makes your reference to Edmund Burke irrelevant and not even loosely connected in this case, perhaps it's you that needs to be sharpening up your skill base?

Regards to you H H, ippy.

I thought the point being made by Burke is that MPs are not mandated to do anything.  They are not delegates.  I realize that various right wing twats are trying to insist that they are, but that is a right wing subversion of parliament.   

[ProfessorDavey]

The politicians were mandated to apply, (expected to apply whatever the result of the referendum was to extricate the UK from membership of the EU or not), all of it not bits of it, the result of the 2016 referendum and a large number of them are still doing their best to renege on that mandate.

No they weren't - indeed MPs can never be mandated in that manner as they are representatives, not delegates. How our democratic system works is that is allows MPs to vote as they wish on the various matters that come before parliament (although they might lose a party whip if they vote in a manner not approved by their party). If voters don't like how they voted in their period of tenure they can vote them out at the next election.

[wigginhall]

Interesting point, that we get to vote again about our MP, and Boris seems keen on another election now.  But apparently the referendum was a holy and sacred relic, that can never be repeated.

[ProfessorDavey]

Interesting point, that we get to vote again about our MP, and Boris seems keen on another election now.  But apparently the referendum was a holy and sacred relic, that can never be repeated.

And MPs were allowed to vote 3 times on the same withdrawal agreement in the space of a few weeks.

[wigginhall]

And MPs were allowed to vote 3 times on the same withdrawal agreement in the space of a few weeks.

And some of them changed their mind, I think.  But we're not allowed to?   Eh?

[Nearly Sane]

And some of them changed their mind, I think.  But we're not allowed to?   Eh?

Johnson did

[ippy]

No they weren't - indeed MPs can never be mandated in that manner as they are representatives, not delegates. How our democratic system works is that is allows MPs to vote as they wish on the various matters that come before parliament (although they might lose a party whip if they vote in a manner not approved by their party). If voters don't like how they voted in their period of tenure they can vote them out at the next election.

I obviously didn't make a sufficient provision for the remainers penchant for trying to reverse results, the political parties promised to implement the result of the EU referendum whichever way it went leave or remain, in effect a  mandate.

Regards to all, ippy.

[ProfessorDavey]

I obviously didn't make a sufficient provision for the remainers penchant for trying to reverse results, the political parties promised to implement the result of the EU referendum whichever way it went leave or remain, in effect a  mandate.

Regards to all, ippy.

It is nothing to do with whether someone is a remainer to a leaver, it is a basic fact about our democracy that MPs are not mandated to vote in any particular manner. If you don't like how they vote in parliament then you vote them out at the next election.

And regarding promises, if I had a £ for each time a manifesto promise hadn't been delivered then I'd be a rich chap. And further your notion that 'the political parties promised to implement the result of the EU referendum' flies in the face of the legal position of the referendum itself. MPs had a choice to make that referendum advisory to binding - they chose the former. Always best to read the legal small-print (in this case it was pretty large print labelled 'advisory') rather than political spin.

This from the MPs briefing on what they were voting for wench they enacted the referendum:

'This Bill requires a referendum to be held on the question of the UK’s continued membership of the European Union (EU) before the end of 2017. It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented.'

[Gordon]

I obviously didn't make a sufficient provision for the remainers penchant for trying to reverse results, the political parties promised to implement the result of the EU referendum whichever way it went leave or remain, in effect a  mandate.

Regards to all, ippy.

No, not a mandate: the referendum was advisory.

Moreover, even if people did vote 'leave' in good faith that they did so without sufficient information about the consequences, and that the consequences are now known, does not preclude a change of mind should it transpire, as it has, that the original decision was a poor one. 

[ProfessorDavey]

I obviously didn't make a sufficient provision for the remainers penchant for trying to reverse results, the political parties promised to implement the result of the EU referendum whichever way it went leave or remain, in effect a  mandate.

Regards to all, ippy.

So in your opinion you can never reverse a democratic result?

So the Tories should not have been allowed to take office in 2010 as this was a reverse of the result of the vote in 2005. Nor could Labour in 97 as that would reverse the result of 92 etc, etc.

Democracy is a process, not a fixed point - as even David Davis recognised a democracy where you cannot change you mind ceases to be a democracy.

[wigginhall]

Yes, politics involves many reversals of previous votes.  I think it's correct that one parliament can't bind the next one.

[Nearly Sane]

I obviously didn't make a sufficient provision for the remainers penchant for trying to reverse results, the political parties promised to implement the result of the EU referendum whichever way it went leave or remain, in effect a  mandate.

Regards to all, ippy.

Or your ignorance of the constitution

[ProfessorDavey]

No, not a mandate: the referendum was advisory.

The referendum did provide a mandate to leave the EU if the government decided to do so, what it didn't provide was a requirement to do so as the referendum was advisory.

What it also did not provide was a mandate for any particular arrangement for leaving the EU, hence the need for a mandate on a specific deal which currently doesn't exist (the mandate, not the deal).

And the referendum certainly doesn't provide a mandate to leave without a deal.

[ippy]

So in effect, a mandate.

ippy

[Robbie]

She had dementia in her later years.

Poor soul.  Wouldn't wish that on worst enemy.

I hated Thatcher on a political level but accepted that, on a personal level, she was a very good person, kind and considerate to individuals.  I wasn't one of her individuals but accept the words of those who were, they'd have no reason to lie.

[Gordon]

So in effect, a mandate.

ippy

At best a mandate to try to negotiate a deal - but not a mandate for a specific deal or for 'no deal', which is why the 2016 referendum was a mistake in asking a simplistic question in respect of a complicated issue when the complications weren't advised to to the electorate at the time of voting. Nor does the referendum compel the government to leave no matter what: the government are free to say that after trying to negotiate it is clear that an acceptable deal isn't a viable option and then just walk away (hopefully this will be the end result).