FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

Labour Three Line Whip On Brexit

Jump to newest
 

By *ercury OP   Man
over a year ago

Grantham

Is this a good idea? Will it cause more trouble in the ranks?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Extremely bad idea.

Labour should offer a free vote to all Labour MP's provided that the white paper and bill to follow has the appropriate checks and balances built in to ensure proper parliamentary oversight, the final say on any deal and that the government publish its white paper setting out its complete negotiating positions and red lines prior to the Article 50 being put before parliament.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercury OP   Man
over a year ago

Grantham

So who are the likely trouble makers?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So who are the likely trouble makers? "

Jc

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandreTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"Extremely bad idea.

Labour should offer a free vote to all Labour MP's provided that the white paper and bill to follow has the appropriate checks and balances built in to ensure proper parliamentary oversight, the final say on any deal and that the government publish its white paper setting out its complete negotiating positions and red lines prior to the Article 50 being put before parliament. "

This

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

Yes it is a bad idea typical of Corbyn he is so sad and pathetic.His members should vote the way the people that elected them voted in the referendum.The first job of an MP is to represent there costituents befor party dogma

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Yes it is a bad idea typical of Corbyn he is so sad and pathetic.His members should vote the way the people that elected them voted in the referendum.The first job of an MP is to represent there costituents befor party dogma"
Then 65 tory MPs would have to vote against brexit If they voted the same as their their constituents.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

The irony of Corbyn imposing a 3 line whip..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"Yes it is a bad idea typical of Corbyn he is so sad and pathetic.His members should vote the way the people that elected them voted in the referendum.The first job of an MP is to represent there costituents befor party dogma Then 65 tory MPs would have to vote against brexit If they voted the same as their their constituents. "

Personally I think all MP's should vote in accordance with how their voters did

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Personally I think our MPs should vote for what they believe is best for their constituents and the country. It is up to them to justify their choice at the next election and if they cant they can be replaced.

After all that is what we elected them to do and they should earn their pay!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Personally I think our MPs should vote for what they believe is best for their constituents and the country. It is up to them to justify their choice at the next election and if they cant they can be replaced.

After all that is what we elected them to do and they should earn their pay! "

what is best for their constituents and the country is what the constituents want

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

I also believe that all publicly elected representatives should have to publish their attendance and voting records in their constituency whenever they seek reelection.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"what is best for their constituents and the country is what the constituents want"

Not necessarily. Although I do accept that most people would agree with you. That is why I think we all have a right to know what is being or not being done in our name.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandreTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham

[Removed by poster at 26/01/17 17:58:16]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandreTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"

Personally I think all MP's should vote in accordance with how their voters did"

Poppycock.

As Edmund Burke (a famous Whig but also known as the father of modern Conservatism) said in 1774 in a famous speech noted for its defence of the principles of representative government against the notion that elected officials should merely be delegates

'Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.'

And THAT is why, on a matter as important as this, with a totally split country, this should be a rigorous, detailed debate followed by a completely free vote absent of all whips. The MP's should listen to the debate then vote with their judgement and conscience. If they feel the wishes of their constituents outweigh's his judgement or he relies on it if he is undecided then so be it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don't know how he can and keep a straight face lol

He only defied the whips 500 times when he was a backbencher !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"

Personally I think all MP's should vote in accordance with how their voters did

Poppycock.

As Edmund Burke (a famous Whig but also known as the father of modern Conservatism) said in 1774 in a famous speech noted for its defence of the principles of representative government against the notion that elected officials should merely be delegates

'Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.'

And THAT is why, on a matter as important as this, with a totally split country, this should be a rigorous, detailed debate followed by a completely free vote absent of all whips. The MP's should listen to the debate then vote with their judgement and conscience. If they feel the wishes of their constituents outweigh's his judgement or he relies on it if he is undecided then so be it."

MP's used their vote to give the uk voting public the right to make that decision by six to one and we were told that the government would abide by that decision, just because you dont like the result does not mean it should be ignored everyone knew the rules beforehand,perhaps if the remain side had produced a better arguement then the result would have been different

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Everyone criticised him as leader when allowed a free vote on Syria now they have a go if he doesn't.

Make your minds up.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You know how the media will portray anyone who votes against brexit .The foaming at the mouth right-wing media will be at fever pitch.They'll all vote leave.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandreTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham

And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

"

The 20% who didn't vote didn't care what way the vote went, so therefore gave their tacit agreement to a leave vote.

The 28% who are ineligible to vote? You think every child should have the right to vote? Every prisoner?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"

Personally I think all MP's should vote in accordance with how their voters did

Poppycock.

As Edmund Burke (a famous Whig but also known as the father of modern Conservatism) said in 1774 in a famous speech noted for its defence of the principles of representative government against the notion that elected officials should merely be delegates

'Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.'

And THAT is why, on a matter as important as this, with a totally split country, this should be a rigorous, detailed debate followed by a completely free vote absent of all whips. The MP's should listen to the debate then vote with their judgement and conscience. If they feel the wishes of their constituents outweigh's his judgement or he relies on it if he is undecided then so be it."

I'll quote the former leader of the Liberal democrats, Paddy Ashdown, who said this before the EU referendum vote on June 23rd, he said "when the British people speak, you obey their command".

The British people spoke on June 23rd last year and they told Parliament that they wanted the country to Leave the EU. Tim Farron and Nick Clegg should heed their former leaders words!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Is this a good idea? Will it cause more trouble in the ranks?"

One front bench Labour MP has already resigned. Not a good day for Corbyn.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

"

So you now claim to know how those who couldnt be arsed to vote wanted to happen and also know that many of those who voted just did so because they wanted to protest and know that many have changed their mind, perhaps many voted remain because they were scared by the thought of the third world war and instant depression that would happen so I think the vote to leave should have been much higher had they know the truth about the goverment lies, how do I know this ? By the same method you know all the alternative facts you quoted its called the bollocks method of made up shit

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

So you now claim to know how those who couldnt be arsed to vote wanted to happen and also know that many of those who voted just did so because they wanted to protest and know that many have changed their mind, perhaps many voted remain because they were scared by the thought of the third world war and instant depression that would happen so I think the vote to leave should have been much higher had they know the truth about the goverment lies, how do I know this ? By the same method you know all the alternative facts you quoted its called the bollocks method of made up shit"
..spot on.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandreTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

So you now claim to know how those who couldnt be arsed to vote wanted to happen and also know that many of those who voted just did so because they wanted to protest and know that many have changed their mind, perhaps many voted remain because they were scared by the thought of the third world war and instant depression that would happen so I think the vote to leave should have been much higher had they know the truth about the goverment lies, how do I know this ? By the same method you know all the alternative facts you quoted its called the bollocks method of made up shit..spot on."

Not spot on at all.

At no point did I claim to know how those people who did not vote, for whatever reason, how they would have voted.

All I said was that the MP's needed to consider what was best for everyone in this country and future generations. I used the proportions to put into perspective that the 52% of the population that voted is not an overwhelming mandate, it was very marginal when put in context, and that there are a lot of things and people to consider.

This vote was only advisory remember. So they take it under advisement but make their own decision. Perhaps as more things come to light than were given due scrutiny in the campaigns.

I expect they will consider the demographics of the vote and they wishes of the younger generations.

After all, in three years time a lot of Leave voters will be dead and a lot more Remain voters enter the electorate.

These are matters they should consider.

Also it isn't right to assume that everyone who didn't vote couldn't be arsed. I know a few people who just didn't feel they had been given enough information they could use to make a decision.

That a lot of people admitted they voted leave as a protest is documented. That a lot have changed their mind since the vote is also documented.

'perhaps many voted remain because they were scared by the thought of the third world war and instant depression that would happen so I think the vote to leave should have been much higher had they know the truth about the goverment lies'

Perhaps. You make a very good case for leaving it to the MP's to take all these things into consideration and make their own judgement rather than simply automatically take the result of the advisory referendum as a definitive instruction.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

So you now claim to know how those who couldnt be arsed to vote wanted to happen and also know that many of those who voted just did so because they wanted to protest and know that many have changed their mind, perhaps many voted remain because they were scared by the thought of the third world war and instant depression that would happen so I think the vote to leave should have been much higher had they know the truth about the goverment lies, how do I know this ? By the same method you know all the alternative facts you quoted its called the bollocks method of made up shit..spot on.

Not spot on at all.

At no point did I claim to know how those people who did not vote, for whatever reason, how they would have voted.

All I said was that the MP's needed to consider what was best for everyone in this country and future generations. I used the proportions to put into perspective that the 52% of the population that voted is not an overwhelming mandate, it was very marginal when put in context, and that there are a lot of things and people to consider.

This vote was only advisory remember. So they take it under advisement but make their own decision. Perhaps as more things come to light than were given due scrutiny in the campaigns.

I expect they will consider the demographics of the vote and they wishes of the younger generations.

After all, in three years time a lot of Leave voters will be dead and a lot more Remain voters enter the electorate.

These are matters they should consider.

Also it isn't right to assume that everyone who didn't vote couldn't be arsed. I know a few people who just didn't feel they had been given enough information they could use to make a decision.

That a lot of people admitted they voted leave as a protest is documented. That a lot have changed their mind since the vote is also documented.

'perhaps many voted remain because they were scared by the thought of the third world war and instant depression that would happen so I think the vote to leave should have been much higher had they know the truth about the goverment lies'

Perhaps. You make a very good case for leaving it to the MP's to take all these things into consideration and make their own judgement rather than simply automatically take the result of the advisory referendum as a definitive instruction.

"

If the EU referendum had been done like a general election on a constituency by constituency basis then it would have been a landslide victory for Leave. MP's can dare to vote against the government Brexit bill if they like but make no mistake they WILL face the wrath of the British public at the next general election if they dare to vote against this bill. Labour will be wiped out, we'll have a lot more Tory and UKip MP's in parliament and then we will most certainly leave this wretched, undemocratic, failed, pathetic excuse for a project called the EU.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

The majority of votes were cast to leave the E.U. That is it, no debate. The various M.P.s who say their constituents would rather remain and intend to vote against the action of article 50 are simply wrong. (And should be shot)

We have indicated to the E.U that we wish to leave and we are obliged by E.U. law to action article 50. In case you are not aware, E.U. law overides our national law.

Alec

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anes HubbyCouple
over a year ago

Babbacombe Torquay


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

The majority of votes were cast to leave the E.U. That is it, no debate. The various M.P.s who say their constituents would rather remain and intend to vote against the action of article 50 are simply wrong. (And should be shot)

We have indicated to the E.U that we wish to leave and we are obliged by E.U. law to action article 50. In case you are not aware, E.U. law overides our national law.

Alec

"

Legally, ALL government referendums in the UK are advisory, it is the prerogative of the government in power at that time to take it so or to act on the outcome.....that said any government choosing to ignore a referendum result would risk the wrath of the electorate and face the political consequences.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

I have now seen the bill...

I have changed my mind, there should be a three line whip. But it should be to vote against the bill!

The arrogance of the fucking woman! For six months her position has been I have the power I get to say and I am not telling anyone what our position is.

Eventually the supreme court tell her she does not have the power, parliament has the power and she needs their approval before she does anything. She has known all along that parliament will support the triggering of article 50 provided they know the exit plan. so yesterday she stands up and says Ill tell you the plan some time in the future now shut the fuck up! And today she says in the mean time sign this blank check as she fucks off to lick a farts arse!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercury OP   Man
over a year ago

Grantham


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

The majority of votes were cast to leave the E.U. That is it, no debate. The various M.P.s who say their constituents would rather remain and intend to vote against the action of article 50 are simply wrong. (And should be shot)

We have indicated to the E.U that we wish to leave and we are obliged by E.U. law to action article 50. In case you are not aware, E.U. law overides our national law.

Alec

"

The referendum most certainly was advisory and had no legal basis, unlike the Scottish independence referendum.

It is upto the British government to trigger article 50, as and when it decides to. The EU cannot make us leave, it is up to us to decide if and when we start that process

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercury OP   Man
over a year ago

Grantham

I know of one Conservative MP, who will vote with his constituents wishes (remain) and will defy his own party.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *onnyJohnMan
over a year ago

Doncaster

Ffs.... arguing in circles really is pointless, a referendum was held a result was announced and it was to leave so how about we get the fcuk on with pulling together instead of tearing strips of each other.

We as a nation have made ourselves a fcuking laughing stock by bickering like three year olds.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral


"Yes it is a bad idea typical of Corbyn he is so sad and pathetic.His members should vote the way the people that elected them voted in the referendum.The first job of an MP is to represent there costituents befor party dogma Then 65 tory MPs would have to vote against brexit If they voted the same as their their constituents. "
Very true

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

The majority of votes were cast to leave the E.U. That is it, no debate. The various M.P.s who say their constituents would rather remain and intend to vote against the action of article 50 are simply wrong. (And should be shot)

We have indicated to the E.U that we wish to leave and we are obliged by E.U. law to action article 50. In case you are not aware, E.U. law overides our national law.

Alec

The referendum most certainly was advisory and had no legal basis, unlike the Scottish independence referendum.

It is upto the British government to trigger article 50, as and when it decides to. The EU cannot make us leave, it is up to us to decide if and when we start that process"

The government intends to trigger article 50, as it was stated in the official government leaflet issued to every house in the uk during the referendum at a cost of £9 million pounds of UK taxpayers money that they would implement the result of the referendum. Brexit secretary David Davis said the other day in Parliament "the point of no return passed on June 23rd last year, there is no going back now." So the government wants to respect the will of the British people and trigger article 50, how about Parliament now just votes in favour of the bill and let's them get the fuck on with it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anes HubbyCouple
over a year ago

Babbacombe Torquay

With amendments to the bill......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"The irony of Corbyn imposing a 3 line whip..

"

Deeply

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandreTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

The majority of votes were cast to leave the E.U. That is it, no debate. The various M.P.s who say their constituents would rather remain and intend to vote against the action of article 50 are simply wrong. (And should be shot)

We have indicated to the E.U that we wish to leave and we are obliged by E.U. law to action article 50. In case you are not aware, E.U. law overides our national law.

Alec

"

Did you miss the High court ruling in November and the Supreme Court ruling this week?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"Yes it is a bad idea typical of Corbyn he is so sad and pathetic.His members should vote the way the people that elected them voted in the referendum.The first job of an MP is to represent there costituents befor party dogma Then 65 tory MPs would have to vote against brexit If they voted the same as their their constituents. Very true"

And about 160 Labor MPs would have to vote for it.

Of the 623 constituencies, about 420 voted leave.

If it was held on a UK GE basis, that would be the biggest parliamentary majority ever.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

The majority of votes were cast to leave the E.U. That is it, no debate. The various M.P.s who say their constituents would rather remain and intend to vote against the action of article 50 are simply wrong. (And should be shot)

We have indicated to the E.U that we wish to leave and we are obliged by E.U. law to action article 50. In case you are not aware, E.U. law overides our national law.

Alec

Did you miss the High court ruling in November and the Supreme Court ruling this week?

"

Was that the one that said parliament had to vote on article 50, that the devolved governments had no say, and that it was not up to the courts to say how extensive or detailed the article 50 bill had to be?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

"

Just as an aside, could you use your same method of calculation to show the proportion of the population in Richmond that voted in the by election for the lib dems?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

Alec

"

I can't believe people are still refusing to accept this very easy to find out fact that it was advisory only.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercury OP   Man
over a year ago

Grantham

A fair bit of dissent from Labour MPs this morning.

Is the Labour party like a game of political jenga?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

Alec

I can't believe people are still refusing to accept this very easy to find out fact that it was advisory only.

"

It was said by the then prime minister that the vote would be acted upon and there would be no going back once cast!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

Alec

I can't believe people are still refusing to accept this very easy to find out fact that it was advisory only.

It was said by the then prime minister that the vote would be acted upon and there would be no going back once cast!"

it may have been said at some point that it was only advisory but once it went the way Cameron and other's did not see happening it was only ever going to be acted upon, to not do so would be a mess politically and democratically..

what it ends up as being is another question..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby

If the referendum had voted the other way 52:48 to remain, being as it was only 'advisory', and especially as at least one person on here says that the 52% is actually only 27% of the population, would there have been any debate at all as to whether we should actually leave, or that the leave voters should be 'listened to'....?

Or would it have been proclaimed as a resounding and unequivocal victory for remain and that 'the people have spoken'?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

I don't have an issue with the labour MPs that have said they are going to defy the whips because they are in areas that strongly voted remain.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"I don't have an issue with the labour MPs that have said they are going to defy the whips because they are in areas that strongly voted remain.....

"

Nor with any MPs voting the way that their constituents did.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

I don't have issues with how any MP votes on any issue. I may not agree with them, and the majority of the country may not agree with them (think police, local authority and NHS cuts). But I accept that ultimately, regardless of how much I protest, they are the people who we elected to make the rules we must live by.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bandjam91Couple
over a year ago

London


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

The 20% who didn't vote didn't care what way the vote went, so therefore gave their tacit agreement to a leave vote.

The 28% who are ineligible to vote? You think every child should have the right to vote? Every prisoner?

"

That's utter nonsense. Those who didn't vote could just as easily have been giving their tacit agreement to vote remain.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bandjam91Couple
over a year ago

London


"Hello Fille,

"This vote was only advisory remember.""

Where did you get that idea from, it certainly is not advisory?

Alec

I can't believe people are still refusing to accept this very easy to find out fact that it was advisory only.

It was said by the then prime minister that the vote would be acted upon and there would be no going back once cast!"

And you believed him? Maybe if you'd have read some of the inaccurate press like the BBC and Guardian you would have known this?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No he actually said it in a speach that was televised and just becaus BBC news does not tell you things the way you actually think you call it inaccurate like it's some kind of propaganda machine.

They give news good and bad and try not to take a side and just because it's not the side some people want it to be they call it one sided

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bandjam91Couple
over a year ago

London


"No he actually said it in a speach that was televised and just becaus BBC news does not tell you things the way you actually think you call it inaccurate like it's some kind of propaganda machine.

They give news good and bad and try not to take a side and just because it's not the side some people want it to be they call it one sided "

I was being sarcastic sorry

Inaccurate should have been in inverted commas.

My point is Cameron may have said it but that didn't make it true.

The referendum was always advisory and reported as such beforehand.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

The 20% who didn't vote didn't care what way the vote went, so therefore gave their tacit agreement to a leave vote.

The 28% who are ineligible to vote? You think every child should have the right to vote? Every prisoner?

That's utter nonsense. Those who didn't vote could just as easily have been giving their tacit agreement to vote remain."

That would certainly have been the case had the vote been for remain. But, as I said, those that didn't bother to vote didn't care which way the vote went; as such, they have given their tacit agreement to leave.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bandjam91Couple
over a year ago

London


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

The 20% who didn't vote didn't care what way the vote went, so therefore gave their tacit agreement to a leave vote.

The 28% who are ineligible to vote? You think every child should have the right to vote? Every prisoner?

That's utter nonsense. Those who didn't vote could just as easily have been giving their tacit agreement to vote remain.

That would certainly have been the case had the vote been for remain. But, as I said, those that didn't bother to vote didn't care which way the vote went; as such, they have given their tacit agreement to leave. "

I think you need to look up the word tacit in the dictionary

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

The 20% who didn't vote didn't care what way the vote went, so therefore gave their tacit agreement to a leave vote.

The 28% who are ineligible to vote? You think every child should have the right to vote? Every prisoner?

That's utter nonsense. Those who didn't vote could just as easily have been giving their tacit agreement to vote remain.

That would certainly have been the case had the vote been for remain. But, as I said, those that didn't bother to vote didn't care which way the vote went; as such, they have given their tacit agreement to leave.

I think you need to look up the word tacit in the dictionary "

You obviously lost the argument but why, what do you think tacit means?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bandjam91Couple
over a year ago

London


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

The 20% who didn't vote didn't care what way the vote went, so therefore gave their tacit agreement to a leave vote.

The 28% who are ineligible to vote? You think every child should have the right to vote? Every prisoner?

That's utter nonsense. Those who didn't vote could just as easily have been giving their tacit agreement to vote remain.

That would certainly have been the case had the vote been for remain. But, as I said, those that didn't bother to vote didn't care which way the vote went; as such, they have given their tacit agreement to leave.

I think you need to look up the word tacit in the dictionary

You obviously lost the argument but why, what do you think tacit means?"

How did I lose the argument?

Tacit means "understood or implied without being stated."

That doesn't mean the same thing as not caring.

On fact, given the polls predicted a Remain win it's more likely that any tacit agreement was with the Remain side.

If those people who didn't vote wanted to leave then surely they would have been more likely to get out and vote to ensure it happened.

Once again, maybe you should actually understand words before using them and also apply some logic.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"You obviously lost the argument but why, what do you think tacit means?"

Actually the convention is that a vote is tied or close to tied if abstentions need to be added to give the vote legitimacy they are added to the status quo.

In this case the status quo would be remain and therefore the result would have been reversed. It is for this reason that most countries require a 60/40, 70/30 or even 80/20 majority when altering or reversing constitutional law. Of course this was not the case with our EU referendum because it was nothing more than a tool to get the tories an extra 5 years in power and any such caveat would have meant that it would have failed in that purpose.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bandjam91Couple
over a year ago

London


"You obviously lost the argument but why, what do you think tacit means?

Actually the convention is that a vote is tied or close to tied if abstentions need to be added to give the vote legitimacy they are added to the status quo.

In this case the status quo would be remain and therefore the result would have been reversed. It is for this reason that most countries require a 60/40, 70/30 or even 80/20 majority when altering or reversing constitutional law. Of course this was not the case with our EU referendum because it was nothing more than a tool to get the tories an extra 5 years in power and any such caveat would have meant that it would have failed in that purpose. "

Exactly

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And they expressed their opinion, for the MP's to take under advice.

26.95% of the UK population wanted to leave the EU at that time.

They have to decide, using the judgement they were elected to provide, if that is the right thing to do for the 20.04% who didn't vote, the 24.99% who voted the opposite way, the 28.02% of the population ineligible to vote, future generations and indeed even the 26.95% who voted to leave, many of whom voted as a protest or have since changed their mind anyway.

The 20% who didn't vote didn't care what way the vote went, so therefore gave their tacit agreement to a leave vote.

The 28% who are ineligible to vote? You think every child should have the right to vote? Every prisoner?

That's utter nonsense. Those who didn't vote could just as easily have been giving their tacit agreement to vote remain.

That would certainly have been the case had the vote been for remain. But, as I said, those that didn't bother to vote didn't care which way the vote went; as such, they have given their tacit agreement to leave.

I think you need to look up the word tacit in the dictionary

You obviously lost the argument but why, what do you think tacit means?

How did I lose the argument?

Tacit means "understood or implied without being stated."

That doesn't mean the same thing as not caring.

On fact, given the polls predicted a Remain win it's more likely that any tacit agreement was with the Remain side.

If those people who didn't vote wanted to leave then surely they would have been more likely to get out and vote to ensure it happened.

Once again, maybe you should actually understand words before using them and also apply some logic."

so how was tacit used in the wrong way? And the polls predicted a remain win by what margin? And if people were happy with the status quo then surely they would have gone out to support it. Its a wonder there are any straws left in this country

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You obviously lost the argument but why, what do you think tacit means?

Actually the convention is that a vote is tied or close to tied if abstentions need to be added to give the vote legitimacy they are added to the status quo.

In this case the status quo would be remain and therefore the result would have been reversed. It is for this reason that most countries require a 60/40, 70/30 or even 80/20 majority when altering or reversing constitutional law. Of course this was not the case with our EU referendum because it was nothing more than a tool to get the tories an extra 5 years in power and any such caveat would have meant that it would have failed in that purpose. "

close to tied? Try to count up to one and a half million

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandreTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham

The point is it wasn't an overwhelming vote.

The second point is it was advisory, not legally binding.

The third point is that if it was meant to be legally binding there would have been a higher threshold required to make change happen.

The fourth point is that as it was advisory the final decision rests with parliament.

The fifth point is the final decision rest with parliament, not the PM.

The sixth point is that MP's should give consideration to the people who voted both ways, the people who did not vote and the people who could not vote.

The last point is I just said they should give due consideration and make up their own minds. I didn't demand they vote how you want them to. If they give more weight to the 52% who voted leave nationally, or the way their constituents voted either for principled reasons or because they are trying to keep their seat then that is up to them.

Never the less they should at least CONSIDER the closeness of the vote along with its effects.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"The point is it wasn't an overwhelming vote.

The second point is it was advisory, not legally binding.

The third point is that if it was meant to be legally binding there would have been a higher threshold required to make change happen.

The fourth point is that as it was advisory the final decision rests with parliament.

The fifth point is the final decision rest with parliament, not the PM.

The sixth point is that MP's should give consideration to the people who voted both ways, the people who did not vote and the people who could not vote.

The last point is I just said they should give due consideration and make up their own minds. I didn't demand they vote how you want them to. If they give more weight to the 52% who voted leave nationally, or the way their constituents voted either for principled reasons or because they are trying to keep their seat then that is up to them.

Never the less they should at least CONSIDER the closeness of the vote along with its effects. "

Soo once parliament votes on it will you then accept the decision?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I also believe that all publicly elected representatives should have to publish their attendance and voting records in their constituency whenever they seek reelection."

This is already a matter of public record if you bother to look.

65 labour MPs constituencies voted remain....but far more voted to leave. Even a vote along these lines would pass the trigger bill easily.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Getting rid of all the arguments about how many did/dint vote which way....the OP asked if Corbyn made a mistake in imposing a three line whip.

Simple answer...yes!

He makes a mistake by getting up in the morning. He makes a mistake by breathing.

Two shadow cabinet members resigned. One of the whips who impose his directives also gone.

If you add up the current members if his shadow cabinet, add those former members either sacked or resigned, those that have refused to join....I think it leaves about three MPs to pick from.

Corbyns time must surely be limited.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"The point is it wasn't an overwhelming vote.

The second point is it was advisory, not legally binding.

The third point is that if it was meant to be legally binding there would have been a higher threshold required to make change happen.

The fourth point is that as it was advisory the final decision rests with parliament.

The fifth point is the final decision rest with parliament, not the PM.

The sixth point is that MP's should give consideration to the people who voted both ways, the people who did not vote and the people who could not vote.

The last point is I just said they should give due consideration and make up their own minds. I didn't demand they vote how you want them to. If they give more weight to the 52% who voted leave nationally, or the way their constituents voted either for principled reasons or because they are trying to keep their seat then that is up to them.

Never the less they should at least CONSIDER the closeness of the vote along with its effects. "

It wasn't a close vote. Leave got 1 and a half million more votes than Remain.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top