Open letter to the UK's 450 MPs who support membership of the EU

First topic message reminder :

The UK has only ever held three nationwide referendums. The first two - in 1975 and in 2011 - gave very clear results. The third one has not done so. For every 17 people who voted to leave the EU, 16 voted to remain.

Ed Miliband was opposed to holding this referendum, which was more about placating the right-wing of the Tory Party than any 'national interest', and in any case, referendums are only advisory. Parliament is sovereign; after all, isn't that what Brexit supporters campaigned for? As 450 of our 650 MPs want us to remain in the EU, why don't they use their sovereignty to reject the referendum result? (It's also become evident that many Labour MPs believe their 'sovereign' opinions carry more weight than the views of the vast majority of their party's members.)

The Brexiters also campaigned to 'restore democracy' to the United Kingdom. What is 'democratic' about forcing Scotland, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar to leave the EU against the will of the majority of their voters? This constitutional disaster is the result of a reckless and irresponsible response by a weak PM to the divisions in his own party.

A despicable campaign of xenophobia and lies, including TV broadcasts which should have been banned by the Broadcasting Standards Authority, hoodwinked 51.9% of the 72.2% who voted into supporting Brexit. It's hardly surprising that millions of people have now signed a petition for another referendum, but that's not the answer. Referendums are an abdication of the responsibility which voters give to MPs when they elect them. What is needed is for 450 of those MPs to stand up for what they believe, exercise their sovereign power, and refuse to ratify the 2016 referendum result.

oftenwrong,

When people start seeing the price of goods going up, and their pockets are hit, there may well be public outcry about the harm / effects of Brexit.

Price rises of goods are already being reported, petrol is due to go up, and I imagine we will see hefty rises in our utility bills within the next year (all our energy supplies are foreign owned).

I think the whole nation, not just parliament, might begin to reconsider what Brexit means and see that the UK has shot itself in the foot and cut our nose to spite our face; and the brazen liar Theresa May will be forced to change her current autocratic plans.

The whole Brexit campaign was a sham, a con, built on lies and manipulation, and in my view this renders the result invalid as a mandate for brexit because people voted without being properly informed, or aware, of the consequences. We are only now beginning to find out something closer to the true impact / meaning of brexit........and we haven't even left yet. The debate needs to be reopened with the arguments from both sides put again in this more honest context.

I don't know if the public have the wherewithal to clamour for electoral reform; but they will clamour about services/goods becoming more expensive when many of them are already struggling as it is.

The Brexiteers are probably already preparing a stout defence of their position - which will include constant assertions that none of the turmoil is as a result of the vote to leave the EU.

It will be put down to natural and cyclical 'world trade fluctuations' and 'Remainers' panic' and anything else which removes from the guilty the responsibility for the downturns that will inevitably arise...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/13/court-case-battle-looms-over-brexit-legality-article-50

But the teams of lawyers deployed by the claimants, interested parties and interveners, some of whom are crowd-funded, counter that the referendum was merely consultative and that a decision to leave has not yet been taken.
Parliament alone, they argue, has the power to decide. Davis, one skeleton argument explains, “may only notify such a decision to the European council under article 50 (2) TEU once he has been properly authorised to do so by an act of parliament”.

I hope these claims are upheld. Good luck to all who have had the courage to bring this case despite death threats and intimidation.

What might have made a difference to the approach to the Brexit referendum result was if some of the big Tory donors had expressed dissatisfaction. But each day Theresa May seems to dig the 'leave' hole even deeper. I doubt the legal challenge will be successful.

The fact that there have been threats against those opposing the government's approach shows just the sort of people who are in favour of the xenophobic and irrational exit. Have we really turned into a nation of bigots and people who are seduced by the likes of the poisonous Daily Mail?

The public are already turning against Brexit. When will Theresa May listen?

Extracts from an article by Polly Toynbee:-

Every soundbite, and signal, from every leader over recent weeks knocks down British wishful thinking that we can stay in the single market and the customs union while denying free movement of people. Or that we can forge special sector-by-sector trade deals for our most prized industries – passporting rights for finance and good deals for our cars or pharmaceuticals. Instead, the French, Germans and Irish are busy trying to woo those businesses to relocate with them, and why wouldn’t they?

The British people may decide the cost is too high. Before anything has happened yet, they can see how the prospect of hard Brexit is already causing serious damage. The pound plunging by 17% is a national disaster, predicted to fall further: only those who supported Brexit whistle in the dark, pretending it’s good news. It will help a few manufacturers and Bond Street retailers of luxury goods, but our precarious over-dependence on imports means steep price rises ahead in petrol and food are rather more important than cheaper Burberry handbags. We may decry an unbalanced reliance on the finance industry, but wrecking it before building up anything else will leave a chasm in treasury revenues, more cuts, more job losses.

The British Election Study finds that most who voted leave didn’t actually think it would happen. That suggests those who thought they were just protesting may change their minds, finding the economic price too high. Very little has happened yet to change people’s minds. So how much further may public opinion shift when the Brexit effect really bites?

For the whole article:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/20/public-turning-against-brexit-theresa-may-immigration

Polly's right - but the evidence suggests that, even if public opinion shifts radically, we have in place a government that is determined not to take account of public opinion

European Council President Donald Tusk told reporters he would be the happiest one if the UK reversed the decision to quit and stuck with the bloc for years to come.  Others expressed a hope that Theresa May would find a way to resolve what was "an internal Party disagreement", in order for the UK to remain within the EU.

There seems to be a common perception that any reversal of the EU decision would result in riots in the streets. While those EU-haters are the very type who would gladly be at the barricades shouting their mouths off, I do wonder if they are still in a majority.

That said, I think the country will continue to plunge headlong into potential disaster and that we shall ask ourselves in a decade's time just exactly what tempted us to pull the plug for the sake of an irrational hatred of 'foreigners' and a belief that , somehow, we could recreate The Empire...

Graham Norton: Brexit voters bought ‘a pack of lies’

TV host tells Late Late Show that UK should take Ireland’s lead and re-run referendum.

“What is great about being young is you’ve so many options. Life - all the doors are open, every door is open. What is so sad about Brexit is that people over 60 - because it was people over 60 passed that thing - closed so many doors on young people and shut down options. Shut down options about studying abroad, living abroad, working in places. It just seemed absolutely the wrong instinct. Don’t make the world smaller, don’t shut things down.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/tv-radio-web/graham-norton-brexit-voters-bought-a-pack-of-lies-1.2838337#

Just in case anyone needs more evidence of the insanity of the UK leaving the EU……..  

Brexit politicians are putting us on a fast track to financial jeopardy

Extracts from an article by Anthony Browne:-

"There is a consensus that the EU’s integrated financial market is one of its great success stories. It makes it easier and cheaper for French farmers, German manufacturers and Italian fashion designers to secure funding. It helps EU citizens get better returns for their savings. And it also creates jobs, not least in the UK, where financial services as a whole employ more than a million people, two-thirds of them outside London.

But it is now at risk. It is underpinned legally by the ‘passporting’ system enshrined in EU legislation, which allows banks based in the UK to sell services to customers in Europe, and banks based in Europe to sell services to customers in the UK, and access the global financial centre that is London. It also allows banks based in one EU country to set up branches in any other EU country without going through local regulators.

Banking is probably more affected by Brexit than any other sector of the economy, both in the degree of impact and the scale of the implications. It is the UK’s biggest export industry by far and is more internationally mobile than most. But it also gets its rules and legal rights to serve its customers cross-border from the EU. For banks, Brexit does not simply mean additional tariffs being imposed on trade, as is likely to be the case with other sectors. It is about whether banks have the legal right to provide services."

For the whole article:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/22/brexit-threat-to-british-banks

I don't suppose I'm the only one to fear that once again the British taxpayer will be called upon to bail-out the City of London in order to "compensate" for any losses arising from Brexit.

As for us "taking back control", Brussels is about to appoint an Administrator to RBS for the purpose of enforcing the sale of 300 of its Branches.

I don't suppose you are the only one with that particular fear OW

The creek is sh*t and we have definitely lost our paddle

It can't be paranoia if they've REALLY got it in for us.

The Brexit war can still be won, but we must start fighting back

Extracts from an article by Will Hutton:-

Britain faces its biggest peacetime crisis since 1945. Leaving the EU on the slightest of referendum majorities, after a campaign in which the leave side was never constitutionally compelled to agree what leave meant, is already plunging Britain into a constitutional, political and legal quagmire. Prolonged economic stagnation, perhaps depression, seem inevitable. A liberal, tolerant, outward-looking country is being transmuted into an illiberal, intolerant, inward-looking one. Battle is being joined for our soul, yet many of those who see all they hold dear being ripped away from them are strangely mute. Nigel Farage was right when he said it was a revolution “without a shot being fired”.

So what to do? The first thing is to get as passionate about what is happening as leavers were in making their case. Britain must not leave the EU. It is not just that leaving is an act of wilful economic self-harm – it is also abandoning the continent’s most noble project. This will be attacked by leavers as defying the democratic will. But democracy is about constant argument and deliberation, not permanently deifying one vote at one moment in time.

This is above all a political project. This is why a group of centre-left Labour MPs has launched a new movement to make the case. I support their efforts because Britain stands on the verge of a great unravelling with untold consequences for its economy, society, place in the world, and its people’s souls. The standard must be raised: fire must be returned. We need to make the case for a reimagined Britain and its membership of the EU. We say not what we are against, but what we stand for. We want our country back. And we want it now.

For the whole article:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/02/brexit-war-can-still-be-won-eu

...." a group of centre-left Labour MPs has launched a new movement " ....

In our bi-polar House of Commons, The elected Leader of the Opposition Labour Party is "centre-left".

‘Should Vote Leave be prosecuted over its referendum propaganda?’ An article by Anthony Eskander

On 23 June 2016 over 33 million people voted in the EU referendum. Since that date there has been widespread anger from those who believe that the organisation ‘Vote Leave’ misled members of the public.

http://churchcourtchambers.co.uk/should-vote-leave-be-prosecuted-over-its-referendum-propaganda-an-article-by-anthony-eskander/

Now for some good news - our unelected dictator Theresa May cannot use the royal prerogative to overrule legislation enacted by Parliament, in this case the European Communities Act of 1972:-

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/summary-r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-eu-20161103.pdf

What pressures , we wonder, are already being put onto the Supreme Court to reverse the inconvenient decision?

As the popular song says : 'There may be trouble ahead...'

The Royal Prerogative.

Wouldn't it be a better idea for Britain to have a written Constitution?

(Please, nobody suggest a referendum!)

The royal prerogative, a hangover from the Middle Ages, was considered necessary by some constitutional experts in case a government ever exceeded its powers (for example, by staying in power longer than five years). In such circumstances, the monarch had the power to dissolve Parliament and call a general election. That power went with the Fixed Term Parliaments Act of 2011, which incidentally prevents Theresa May from calling a snap general election (as some political pundits are predicting).

If our unelected dictator should get away with the outrage of using this medieval power to overrule the legislature, a very dangerous precedent would be set. The judges are correct: Parliament is sovereign (just as the Brexit boneheads have been demanding), Parliament passed the European Communities Act of 1972, and the royal prerogative must not be used to bypass it.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CwaA1gyXEAAEUxF.jpg

Future History books are destined to be very unkind to David Cameron, and his successors, for the chaotic events of 2016 precipitated by a floundering Tory administration. Whoever is pulling their strings has got into a bit of a tangle.

The referendum result was clear? Really?

Leave - 17,410,742
Remain 16,141,241
Didn't vote 12,948,018

......and that was on the back of a frenzy of misinformation, propaganda, and outright lies. The complexities, and the consequences of Brexit were never fully explained during the campaign. A serious and truthful campaign would have yielded a different result to the crass sensationalism of the 'vote leave' campaign. A democratic vote built on a bed of lies - what kind of democracy is that?

I'm sick of hearing MP's and the commentariat say 'the vast majority of British people have spoken and we have to respect their wishes'.....and words to that effect. You are respecting the wishes of 17 million. Are you then disrespecting the 16 million who voted remain, and the 12 million who didn't vote, and all the 15, 16, and 17yr old's who will be of voting age by the time Brexit is enacted?

The referendum should be used by parliament to 'gauge' the public mood and then make a decision that reflects the mood of all of us......not just 17 million of us. The result clearly indicates the country is NOT overwhelmingly in favour of Brexit.....especially a 'hard' Brexit.

The 'Brexit means Brexit' and 'respecting the wishes of the electorate' line is a lazy abdication of responsibility by mps.

There are approx. 29 million of the electorate who didn't vote to leave, plus a generation of young people who will be of voting age by the time we leave. Are mps saying only the 17 million who voted leave matter? If so they are emphatically NOT representing the whole of Britain, or the mood of the UK.

In a very few years the majority of Brexiteers will be dead, after all. How long will we go on pretending we can't possibly argue with a protest vote by the old and none-too-bright?

(a2ua.com)

" I am afraid, Mrs May, that you have the wrong sort of 'Leave' on the line..."

If it comes to mps voting on Article 50, and they voted according to how each parties voters voted........here's some interesting number crunching.

Seats:................. Tory - 328......Lab - 231.....SNP - 54.....Lib Dem - 8......Ulster Union - 8
% voters remain: ..........42%.............63%...........64%................70%.......................55%
% voters leave:.............58%.............37%...........36%.................30%......................45%

If mps reflected these numbers in a parliamentary vote they would vote as follows:
Approx. 325 mps would vote to stop Article 50, against approx. 296 voting to trigger it. Article 50 would be stopped. Brexit would stop.

There are a few other seats in parliament - UKIP have 1, Green Party have 1, etc. Obviously UKIP got 4 million votes but only one seat at the last General Election, and those UKIP supporters pushed Brexit through......so UKIP would be crying foul; but tough - they only have one seat in Parliament.

So are MP's, and their respective parties, going to reflect the wishes of the people who voted for them? Or will Tory and Labour mps do UKIP's bidding?

I posted the above elsewhere and some people suggested MP's should vote as their constituencies did.

Here are my responses to that:

......an important point - the majority of Labour voters voted to Remain. Labour constituencies ended up voting leave because of the 'combined' votes of UKIP and Tory voters with some Labour votes thrown in.
The referendum was a two horse race - in/out. A general election is not a two horse race. In simple terms: in a general election Labour might win 45% of votes in a constituency, the Tories and UKIP might win 26% each, Lib Dems 3%.....Labour win the seat. If it was a referendum and all the UKIP and Tories voted Leave.....Leave wins.

In a general election UKIP and Tory votes are not combined......so there is every chance Labour would still hold many of those seats. If Labour mps voted for Brexit against the 63% of Labour voters who voted Remain, there is every chance those voters would then reject Labour. It would seem that many mps, because of the narrow margins, are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to making a judgement; but it is their duty to vote honestly for what they think is truly best for the country.......the whole country - not just the 37% who voted to leave.

And: I would question the notion of MP's going with their constituencies on this. The referendum was a NATIONAL vote to gauge the mood of the whole nation......it wasn't about regions or constituencies - a constituency that voted remain doesn't get to remain because it voted that way. It was a vote about the whole country (not individual constituencies), and making a decision that effects the whole country.......it wasn't about local elections. Therefore it would make more sense for MP's voting to represent their respective parties based on the way their parties supporters voted nationally.....Labour 63% remain / 37% leave, Tories 42% remain / 58% leave, etc.

It'd be a foolhardy MP that votes against it.

That depends on whether they vote selfishly for their own careers as mps, or whether they vote for what they genuinely believe is in the national interest. Do they put themselves or country first? I would also suggest that voting with their hearts doesn't necessarily mean they would be voted out at a General Election.

Complications and conflicts arise because FPTP voting system only gave UKIP one seat in Parliament at the General Election, despite them getting almost 4 million votes (12.6% of the total votes cast). The SNP meanwhile got 56 seats in Parliament with only 1.4 million votes (4.7% of total votes cast). Undoubtedly the 4 million Ukippers pushed the leave vote through in the referendum; but because they only have one seat in Parliament they will have no power in an MP's vote on Article 50. Those 4 million Ukippers will have no representation in a parliamentary vote. So do Labour and Tory mps do UKIP's bidding? Interesting!

Additionally there were approx. 3.5 million more people voted in the referendum than did at the General Election.

No matter what one thinks of Nigel Farage and UKIP, it has to be said that despite only having one seat in parliament they have shown considerable guile, and have out manoeuvred the main parties - who now look very confused and foolish. Farage/UKIP have pinned the Tories and the Labour party into a corner.

It's complicated by the fact that so may 'Labour' MPs no longer support the Party and should, if they were honest, resign, but I think the only members of Parliament worth having should do what they believe to be right, and take the consequences. It would make a lot more sense, I think, to say that a referendum is foreign to British politics and should never have been introduced, and then go back to being honest.

The Brexit vote deserves the same respect as Boaty McBoatface

Extracts from an article by Paul Flynn MP:-

“A snapshot of public opinion one day in June should not condemn us to 50 years of error and misery. Before referendum day, I said the winners would be those who told the most convincing lies. Leave did. We are all democrats, but only up to a point. Referendums are blunt instruments that favour the lowest common denominator of malleable public opinion.

The UK Parliament traditionally obeys the decisions of referendums, although they are under no obligation to do so. The Brexit vote deserves the same respect as the vote which chose to name a state-of-the art ship Boaty McBoatface (it was named RRS Sir David Attenborough instead). There is a crescendo of anger rising in the Celtic nations against Theresa May’s Little Englander myopic insistence that a Hard Brexit must fall on the whole of the United Kingdom. Scotland is outraged that their 62% rejection of Brexit will be ignored. Moderate opinion in Northern Ireland is aghast at the nightmare of a ruinously expensive, but ultimately unenforceable, hard border that will reverse improving relations with the Republic.

Referendums are not a reliable measure of public opinion, and do not deserve the respect of Holy Writ. But opposition parties are reluctant to appear to be bad democrats. They fear that attacking the Brexit result would be politically inept now. Time will embolden them. If Hammond’s promised ‘bumps’ in the financial road ahead turn out to be a giant sinkhole into which the UK economy falls, caught in a tailspin of lost jobs and the falling pound, public opinion will demand a new vote. Second thoughts are always superior to first thoughts.”

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/11/brexit-vote-deserves-same-respect-boaty-mcboatface

Corbyn coming out and saying Labour will block it unless the following guarantees are given:

:UK access to 500 million customers in Europe’s single market.
:No watering down of EU workplace rights.
:Guarantees on safeguarding consumers and the environment.
:A promise that Britain will pick up the tab for any EU capital investment lost as a result of Brexit.

This is excellent news, and should be the main headlines today. Well done Labour for being bold, brave, sticking to principles, and having conviction.

You have at least 48% of the electorate on your side.......let's hope the 52% split between Tories and UKIP at a general election, and we get a Labour government.

Corbyn speech starts 5 mins in:


Source: YouTube

Incidentally, the move by the Brexiteers to overthrow the rule of law should be enough to shut down on the whole smelly plot.

".... move by the Brexiteers to overthrow the rule of law..."

Rather gave the game away there, didn't they, Penderyn?

I have my fears about the Supreme Court and what might be going on behind the scenes.

The Tories confronted are a very dangerous animal indeed, and capable of the unthinkable - including threats to judges about their 'futures'...

I don't think even the overweening Tories are quite ready for a head-to-head confrontation with the Judiciary, but we shall know next month.

The population of course are merely spectators, but it could be as entertaining as any Roman "Bread and circuses".

Phil Hornby wrote:I have my fears about the Supreme Court and what might be going on behind the scenes.

And then there's the intimidation being planned in front of the scenes......  


(From the Leave.EU page on Facebook)

Brexiteers spoiling for a fight don't want to see the fight spoiled by Lawyers.

It won’t be easy to stop Brexit. But here are four ways to do it

From an article by Martin Kettle:-

"Those who think Brexit must be stopped are not the majority. But they have a case and a cause, and they are right. So how might stoppage be achieved? It will require time, a change of public mood, and an alliance. The SNP, Greens, Liberal Democrats, significant parts of the Labour Party and a minority of Tories would all have roles to play. People from outside politics are crucial too.

The first point is to be clear who they need to be talking to. A lot of people voted for Brexit, in hundreds of thousands of cases, on the basis of their own experience. They were sold a false prospectus by the Leave campaign; but they need a better one, which offers them hope, support, material improvements in their lives, and confidence. The second key principle is to accept that this is a long game. Brexit won in June 2016. It won’t be turned around quickly. Stopping Brexit is on the margins of political possibility right now.

The third point is to chip away, every day. Every time something new and troubling happens, make it clear that things would be different if Brexit were stopped. The fourth point is that the Leave campaign landed the May government with a huge promise that it cannot deliver. The opposition parties need to link the two at every opportunity."

More details:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/01/stop-brexit-remainers

Ah, yes, indeed. "The Opposition Parties". All they have to do is unite. That will be the official opposition Labour - already divided against itself - the Greens with not exactly a surplus of MPs - Lib-Dems who now have NINE with the chipmunk - SNP - Ulster parties (Sinn Fein doesn't vote at Westminster) - Plaid Cymru; and probably quite a lot of British businessmen, who up to now have always supposed that a Tory government would be on their side.

Sounds to me like a recipe for Civil War.

Warts and all.