Hilary Benn Sacked From The Shadow Cabinet - wider political debate

[Bruce Wayne]

Corbyn made a big deal about his enthusiastic campaigning for remain. I can't recall a single point from him since the vote supporting the four freedoms. Given the Tories are running roughshod over something he 'apparently' supports, the lack of opposition has been appalling.

 

[dandydan]

Stephen Phillips MP, a pro-leave Conservative MP wants Parliament to be consulted on the EU leaving terms

He said the Government appeared intent on negotiating “without any regard to the House of Commons” in a way that was “fundamentally undemocratic, unconstitutional and cuts across the rights and privileges of the legislature”.

Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the EU replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”

The question put to the people was stay or leave. it's his and every other MP's job to carry out the will of the people.

 

[The Esk]

The question put to the people was stay or leave. it's his and every other MP's job to carry out the will of the people.

Totally correct, it is the duty of all MP's to see that the wishes of the British people are carried out in their best interests. It is not just the duty of the "executive" to negotiate terms of leaving, but the duty of all MP's to best carry out the wishes of the electorate. Therefore "the House" should have a say in those terms, and determine their suitability.

 

[ToffeeDoug]

Stephen Phillips MP, a pro-leave Conservative MP wants Parliament to be consulted on the EU leaving terms

He said the Government appeared intent on negotiating “without any regard to the House of Commons” in a way that was “fundamentally undemocratic, unconstitutional and cuts across the rights and privileges of the legislature”.

Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the EU replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”

Surely a vast majority of MPs would have supported Remain back in June, what could he wish to achieve by allowing the Commons the chance to be more involved in this?

 

[orchard]

That important binding decisions are made via parliamentary process and not made on the whim of an unelected Pm?
Eg sacrificing most industries to generate advantages for the square mile.

Surely a vast majority of MPs would have supported Remain back in June, what could he wish to achieve by allowing the Commons the chance to be more involved in this?

 

[tsubaki]

Totally correct, it is the duty of all MP's to see that the wishes of the British people are carried out in their best interests. It is not just the duty of the "executive" to negotiate terms of leaving, but the duty of all MP's to best carry out the wishes of the electorate. Therefore "the House" should have a say in those terms, and determine their suitability.

The problem with this is that a sizeable majority of the Commons doesn't want to leave the EU; all Miliband et al are trying to do is sabotage the negotiations before they ever take place by never agreeing a position. I am not sure that there is any precedent for them to get involved in setting the negotiation position of the government before treaty negotiations either.

What they should get is a vote on the new treaty after it has been negotiated.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

Totally correct, it is the duty of all MP's to see that the wishes of the British people are carried out in their best interests. It is not just the duty of the "executive" to negotiate terms of leaving, but the duty of all MP's to best carry out the wishes of the electorate. Therefore "the House" should have a say in those terms, and determine their suitability.

If stuff regarding the terms of our leaving are put through the commons for MPs to vote on, what is to stop the Labour party, Tory remainer's and other's to keep voting against anything put forward by May and Co, it could end up a circus.

 

[Pienaar's gloves]

If stuff regarding the terms of our leaving are put through the commons for MPs to vote on, what is to stop the Labour party, Tory remainer's and other's to keep voting against anything put forward by May and Co, it could end up a circus.

They'd get decimated electorally.

 

[tsubaki]

They'd get decimated electorally.

UKIP would end up with a hundred MPs, at least. They have ample form for inviting their own decimation, though.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

They'd get decimated electorally.

Heard it mentioned the other day that if anything is put through the house of commons to a vote on in regards to our negotiating, it has to go through the lords to vote on as well, can't see that ending well.

 

[ToffeeDoug]

They'd get decimated electorally.

Only if the desire to leave is as strong in 2020 as it is now, or rather was back in June.

 

[Pienaar's gloves]

Only if the desire to leave is as strong in 2020 as it is now, or rather was back in June.

Hmmm maybe, but even though we live in a representative democracy, I think that ignoring the will of the people will anger people regardless.

I'm was a remainer but I would be annoyed if parliament unilaterally decided to ignore a referendum.

I definitely think it should go through the house, purely from the point of view of holding the government to account and working towards the best deal.

 

[tsubaki]

Only if the desire to leave is as strong in 2020 as it is now, or rather was back in June.

It wouldn't be about a desire to leave, if they managed to block the referendum result from having an effect the 2020 election would basically boil down to a contest between "most of the population" and a "bunch of expenses thieves who get wage rises of ten percent a year despite never having had a job in their lives".

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

What they should get is a vote on the new treaty after it has been negotiated.

For the first time in a while I simply must disagree with you.

The count's been taken. The choices were 'In' or 'Out' and that was that.

People voted leave because they seen that the UK weren't able to change the EU from within as was promised time after time. There's no possibility that we can change the terms through more electoral processes once the negotiations are complete.

Another vote will further the illusion of democracy when in reality it's perpetuating the will of the establishment.

 

[ToffeeDoug]

Hmmm maybe, but even though we live in a representative democracy, I think that ignoring the will of the people will anger people regardless.

I'm was a remainer but I would be annoyed if parliament unilaterally decided to ignore a referendum.

I definitely think it should go through the house, purely from the point of view of holding the government to account and working towards the best deal.

I agree with those points but there has to be a risk that a pro-Remain house could obstruct any Brexit deal as originally envisaged by the Referendum outcome (leave means leave etc.) It is the Remainers who have the most to gain from allowing a Parliamentary vote on this.