Responses to Letter: If Our MP Rebels I’d Send My Congratulations

1. John Perkins Reply

   September 3, 2019 at 10:41 am

   Nobody voted to be poorer, or richer – the vote was to leave or stay. It was a national vote and the nation, rather more than one constituency, voted to leave.

   Anne Milton stood in 2017 on her party manifesto, which states “We will get on with the job and take Britain out of the European Union.” It’s rather late for her to make a stand against it now.

   If it’s “wishful thinking and fantasy” to leave the EU then that only shows what a despotic regime it is.
2. Andrew Eacott Reply

   September 5, 2019 at 10:53 am

   An MP’s first duty is to their constituents, not the handful of party members who selected them or even to the party they’re affiliated with. Ms Milton finally decided to vote against a no-deal Brexit, she should be applauded for voting in the interest of her constituents.

   We have a minority government with a prime minister “chosen” by 0.2% of the electorate who freely admits he will ignore any inconvenient laws passed by Parliament (when he allows it to sit at all).

   I can see a despotic regime but it’s not the EU.

   I’m tired of hearing about party manifestos as though they’re sacrosanct. Parties disregard promises they’ve made in their manifesto on an almost daily basis so arguing that a pledge made in 2017 is somehow set in stone seems rather a weak argument.

   In any other walk of life, when circumstances change, you adapt to meet them. Apparently in the case of Brexit, you just plow headlong into an omnishambles (and pretend it will all be fine in the end while suppressing the briefing papers – prepared by your own government – that indicate otherwise).
   • John Perkins Reply

     September 5, 2019 at 4:30 pm

     If politicians are free to disregard promises then can tell any lie they want and ignore their constituents as they see fit. Why bother to vote at all?

     As lies go, to promise to leave the EU and then choose not to do so, is a whopper. How big is shown in the 2017 General Election when more than three million people (10% of the turnout) were persuaded to abandon UKIP and vote Labour or Conservative instead, as both parties promised to implement the referendum result.

     I would dearly like to know what circumstances have changed since 2017 that we have to adapt to now.

     Just because some, including some in government, choose to regard something as an “omnishambles” doesn’t make it so. After all, they could simply be lying.
3. Andrew Eacott Reply

   September 26, 2019 at 5:00 pm

   Nice to know John Perkins thinks our country’s handling of Brexit is going according to plan. Unfortunately, any other observer would categorise it as an utter failure both in planning and competence. If that doesn’t qualify as an “omnishambles”, I would dearly love to know what does.

   Politicians have a duty to vote in the best interests of their constituents and circumstances now are wildly different from those promised during the referendum campaign and 2017 election. We were told we would be leaving with a beneficial deal, other countries would be falling over themselves to offer us favourable terms, we would retain tariff-free access to the single market and there would be no borders on the island of Ireland.

   As it is clear now that none of these things are available, any MP is duty-bound to adapt rather than opt for a worse option and willfully choose a course that will negatively impact our economy, industry and society.

   As for lies told to the electorate that were then reversed, how about “chance of a no-deal is a million-to-one” or “honestly, prorogation has nothing to do with Brexit (m’lud)”?