50 mps going to vote no to article 50

[I1L2T3]

We really, really do. There was consensus from both campaigns about one thing. The leaving meant leaving the single market.

The Prime Minister himself said it on the BBC in full view of the public, and never retracted it. You already know this.

 

If we get half-Brexit, or even what could be as little as Brexit in name only, then the referendum result is at least partially overturned and the damage to the integrity of democracy in the UK will take a generation to correct.

 

No we don't.

 

Like I said previously you can't have it both ways, having spent months deriding the remain campaign as fearmongering but now cherry picking parts of what was said as solid policy.

 

Your hypocisy is utterly breathtaking

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 15:00 ----------

 

You really cant. It was a referendum on the question asked. people voted and there was a result. no minimum voting criteria.

 

Er, we can.

 

I accept the result but the way the referendum was designed was a mistake. We now need to use our democratic apparatus to limit the damage. I don't want to reverse the result. I just think the way we exit should be a collective process that takes into account all views. Fundamentally the referendum did not give the green light to a specific and extreme form of Brexit. That form of Brexit will lead to enormous problems in this country.

[Petminder]

No we don't.

 

Like I said previously you can't have it both ways, having spent months deriding the remain campaign as fearmongering but now cherry picking parts of what was said as solid policy.

 

Your hypocisy is utterly breathtaking

 

The PM saying a vote to leave is a vote to leave the single market is campaign promise, it becomes fear mongering when he then goes on to say leaving the singe market will leave every Britain £4000 a year worse off.

The leave campaign agreed with him that a vote to leave was a vote to leave the single market, the disagreement was about the consequences of leaving the single market.

The electorate believed the leave campaign hence they voted to leave the EU and single market.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 15:05 ----------

 

 

I accept the result but the way the referendum was designed was a mistake. We now need to use our democratic apparatus to limit the damage. I don't want to reverse the result. I just think the way we exit should be a collective process that takes into account all views. Fundamentally the referendum did not give the green light to a specific and extreme form of Brexit. That form of Brexit will lead to enormous problems in this country.

 

But that isn't what you are trying to do, doing it your way will cause economic damage.

 

Which would be best.

 

1.. Staying in the EU and having a seat at the table,

or

2.. Giving up that seat but still paying and abiding by the rules they impose.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 15:07 ----------

 

 

I accept the result but the way the referendum was designed was a mistake. We now need to use our democratic apparatus to limit the damage. I don't want to reverse the result. I just think the way we exit should be a collective process that takes into account all views. Fundamentally the referendum did not give the green light to a specific and extreme form of Brexit. That form of Brexit will lead to enormous problems in this country.

 

There isn't an extreme form of brexit, just brexit, in or out, what you want is IN but without a seat at the table.

Edited November 12, 2016 by Petminder

[tinfoilhat]

At election time we are asked a simple question, who do your want as your MP. The choice you make is usually based on their election manifesto and the electorate rightly expects that manifesto to be implemented.

 

The EU referendum was indeed a singe question but it was based on an in and out campaign, both of which agreed that a vote to leave meant leaving the single market, taking back full control of our laws and money, and ending the free movement of people.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 14:39 ----------

 

 

We do realise this and it is the reason we don't want people like you trying to impose the deal you want. Its not in the UK's best interest to leave on the remoaners terms.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 14:41 ----------

 

 

There is a little niggle at the back of my mind that she is on this remoaner campaign to alt our brexit.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 14:44 ----------

 

 

Lets say you vote labour at the next election based on their promise they are going to increase the minimum wage to £12 an hour, how would you feel if after they are elected they cut your wage to £5 an hour?

 

You want to start a list of failed election promises throughout history? I haven't the time and this website won't have the bandwidth, because it's every election and every government in the history of the world. Ever.

[lizmachin]

Do the MP's that vote to block the Article 50 vote against the publics wish on Brexit think they will get in at the next election?

 

I'm not sure that 50 MPs voting no to Article 50 is going to make much difference. I presume you actually mean voting against triggering the provisions of Article 50 which is starting the formal process of the UK leaving the EU.

 

But 50 MPs out of 650 isn't really going to rock the boat.

[*_ash_*]

I think Labour have already stated that they wont vote against Brexit and triggering A50.

 

Yes I heard a few times on QT, though they wouldn't answer this directly, they certainly implied this.

[Harrystottle]

I'm not sure that 50 MPs voting no to Article 50 is going to make much difference. I presume you actually mean voting against triggering the provisions of Article 50 which is starting the formal process of the UK leaving the EU.

 

But 50 MPs out of 650 isn't really going to rock the boat.

 

I've read it will be more like 85, but it still won't rock the boat.

[Mr Gobby]

Who cares, they cannot overturn the decision to leave .We are leaving like it or not, sooner the better lets move on and prosper.

[I1L2T3]

The PM saying a vote to leave is a vote to leave the single market is campaign promise, it becomes fear mongering when he then goes on to say leaving the singe market will leave every Britain £4000 a year worse off.

The leave campaign agreed with him that a vote to leave was a vote to leave the single market, the disagreement was about the consequences of leaving the single market.

The electorate believed the leave campaign hence they voted to leave the EU and single market.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 15:05 ----------

 

 

But that isn't what you are trying to do, doing it your way will cause economic damage.

 

Which would be best.

 

1.. Staying in the EU and having a seat at the table,

or

2.. Giving up that seat but still paying and abiding by the rules they impose.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2016 at 15:07 ----------

 

 

There isn't an extreme form of brexit, just brexit, in or out, what you want is IN but without a seat at the table.

 

You are retrospectively cherry picking the bits that suit you as well. Sorry but it doesn't wash. It's just convenient revisionist nonsense.

 

The £4000 thing could come true. You know it.

 

What i'm suggesting will limit the damage. Yes we could be like Norway for a time - only half in - but I see that as a transitional stage to avoid a massive economic shock. Of course it would allow us to easily transition back in as well if we needed to but ultimately I think we will fully detach.

 

My last paragraph makes it fully clear there is an extreme form of Brexit, and a gentler form. Both are right now still options

[Penistone999]

Do the MP's that vote to block the Article 50 vote against the publics wish on Brexit think they will get in at the next election?

 

Just proves that MP`s have utter contempt for the voting public. Lets hope all these 50 lose their seats and cushy income and perks at the next election.

[area 51]

Just proves that MP`s have utter contempt for the voting public. Lets hope all these 50 lose their seats and cushy income and perks at the next election.

 

They might have to go to work or go on strictly come dancing.