Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ManiaMuse)
    He's not the only Tory europhile though surely, otherwise it wouldn't have become such a divisive issue for the party.
    No, but in sophisticated politics, rather than the dumbed down version the media are presenting, aims are not achieved by losing votes but by winning support.

    Two weeks ago "Downing Street sources" were saying that there wouldn't be a Brexit White Paper. One is going to be published, perhaps today. Does that matter? Yes, because MPs cannot simply abandon Brexit unless there is a clear public opinion move against it but they can and will wish to shape the form of Brexit. That is what lobbying is about.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Those who voted against are a disgrace with the exception of the SNP. Their party's objective is to break up the union and so they will do whatever they can to achieve that.

    I don't think any other MP's have the right to vote against. How can Chris Bryant say that following a democratic vote, the view of the minority should be implemented? If he believes that, he should give up his seat to the person who lost the election and let them vote instead. It is completely hypocritical.

    There will always be a minority of people supporting anything. If Chris Bryant thinks he is good enough to decide when we should listen to the majority and when we should ignore them, we should make him our dictator. The legal technicalities of it don't matter.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    Those who voted against are a disgrace with the exception of the SNP. Their party's objective is to break up the union and so they will do whatever they can to achieve that.

    I don't think any other MP's have the right to vote against. How can Chris Bryant say that following a democratic vote, the view of the minority should be implemented? If he believes that, he should give up his seat to the person who lost the election and let them vote instead. It is completely hypocritical. The legal technicalities of it don't matter.
    Those who represent constituencies that voted to remain shouldn't really be penalised for also voting to remain. That's the point of MPs, to represent their constituents.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Ken Clarke is the bogeyman. He's the bogeyman who was one of the main people who actually pushed UK into the EU. He's been in parliament for a very long time, even before 1971. I see right through him.

    Very happy that government won. Gina Miller needs to sit down and tolerate this. This is about building opportunities for the deprived average citizens.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Those who represent constituencies that voted to remain shouldn't really be penalised for also voting to remain. That's the point of MPs, to represent their constituents.
    And just because a constituency voted remain doesn't mean they now oppose article 50 since you get a significant number of remain voters who very rapidly passed through the stages of grief and support article 50 because that's what the country as a whole voted for.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    And just because a constituency voted remain doesn't mean they now oppose article 50 since you get a significant number of remain voters who very rapidly passed through the stages of grief and support article 50 because that's what the country as a whole voted for.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And just because they voted Leave doesn't mean that this will influence which MP they vote for when the world has moved on over the next three years.

    Areas which strongly supported capital punishment elected abolitionist MPs for decades before public opinion moved decisively against capital punishment.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone here care about the future of our economy, work prospects, the ability to seek jobs Europe-wide with ease? Just wondering. :rolleyes:

    Setting aside nationalist rhetoric and empty tub-thumping about a British imperial prospect that no longer exists, here are a few things we now stand to lose in the not very distant future:

    - access to the Single Market - that's more 2/3 of our trade and more than half of our GDP. This is certain to be impacted severely under the current plan as tariffs will be introduced.

    - our leading role in the global education market and the powerhouse universities of Britain - EU student enrollment is already down 7% and research funding will be hugely down in future years as the government have only promised 2 year's worth of replacement for the large slice of university research income that comes from the EU countries.

    - cheap, diverse and plentiful food - crops in this country are mainly picked by E. European workers and farmers rely heavily on EU subsidies, which again are not going to be replaced by the British government for more than a short time. All of the huge variety of excellent produce we currently see from Europe will become more expensive as tariffs go on.

    - economic stability and high employment - both threatened - there is a strong chance that the UK will return to the economic pattern it had before it joined, with stagflation and high unemployment.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    the ability to seek jobs Europe-wide with ease?
    Why should this be a factor?

    Why should we be more bothered about Europe than doing this anywhere else?

    Why should it be easier to go to work in Spain than Canada?

    And why do you suspect that, as is the case with the rest of the world, that if you have the required qualifications for the job and are offered a job, a visa won't be readily available?


    These aren't digs, they're genuine questions.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Being in the EU is so successful, unless you're lazy tax dodging *******s like the Greeks.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Those who represent constituencies that voted to remain shouldn't really be penalised for also voting to remain. That's the point of MPs, to represent their constituents.
    There is absolutely no reason why constituencies matter (except in purely unprincipled electoral calculations). It is a national issue to be decided nationally.

    You can not get a purer exercise in democracy than the two sides making their arguments and everyone voting on in.

    Yes we have a parliamentary system and the courts ruled that it overrules the referendum result but that isn't the point. It is a historical accident that we have the system we do and it is constantly changing.

    The will of the people has been expressed. The question is, do MPs want to carry it out? All the other arguments are attempts to justify voting against the people.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    The will of the people has been expressed. The question is, do MPs want to carry it out? All the other arguments are attempts to justify voting against the people.
    It's not voting against the people though. It's voting with the people who put you in that position in the first place. If you're an MP you're there to represent them. So you represent them. I don't think there should be any penalty for that.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    It's not voting against the people though. It's voting with the people who put you in that position in the first place. If you're an MP you're there to represent them. So you represent them. I don't think there should be any penalty for that.
    Why does the opinion of someone 2mins down the road but in a neighbouring constituency matter less than a person in the constituency? As I said, it is totally by chance how constituency boundaries have been drawn up. They are not voting on whether their constituency stays in the Eu, they are voting on whether the UK does.

    If we were under a dictator, you could say MPs shouldn't be punished for voting for what their appointer wanted. May be they shouldn't but that doesn't make it a principled act and it certainly doesn't make it democratic. It is a cynical act, in their own self interest to stay in a job.

    Clearly, it wouldnt be an acceptable result if more constituencies voted against brexit even though they won the vote and as a result, it was blocked by MPs.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Yes! Nothing will stand in the way of democracy
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    These aren't digs, they're genuine questions.
    Sure. I don't really see that anything about EU membership blocked people out from jobseeking in Australia, Canada or the US - indeed, they all have their own visa requirements which seem unlikely to radically shift in our favour.

    By contrast, the EU is right next door, has a huge technical, scientific and cultural economy of the sort appealing to British graduates, has tended to welcome British graduates (especially because native English speakers have a widespread advantage in Europe, hence the frantic efforts to speak good English endemic amongst the European middle classes) and is right next door.

    Really, isn't this a no-brainer? I am not speaking polemically - isn't it just logic?

    I know that so far nothing has been specifically said that rules out continued job market access, but if May sticks adamantly to full controls on inward migration from Europe, it's deeply implausible that it can continue in the current form.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Sure. I don't really see that anything about EU membership blocked people out from jobseeking in Australia, Canada or the US - indeed, they all have their own visa requirements which seem unlikely to radically shift in our favour.

    By contrast, the EU is right next door, has a huge technical, scientific and cultural economy of the sort appealing to British graduates, has tended to welcome British graduates (especially because native English speakers have a widespread advantage in Europe, hence the frantic efforts to speak good English endemic amongst the European middle classes) and is right next door.

    Really, isn't this a no-brainer? I am not speaking polemically - isn't it just logic?

    I know that so far nothing has been specifically said that rules out continued job market access, but if May sticks adamantly to full controls on inward migration from Europe, it's deeply implausible that it can continue in the current form.
    Not in my experience.

    I found it far easier to go work in Canada and Japan than I did in mainland Europe, despite the qualifications I possessed being exactly the same.

    Various European countries - notably France and Italy - made it very difficult (to the point of banning the practise and arresting those who did it) for it to happen, in a complete disregard for EU rules on the matter.

    I don't see why it would suddenly be such a hardship to get a visa to go work in any of the 27 EU countries. We have to do it for basically every other country on the planet.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Not in my experience.

    I found it far easier to go work in Canada and Japan than I did in mainland Europe, despite the qualifications I possessed being exactly the same.

    Various European countries - notably France and Italy - made it very difficult (to the point of banning the practise and arresting those who did it) for it to happen, in a complete disregard for EU rules on the matter.

    I don't see why it would suddenly be such a hardship to get a visa to go work in any of the 27 EU countries. We have to do it for basically every other country on the planet.
    Is there a recent case of France or Italy behaving like that? I think you are referencing problems from 10-20 years ago that no longer exist.

    I've heard a great deal about the huge problems applying for work in the US and Australia. I don't know much about Canada.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Is there a recent case of France or Italy behaving like that? I think you are referencing problems from 10-20 years ago that no longer exist.

    I've heard a great deal about the huge problems applying for work in the US and Australia. I don't know much about Canada.
    This was 3 years ago. It's now happening in Austria too.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Too important for the "ordinary" people to decide, eh?

    The peasant mentality is strong in this one......
    It's not really a peasant mentality but if you asked the average person about the future of this country and our global influence or about the customs union, the schengen area etc they wouldn't have a clue.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The big question is, is this going to be a full English Brexit or some poncy Continental style Brexit?
    • Aston Villa FC Supporter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jasminder1994)
    X
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.