MPs want blame-free route out of this chaos
- Credit: UIG via Getty Images
A People's Vote is the only way out for MPs who are too afraid to vote with their conscience, says DAVID COLLINS.
I have had a very interesting chat with my Labour MP about Brexit and the People's Vote. His position is that although he did not campaign for it in the referendum, a near-60% Leave vote in our constituency means he must support the idea of Britain leaving the EU.
He agreed that Labour's preferred option of a general election is unlikely and said he thought the next-best thing was for the government's withdrawal agreement to be voted down in Parliament, leading to a People's Vote with Remain as one of three options.
His rationale for this was that as the government's deal was a 'fudge' and its implementation would not result in the complete withdrawal of the UK from the EU, he could justifiably vote against it. He described a People's Vote as a 'win-win' for him and I was left thinking this meant he could still hold on to his belief, but not have to actually face the consequences of making it happen.
Does this chime with other MPs who are in a similar position? If so, the People's Vote must be the only way out for them.
You may also want to watch:
- 1 Brexit regret: Meet the Leave voters who wish they hadn't voted Leave
- 2 Labour leader defends NHS after being kicked out of pub in Bath
- 3 Opposition parties push for probe into Boris Johnson's conduct following viral video
- 4 ‘I should not have listened to Cameron’ – Former European Commission president
- 5 Scottish Tory leader accused of 'nonsense' excuse for Boris Johnson avoiding Scotland
- 6 A chapter is over for Britain, for good or ill
- 7 Welsh government refused permission for legal challenge over post-Brexit bill
- 8 New research reveals half of Brexit supporters were not 'left behind' red-wall voters
- 9 Russell Kane: Why working class people like Boris Johnson
- 10 Annalena Baerbock: Can the Queen of Green seize the Bundestag?
Why is Jeremy Corbyn contradicting most of his party and supporters by telling Der Spiegel 'we can't stop Brexit'?
Is he just playing the 'wait and see' game, as he has done before? Hoping that in the impasse the Tories find themselves, a People's Vote somehow gets through? That way, admittedly, he would not have to alienate entrenched Labour Brexiters in marginal constituencies by openly promoting it now.
His worry could be that, by campaigning for Remain, he might lose Labour Leavers' votes in the general election that he is dreaming of.
But aren't the country's interests more important?
Matt Kelly highlights that Labour's Barry Gardiner and plenty of other MPs know Brexit is an act of economic self-harm but are determined to see it through because it was what the people voted for.
Sometimes the country's needs are such that politicians like Gardiner need to accept that they have to put themselves on the line, regardless of the consequences for their own political careers. A bit like the Liberal Democrats going into coalition government with the Conservatives, when the country was crying out for political stability at a time of severe financial peril.
I am sure Lib Dem politicians knew there would be a price to pay and boy did they pay it. However it was the right decision.
If the 2016 referendum had been about the return of capital punishment, a popular demand, and the result was 52/48 in favour, would those opposed be now trooping through the parliamentary lobbies with the hangers and floggers to re-introduce hanging in 21st century Britain, with all the potential for miscarriages of justice and the inevitable execution of an innocent person? I think not.
Bob Hale, Portishead
• Send your letters for publication in The New European to email@example.com
Become a Supporter
The New European is proud of its journalism and we hope you are proud of it too. We believe our voice is important - both in representing the pro-EU perspective and also to help rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.