Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[Deleted member 18588]

The moans are only coming because she voted on the side of this bill - if she voted against it Imo you wouldn’t have heard a peep

She was rightly found guilty of crime , given a sentence of which as per most sentence been released early on a tab , why should she not now be allowed to carry on her life and represent her constituents who voted her in

I believe her constituency voted more than 60% in favour of Leave.

Did her vote represent her constituents?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I believe her constituency voted more than 60% in favour of Leave.

Did her vote represent her constituents?

You can aim that at plenty of the MP’s in the HoC not just her. There are hundreds of MP’s voting differently than what some of their constituents voted are there not ? An MP does their job to what they think is best - that’s what they are paid for are they not ?

 

[Deleted member 18588]

You can aim that at plenty of the MP’s in the HoC not just her. There are hundreds of MP’s voting differently than what some of their constituents voted are there not ? An MP does their job to what they think is best - that’s what they are paid for are they not ?

Read the last line of post #8977.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Read the last line of post #8977.

And ?

She is representing her constituents in the way she thinks is best as that’s why she was voted in and why she is paid to be an MP - if at the next election they think she hasn’t done that job then they won’t vote for her again.

But it’s a well trodden argument and she is just doing the same as what all the other MP’s are doing - some voting in a different way to what their constituents want , some in the same way.

 

[Blue in Munich]

The moans are only coming because she voted on the side of this bill - if she voted against it Imo you wouldn’t have heard a peep

She was rightly found guilty of crime , given a sentence of which as per most sentence been released early on a tab , why should she not now be allowed to carry on her life and represent her constituents who voted her in[/QUOTE]

Because whoever set the conditions for her tag said it was past her bedtime; they apparently didn't consider that sufficient reason to extend the curfew hours or dispense with them completely.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

......................... and your point of offering that totally irrelevant post is?

Pointing out how utterly weird the people of Engwales must be. The last Tory stronghold in the UK.
Also mapmakers showing contempt for Orkney and Shetland again.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I believe from what I read she got permission to extend the time curfew if Parliamentry business overran, she didn’t “wing it” or get given special treatment.
My point is that we didn’t get this fuss in Match when she first voted on Brexit.
Not sure what you mean by the punish twice moans mate, I’ve not said that.

You didn't, the other post I quoted did.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

And ?

She is representing her constituents in the way she thinks is best as that’s why she was voted in and why she is paid to be an MP - if at the next election they think she hasn’t done that job then they won’t vote for her again.

But it’s a well trodden argument and she is just doing the same as what all the other MP’s are doing - some voting in a different way to what their constituents want , some in the same way.

She clearly was not representing her constituents.

She was representing her view of what she thinks would be best for those constituents.

And therein lies one of the biggest problems of resolving this mess. Too many MP's pushing their own agendas rather than acting in the interests of the democratically expressed wish of the country.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Is it confirmed that she broke her curfew without permission?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

You didn't, the other post I quoted did.

Sorry mate, I have certain people on ignore, I’ll take it it was one of them.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

She clearly was not representing her constituents.

She was representing her view of what she thinks would be best for those constituents.

And therein lies one of the biggest problems of resolving this mess. Too many MP's pushing their own agendas rather than acting in the interests of the democratically expressed wish of the country.

Technically she is representing them every time she makes a vote - she may not be representing their view or wishes but she is there casting the vote on behalf of them which ever way they vote

 

[Blue in Munich]

Sorry mate, I have certain people on ignore, I’ll take it it was one of them.

No problem mate.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Technically she is representing them every time she makes a vote - she may not be representing their view or wishes but she is there casting the vote on behalf of them which ever way they vote

There is a strong likelihood of a by election being forced to replace her.

Her party, both nationally and locally, are keen to replace her.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

There is a strong likelihood of a by election being forced to replace her.

Her party, both nationally and locally, are keen to replace her.

I’m sure it will happen at some point but until then she still represents them in the current voting.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

I’m sure it will happen at some point but until then she still represents them in the current voting.

Currently the views of 61% of her constituents are not being represented on this particular issue.

Not a great advert for democracy.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Currently the views of 61% of her constituents are not being represented on this particular issue.

Not a great advert for democracy.

Again it’s a finger you can point at many , its a point being laboured many times 🙄

Don’t worry Democracy is alive and well as being shown each day with voices and votes and will continue in the future - democracy hasn’t left.

 

[Tashyboy]

What Law? Dropping litter? Doing 35 in a 30, come on Tash, people are clutching at straws, what about the 14 tory MP’s who voted the same way as her?

She wasn't doing 35 in a 30 though was she, that's not what she got sent down for is it. Bit extreme if that's what it was for. She got sent down for asking someone else to take the rap for it. Re the 14 Tories that voted the same way as her. They are not the first that has not voted the party line on either side of the arguement.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Again it’s a finger you can point at many , its a point being laboured many times 🙄

Don’t worry Democracy is alive and well as being shown each day with voices and votes and will continue in the future - democracy hasn’t left.

Quite simple really.

The result of the Referendum is known on a constituency basis and if the MP's reflected the wishes of their constituencies then it may have been possible to have resolved this sorry mess by now.

I appreciate that the Referendum was non-binding but if the result is not acted upon then the democratic process is severely damaged.

And I say all of that as someone who was very strongly in the Remain camp.

 

[Tashyboy]

I was going off Keir Starmer comments. I've not heard what the govt said but Starmer is clearly half of the talks. I totally agree with your comments, they need to be bigger.




Irrespective of what she has done her constituents are entitled to be represented. They should not be punished for her disgrace.

I would suggest that seeing as she has voted against her constituents wishes, she has not represented them. In fact she has done the opposite.

 

[Slime]

Let’s be honest here - everyone is clear about what the message is saying and what the impact of the massive headline was supposed to me - it’s a clear subliminal message that is “suggesting” that the country could spend money that normally goes to the EU could be spent on the NHS instead - any marketing exec ( which my wife is ) will tell you it’s brilliant marketing and would have had the desired affected. Something doesn’t have to give a direct message for it to tell the story

There's a big difference between could and would, a big difference.