I thought it was a good idea to see if people's MPs put democracy before party/personal issues in today's vote.

I think there are 5 categories:-

1. Constituancy voted for Brexit and MP supports triggering A 50 today.
2. Constituancy voted for Brexit but MP votes against triggering A 50 today.
3. Constituancy voted for Remain and MP votes against triggering A 50 today.
4. Constituancy voted for Remain, but MP votes for triggering A 50 today.
5. MP abstains.

Results and views on their MPs would be helpful.

IMO if Julie Cooper does not go for option 1 she will be out at the next election.

Any MP who goes against the majority of their constituency can probably expect to be looking for a new job at the next election.

Does anyone know the breakdown of the referendum vote by constituencies?

There was something on it after the Richmond vote. Majority of MPs wanted "In" so a lot in danger if people think Brexit is the only thing on the vote.

Isn't it wonderful that we'll be free of all EU red tape when we leave.

We'll be able to import toys which are death traps for example:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 59336.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spijed wrote:Isn't it wonderful that we'll be free of all EU red tape when we leave.

We'll be able to import toys which are death traps for example:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 59336.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“I accept that we’re not going to allow dangerous toys to come in from China, we don’t want to see those kind of risks. But there’s a very long way you can go.” That's the only reference to toys. If the man says we won't allow dangerous toys, then why do you take that to mean that we will accept dangerous toys?

As for today's referendum, I wouldn't have expected constituency MPs to vote for Brexit if the referendum had been to remain, but as the vote has gone for Brexit, constituency MPs shouldn't be voting against. I know quite a lot of Remainers appear to be arguing for a sort of electoral college, where MPs ignore the overall referendum result and just vote the way their constituents wanted; that would heavily bias the result in favour of Brexit, of course, which is presumably why they weren't arguing that before the referendum. But basically, what this result is all about is whether or not MPs respect the referendum result.

Julie Cooper should act on behalf of those who voted for her. It's more than likely that Brexiters didn't vote for her last time, so **** em.

Rees-Mogg, eh? It's certainly no wonder why some call him 'the Honourable Member for the 18th Century' - he's an absolute prick.

Walton wrote:Julie Cooper should act on behalf of those who voted for her. It's more than likely that Brexiters didn't vote for her last time, so **** em.

Burnley was 66% Brexit. Some of them must have voted for Cooper.

Walton wrote:Julie Cooper should act on behalf of those who voted for her. It's more than likely that Brexiters didn't vote for her last time, so **** em.

A nice sentiment but she does represent those in Burnley who didn't vote for her too.

Two-thirds of Labour voters supported Remain.

dsr wrote: Burnley was 66% Brexit. Some of them must have voted for Cooper.

14,951 voted for Cooper in the last general election, 14,462 voted to remain in the referendum.

So about 500 then.

I'm a member of a group on FB in which somebody posted an email exchange they'd had with Julie Cooper, after asking her if she intended to 'vote against Brexit'. Anyway, after some back and forth in which the person writing to Cooper accused her of ducking the question, JC sent a final email clarifying her stance (see below):

"MP's will NOT be given this vote, this is not what is on the table. What is under discussion is the terms of leaving only. I have fully accepted that we must leave as there was a clear majority in favour of this in my constituency. I will negotiate for the best possible terms for Burnley when we do leave, as this is what I was elected to do."

She'd better have a word with her leader then and get them to actually start pressing the govt to make sure we don't end up with a Brexit that f**ks us even more than a "soft" one will.

Walton wrote:14,951 voted for Cooper in the last general election, 14,462 voted to remain in the referendum.

So about 500 then.

I don't know where you are getting your info from but the Lib Dems are a decent sized party in Burnley and will take up a chunk of the remainers votes.
Most Labour supporters I know voted out.

Any MP going against their constituents will be committing political suicide and probably for nothing as the majority won't.

Mine is Philip Davies, an absolute disgrace of an MP (can't believe I was stupid enough to vote for him twice) can't wait for the next election to campaign to wup his backside

Lancasterclaret wrote:She'd better have a word with her leader then and get them to actually start pressing the govt to make sure we don't end up with a Brexit that f**ks us even more than a "soft" one will.

That's the point isn't it?

Once we leave we can never go back on any deals we make, even if it leaves us in a worse state than before.

Quickenthetempo wrote:Most Labour supporters I know voted out.

I've no figures to back it up but I would suspect, to a large extent, the labour voters were not those generally voting to remain.

ClaretTony wrote:I've no figures to back it up but I would suspect, to a large extent, the labour voters were not those generally voting to remain.

I agree with this, from my experience and people I've spoken to the 'traditional' Labour voters will have voted Leave. The really left-wing (and arguably younger) Corbyn supporting section of the party will have probably mostly voted Remain.

Spijed wrote:
Once we leave we can never go back on any deals we make, even if it leaves us in a worse state than before.

What utter nonsense.

If in 50 years time it suits us to go back in they would welcome us with open arms. Remember there are only 5 countries paying into the EU, the other 24 take out more than they put in.
When we leave it will be like Germany trying to keep it going all on her own.

Spijed wrote:That's the point isn't it?

Once we leave we can never go back on any deals we make, even if it leaves us in a worse state than before.

If we manage to make a deal with the USA, for example, (because I doubt Obama's threat to put us at the back of the queue has any meaning) and we later don't like it, we can renegotiate or rescind it. Though I doubt any deal would be worse than we have now, because the EU was unable to negotiate any deal at all. We could at least equal that result.

Quickenthetempo wrote:What utter nonsense.

If in 50 years time it suits us to go back in they would welcome us with open arms. Remember there are only 5 countries paying into the EU, the other 24 take out more than they put in.
When we leave it will be like Germany trying to keep it going all on her own.

I very much doubt there will be an eu in 50 years

Quickenthetempo wrote:If in 50 years time it suits us to go back in they would welcome us with open arms.

Is this like the time when people on the 'Leave' side claimed the EU will bend over backwards to keep us in the single market, so they can sell us their BMW's and Audi's?

All you have to say to them is "EU Sanctions against Russia".

JohnMcGreal wrote:Is this like the time when people on the 'Leave' side claimed the EU will bend over backwards to keep us in the single market, so they can sell us their BMW's and Audi's?

It's all posturing at the moment from both sides as you well know.

Who will the Germans sell their cars to if not us and the Russians?

dsr wrote:If we manage to make a deal with the USA, for example, (because I doubt Obama's threat to put us at the back of the queue has any meaning) and we later don't like it, we can renegotiate or rescind it. Though I doubt any deal would be worse than we have now, because the EU was unable to negotiate any deal at all. We could at least equal that result.

USA & Britain may want to do a trade deal. However, how many people want to buy a poorly built American car over a top class one, built by Germans, for example?

Spijed the world won't end due to not being in the Eu.

Which German car do you currently drive ?

claretdom wrote:Spijed the world won't end due to not being in the Eu.

Which German car do you currently drive ?

I haven't got a car.

It's a relevant point in that people, whether they voted to leave or stay, will still want to buy the best quality products. If that means getting German cars then we'll have to do a deal with the EU, rather than the USA for our automobiles. Market forces make that a reality.

Modern BMWs and Mercs break down. Get a Japanese car.

Quicknick wrote:Modern BMWs and Mercs break down. Get a Japanese car.

Still leagues ahead of any American car though!

Ah the German cars that broke all the emission regulations on purpose?
Can't be on about those ones can you?

Yes they're generally better built, but people in the indurstry know the faults with these vehicles.
They aren't always as well built as they'd have you believe through their marketing campaigns.

Did you know Audi had to pay out a fortune in the states due to their TFSI engine that lost excessive amounts of oil over a 12 month period?
It never went to court in the UK for some strange reason.

Sidney1st wrote:Ah the German cars that broke all the emission regulations on purpose?
Can't be on about those ones can you?

Yes they're generally better built, but people in the indurstry know the faults with these vehicles.
They aren't always as well built as they'd have you believe through their marketing campaigns.

Did you know Audi had to pay out a fortune in the states due to their TFSI engine that lost excessive amounts of oil over a 12 month period?
It never went to court in the UK for some strange reason.

The point still remains that customers won't want to be fobbed off with cars from America, just because we've signed a juicy trade deal with them.

And yes, Japanese cars are of good quality.

Quite a lot of MPs will probably vote against but the motion will comfortably pass. The government will then issue a sketchy outline of what colour and texture of Brexit they are 'planning' for that day and allow it to be loosely debated which is ultimately pointless because they'll already have the Parliamentary authority to push ahead regardless.

Whether, for instance, Julie Cooper would lose her seat if she were to vote against is an interesting question. Could anyone see really see UKIP winning? The town (rightly) went into meltdown over the loss of A&E - why would they vote for a party headed up by someone who is completely opposed to the NHS? The Lib Dems burned whatever credit they had and the Tories might as well not even bother standing. An independent MP, maybe?

It all depends on whether concerns over a national issue supersede those of a local issue.

UKIP could make gains in the North if labour completely imploded.......oh hang on

Spijed wrote:The point still remains that customers won't want to be fobbed off with cars from America, just because we've signed a juicy trade deal with them.

And yes, Japanese cars are of good quality.

Most cars are pretty much of the same build quality nowadays.

They all have issues, some similar, others unique to their brand.

I've got a German car, but I'm probably not buying one for my next car due to the exhorbitant cost of buying a VW nowadays when I can buy an equally good car for less money from a non European car manufacturer.

Why the obsession with Germany from some posters?
It's not Germany that we should be concerned about in these negotiations. They would most likely be more sympathetic than most of their neighbours to us having full access to the single market so that they can sell their cars etc. to us. (They are net exporters to the UK).
But of what benefit is that to Croatia, Estonia, Bulgaria etc?. Any trade agreement will have to be made with all 27 EU partners. Presumably most countries will - initially at least - adopt a "what's in it for me?" stance, as we are doing.

Lancasterclaret wrote:It all depends on whether concerns over a national issue supersede those of a local issue.

UKIP could make gains in the North if labour completely imploded.......oh hang on

If there were a GE tomorrow I have no doubt that UKIP would make significant gains. By 2020 though we will probably be out of Europe and so I'm not sure what or who they'll really represent. Let's assume Labour will still be a complete shambles and the Tories could be too dependent on what the Brexit process & aftermath actually looks like (brown and loose is my best guess.) The political landscape in the run up to the next election could appear very different to the one we see today, maybe even with new parties / alliances having formed.

My bet is that who did / didn't vote to trigger A50 will be a distant memory in most cases.

Given what's just happened in Italy. What's happening in France. That the party who's in the lead in Holland are anti EU. That some eastern European countries have recently elected eurosceptic governments.

If we don't crack on leaving the EU.

They'll be nowt left to leave!

Not sure what the obsession is with German cars either. Plenty of folk choose to drive Peugeot's, Citroen's and Renaults due to cost. They may be more inclined to move to brands such as Ford, Kia, Chevrolet and all the other non European manufacturers should tariff's be imposed on vehicle brands from within the EU.

I'm sure once the French/German/Spanish/Czechs/Polish understand that their automotive industry jobs are at risk, they'll be more than happy to support the EU in punishing little old Blighty.

(sarcasm smiley)

UKIP could make gains in the North if labour completely imploded.......oh hang on

Can't see this happening while Paul Nuttall is leading the party. He has all the charisma of a squashed frog - his baggage on the NHS won't help him either. Also, I cannot see Arron Banks funding a Nuttall led Ukip.

'German cars' is the EU/Brexit equivalent of Godwin's Law.

Alan Hosker who is the Hapton ward UKIP councillor is planning on running as an MP. He is doing lots of good things in Hapton and Padiham and seems to be everyones turn to when they need something doing.
The Labour alternatives don't seem to be getting any good press at all.

He could stand a big chance if people vote him rather than his party in.

What good things is he doing then?

Making the trains run on time?

We get to vote for a new MP tomorrow and so todays Brexit vote may have some bearing on tomorrows result in my constituency of "Sleaford and North Hykeham". I shall vote but honestly don't know who I will vote for, 10 choices but I can't see the Tories being ousted, but then again Bexit, Trump, Italy etc etc. My gut feeling is that Lab, Lib Dems, UKIP and The Independence candidate will all increase their votes but not enough for one of them to win it.

Brexit is scuppering Burnley's chances on buying more European players, dixit Mr. Garlick

Lancasterclaret wrote:What good things is he doing then?

Making the trains run on time?

Is that a private joke?

He sorts any local issues within a couple of days. Were the rest just seem to listen abd not follow things up.

For such an important debate/vote, it's good to see there's so many MPs in Parliament at present

That one might have gone a bit over your head.

No worries

Haha.

Murger wrote:For such an important debate/vote, it's good to see there's so many MPs in Parliament at present

In fairness, if my constituency had voted "leave" and I held strong "remain" views, then I might consider my time best spent elsewhere. Lot's of MPs in that position, and they can't really speak up in favour of "remain" in the debate, and obviously they aren't going to go along and say what a great thing Brexit is, so why turn up?, other than perhaps to vote (presumably in accord with their constituents).

461-89 MPs vote in favour of Brexit.

There's calls for treason charges for the 89, I say just enjoy victory.

Get in there Brexit. Rule Britannia and all that.