Brexit and my MP - Part 40

A quick response this time. Obviously a standard letter but small signs of green shoots acknowledging that a second referendum may be the only solution.

Note, however, she voted AGAINST the "Gieve amendment"

Many thanks for contacting me about Brexit. 

Over the past month alone, I have received thousands of pieces of correspondence from constituents (letters, emails and phone calls) about Brexit.  I want you to know that I do appreciate the concerns and frustrations that have been raised as the debate on our withdrawal from the EU continues.  Time does not allow for me to respond to every individual point, but I want you to know that I do read through all the comments and points you raise.  Please do continue to share them with me.  It is invaluable for me to hear all the very different opinions.

I would like to update you on the events in the House of Commons this week. The debate on the Withdrawal Agreement resumed on Wednesday 8 January and will continue until the vote on the Agreement on Tuesday 15 January.  On Wednesday, the Government accepted a key amendment to the EU Withdrawal Act.  This amendment, tabled by Dominic Grieve MP, means that if the Withdrawal Agreement is voted down, the Government must present the next steps to Parliament in 3 working days, instead of 21.

Two of the options, if the Agreement does not get through the House, are that we either leave on World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules or we have a second referendum.  I am strongly of the belief that there is not a majority of MPs who want to leave on WTO rules.  It may be the case that another referendum might get a majority in the House, however it is possible that other options may be put forward.

I have great concerns about a second referendum.  I now understand, however, that it may be the only way out of any impasse that Parliament will face if the Agreement is voted down.  Until the House faces such a deadlock, it will be very difficult to enact the enabling legislation for a second referendum.

As I have mentioned, the debate on the Agreement is scheduled to continue until the vote on Tuesday 15 January.  I am certain that all outcomes will be considered and I encourage you to follow the debates live via the link at https://parliamentlive.tv/Commons.  You can also find a transcript of what has already been discussed since the debate resumed, at: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2019-01-09.  Please let me know if you would like a paper copy of the debates, as I can arrange for this to be sent you.

When it comes to the vote on Tuesday, I will consider all of the advice that I have been given and vote for what I believe is the right thing for my constituents and for the country.  Thank you again for contacting me, please continue to do so, and I will keep you updated as the debate continues in the House.

My best wishes,

Anne

The Rt Hon Anne Milton MP

Member of Parliament for Guildford

Minister of State for Apprenticeships and Skills

Tel: 020 7219 8392/0017

 

Brexit and my MP - Part 39

Dear Mrs Milton

I have just received the attached email.

Paraphasing, it says to me "It's regrettable that some groups lied and cheated but, hey, they won, so that's OK"

Really?

Yours sincerely


Richard Bawden

========================================================================================

	You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Rescind Art.50 if Vote Leave has broken Electoral Laws regarding 2016 referendum”. To unsubscribe from getting emails about this petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/signatures/48055011/unsubscribe?token=jlRO3AihNuOq2z80nrv Dear Richard James Bawden, The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Rescind Art.50 if Vote Leave has broken Electoral Laws regarding 2016 referendum”. Government responded: It is regrettable that fines were levied on multiple groups, but it is firm policy the Article 50 notification will not be withdrawn. Britain voted to leave and Government respects that decision. It is regrettable that fines have been levied on multiple groups involved in the referendum campaign. However, the Government is clear that there can be no attempt to rescind Article 50. The British people voted to leave the EU, and it is the duty of the Government to deliver on their instruction. The result of the referendum held on 23 June 2016 saw a majority of people vote to leave the European Union. This was the biggest democratic mandate for a course of action ever directed at any UK Government. Following this, Parliament authorised the Prime Minister to trigger Article 50, passing the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act. In last year’s General Election, over 80% of people then voted for parties committing to respecting the result of the referendum. It was the stated policy of both major parties that the decision of the people would be respected. The Government is clear that it is now its duty to implement the will of the electorate. This was not a decision made after just a few weeks of campaigning, but one that came after a debate that had taken place both in Parliament and across the country for decades. The Government is determined to make a success of the British people’s decision to leave the European Union. And that is how we have always approached the negotiations - anticipating success, not failure. It is vital that we try to reach an agreement that builds a strong relationship between Britain and the EU as neighbours, allies and partners. Not just for those who voted to leave, but for every citizen of the United Kingdom. We were given a national mandate and this Government is determined to deliver a deal in the national interest. As the Prime Minister has said: “This is about more than the decision to leave the EU; it is about whether the public can trust their politicians to put in place the decision they took.” The British people can trust this Government to honour the referendum result and get the best deal possible. To do otherwise would be to undermine the decision of the British people. The premise that the people can trust their politicians to deliver on the promises they make and will deliver them in Parliament is fundamental to our democracy. It is not acceptable for any organisation to breach electoral procedures and it is regrettable that fines have been levied on multiple groups involved in the referendum campaigns. The Electoral Commission is an independent regulator, accountable to Parliament, not the Government, and the use of its sanctioning powers show that it is doing its job. However, almost three quarters of the electorate took part in the referendum, resulting in the highest ever number of votes cast for anything in UK electoral history, to leave the European Union. This instruction was then reinforced both in Parliament, and in the subsequent General Election. The British people therefore gave a clear directive to Government to leave the EU, and we are committed to respecting that directive. Our focus now is on making a success of Brexit, and delivering an outcome which will better the lives of British people, whether they voted to leave or to remain. Department for Exiting the European Union Click this link to view the response online: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/223729?reveal_response=yes This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action. The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: https://petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee Thanks, The Petitions team UK Government and Parliament

Brexit and my MP - Part 38

The can has been kicked pretty close to the end of the road so it's time for another little squib to my MP:

Dear Mrs Milton,

Thank you for your 4^th January response to my email of 21^st December although I was disappointed that it reads as though you are passively watching events rather than taking any part in attempting to influence them to the benefit of your constituents.  

I was also disappointed, in perusing what purports to be the list of signatories to the recent letter to the PM urging her to rule out a no-deal Brexit, that I did not find your name. Please accept my apologies if that’s an oversight on my part.

The overwhelming balance of opinion amongst experts is that a no-deal Brexit would be extremely damaging to the UK. Therefore, I suggest that it is imperative that Parliament ensures that a no-deal Brexit cannot and does not happen, whether by default or design.

The House of Commons is currently debating the proposed EU Withdrawal Agreement ahead of a so-called “meaningful vote” next week. If that vote is in favour of the proposed Agreement then so be it; although I, personally, can find little to recommend it.

However, at the current time it appears likely that the Agreement will be voted down. What then would be the options? Broadly, I think they are as follows:

1)      A no-deal Brexit. As I outline above, I believe that MPs would be reneging on their duty to act in the interests of the nation if they allowed this to happen. I hope you agree and are working to ensure that there is absolutely no chance of a no-deal Brexit.

2)      A renegotiated agreement is put forward. Time is short. An extension to Article 50 would almost certainly be required to obtain any substantive change to the current draft Agreement and one must doubt whether there is the appetite among the other 27 EU nations to enter such negotiations. Furthermore, given the wide range of attitudes, objectives and desires held by MPs one must question whether there is any hope of bringing forward to Parliament any acceptable proposed agreement. This option would appear to be a non-starter.

3)      Put the question to the nation – the so-called 2^nd referendum. Again, timing is of the essence and an extension would almost certainly be required. And, again, one must question whether unanimous agreement could be obtained from the 27. I doubt that it could. The only possibility would seem to be a rapidly called, and consequently botched, referendum. We have already had one, let’s not have another. As a result, I suggest that this option is also a non-starter.

4)      Revoke Article 50. This would cause howls of dismay and anger, and more than likely create even more division in the country even if it was somehow sold as some form of delay to Brexit rather than cancelling it altogether. Be that as it may. This option would now appear to be the only course forward.

Government and Parliament will not be thanked for this outcome. Vast sums of money will have been wasted across the EU. UK politics will become even more fractious. The UK’s relations with the 27 and its influence within the EU, and consequently its attractiveness to other nations as a gateway to the EU, will have been markedly damaged.

This then is the root of my disappointment. It stems from the calling of a badly formulated referendum to solve an internal party political problem. It stems from taking the “advice” of 37% of the electorate and believing it should be applied to the entire nation, no questions asked. It stems from the inadequacies of “Brexit means Brexit” as a meaningful policy statement. It stems from the premature invoking of Article 50. It stems from the apparent ignorance and ineptitude of some MPs and ministers. It stems from the UK becoming a world-wide laughing stock. It stems from the rise of divisive politicking. It stems from the lack of anyone in a position of authority who could even marginally be considered as a statesperson.

In summary, it stems from the failure of our representatives in Parliament and Government to act in the interests of the nation as a whole.

Yours sincerely

Richard Bawden

Brexit and my MP - Part 37

So this is the anodyne pap I received in response to my latest email to my MP (see part 36 of this sequence).

Dear Richard,

Anne has asked me to thank you for your email and says:

“I know that many of us in Parliament, alongside yourself and many of my constituents, have been very frustrated as the discussions about our future relationship with the EU continue.  The debate on the Withdrawal Agreement will resume when Parliament sits again and all the options I am sure will be considered one way or another.

I will keep you closely in touch with all developments as they unfold.

My best wishes and many thanks for emailing me - Anne”

Very best wishes,

Jess

Jess Clarke

Office of the Rt Hon Anne Milton MP

Member of Parliament for Guildford

Minister of State for Apprenticeships and Skills

House of Commons

London

SW1A 0AA

T. 0207 219 8392