Liberal Democrats

As the UK doesn't have a written constitution, it really isn't true that MPs only represent their parties.

They are free to change parties, as Winston Churchill did from Conservative to Liberal and back to Conservative. As a Conservative MP, he frequently rebelled and voted against his own party.

Churchill only became Prime Minister because Attlee refused to serve in a government headed by Chamberlain, so a compromise PM was sought.

Nobody ever voted for the wartime coalition government. A number of the leading figures weren't even MPs, but were members of the House of Lords.

I'm afraid talk about what's constitutional or not is nonsensical.

MPs representing their parties is a convention, not a rule. The whole party system was developed to make it easier for a government (i.e the party able to command a majority in the HOC) to get its legislation enacted.

It also means that you don't have to be stinking rich to become an MP and pay for all the election leaflets and canvassers, etc.

Funny old game politics.

If the voter does not vote for a political party but always for the individual how does that work for those who canvass on behalf of him/her thinking / believing their hard work and effort campaigning for that individual is on behalf of the party they are promoting.?

The candidate should stand as an Independent and not take the proverbial out of both his / her constituents and his / her party members/organisation.
----

If the voter does not vote for a political party but always for the individual how does that work for those who advocate ' tactical voting'?

Lord knows we see posters even on gransnet advocating ' tactical voting'. That is because they believe the voter is voting for a political party, not the individual obviously.

As for Churchill I care not a jot because to me it is a lack of ' principle' and not political point scoring I am interested in. There are now so many constituencies that have MP's who have quit their party I repeat my point I think Parliament will in time revisit the reason why constituents should be given the opportunity of a bi-election.

By - elections not Bi- elections.

POGS totally agree ??????

It makes sense for politicians to belong to a party which has agreed policies but they are also indivdiuals, who appeal to voters as real people.

Varian

" It makes sense for politicians to belong to a party which has agreed policies but they are also indivdiuals, who appeal to voters as real people."
--

The key words here are ' shared policies'.

That is the point I have been making. MP's such as Sarah Wollaston, Chuka Umuna, Anna Soubry, Chris Lesley et al stood on a Party ticket, Party manifesto, used Party funding and Party campaign support because they were deemed to 'share the politicies ' of the respective Party they were happy to represent.

Candidates owe it to their constituency electorate to be principled enough to not stand on a party ticket if they do not agree with ' the policies' of the party they are campaigning for and if they quit the party they should have a by-election to let their constituency decide whether or not they still want them to represent them.

That is why we have Independent candidates for those who are principled and will not gain the position of MP on false pretences and if and when they win they truly have won as an ' individual'.

Wollaston and Umuna have now represented their constituents by proporting to agree with ' the policies' of 3 different parties '3'. Their constituents have no right of recall and they give their constituents no right of recall yet they have a common denominator there MUST BE ' 2nd Referendum/ Peoples Vote' because the circumstances have changed.

Hypocrites, self important, unprincipled to some to others principled and brave.

We all take a different view I guess.

Each political party contains members with a range of views. They will never all agree on every policy but can broadly agree on the general direction.

In the last few years the Conservative Party has moved sharply to the right to compete with Farage just as the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn has moved sharply to the left.

This has left moderate MPs in both parties feeling very uncomfortable but most still retain a strong feeling of loyalty to the party they may have belonged to for most of their life. Each MP has to decide when the point comes that they can no longer tolerate the drastic shift to the extreme which they witness in their party and at the point when their continued membership becomes intolerable they leave, as happened earlier this year with Sarah Woolaston, Chukka Umunna and others.

Many of us would have liked them all to have joined the Liberal Democrats at that point as they seemed to agree with LibDem policies, but they chose for a while to be part of a new group, until they realised that they should not at this crucial time, be fragmenting the support for the centre/ centre left. Those who have now decided to join the LibDems have been made very welcome.

Under FPTP it is very difficult for small parties to survive. If we had PR, I think it likely that both the Conservative and Labour Parties would fragment, which is one of the reasons they continue to oppose electoral reform.

Fake news appears to have been fabricated by the dirty tricks department of the brexit brigade

fullfact.org/news/article-about-leaked-lib-dem-emails-fake/

Yes, we do all take a different view POGS.

Boris Johnson is proroguing Parliament to try & force through No Deal. He is a coward. He doesn't believe that he can command control of the Commons & this is his only way to get what he wants - @LaylaMoran

twitter.com/LibDems

Jo Swinson has written to Her Majesty to ask for a meeting, in the wake of the government revealing its intention to suspend parliament.

Swinson said: "I've written to the Queen to express my concern at Boris Johnson's anti-democratic plan to shut down parliament, and to request an urgent meeting.

"This is a crucial time in our country's history, and yet our prime minister is arrogantly attempting to force through a no-deal Brexit against the democratic will.

"He is outrageously stifling the voices of both the people and their representatives.

"It is appalling that the prime minister has forced opposition leaders into taking this action.

"However, we must take all measures necessary to avoid a disastrous no-deal Brexit, for which there is no mandate."

The irony is the Lib Dems are trying to force through a ' NO Deal' by their own style of subterfuge.

The desire for ' NO Deal' is not to accept ' A Deal' it is to accept nothing other than No Deal at all, Revoke Article 50 and Remain in the EU.

When the Lib Dems say they will ' NEVER ' accept the result of a democratic Referendum unless it returns a Remain vote I honestly do not know how they can be called either Liberal or Democrats.

Well said POGS....in this matter they are not democratic or liberal they are extremists.

Agree POGS

They should be renamed the Undemocratic Party.

Or the Illiberal Democrats.

These are lies.

The Liberal Democrats are the leading party of REMAIN. That is true. We believe, as most of the UK population do, that the future of the UK is best if we remain a member of the EU.

We have, as full members, and very influential members of the world's greatest trading bloc, huge influence and huge advantages which have increased our position as a world power.

We enjoy the best deal of any EU member country. We are not in the Euro, nor in Schengen and we have a rebate. We have prospered because of our EU membership, not just in financial terms, but because we co-operate with our partner countries for the benefit of all, in security, science, research, commerce, and in so many ways.

Frictionless trade has given us a huge advantage and as a global trading nation we enjoy the trading agreements between the EU and so many other countries worldwide.

We have enjoyed peace in Europe and most especially in the island of Ireland as the Good Friday Agreement is guaranteed by both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom being EU members.

Why should we throw this away?

The Liberal Democrats believe, and will continue to believe that we should Remain in the EU.

The fraudulent referendum of 2016 has been proven to have been won by lies, criminal activity and foreign interference.

If it were possible to run a fair People's Vote, and the leave side secured a majority, the Liberal Democrats would respect that vote, although our own view that continued membership of the EU would be preferable would not change.

Varian

"If it were possible to run a fair People's Vote, and the leave side secured a majority, the Liberal Democrats would respect that vote"
-

I think you must hear / interpret different words spoken from Jo Swinson than I do. I have heard Swinson say it more than once she will not accept a leave vote if there were another Referendum. She may have changed her tune but if the link works this was certainly one of the times I remember watching her being interviewed.

www.youtube.com › watch
Newly elected Liberal Democrat Leader wouldn't accept a Leave result even after a second referendum - YouTube

I don't think Varian would accept a Leave vote after a second referendum either ?

I don't think any of the other GN remainers would either!

The UK’s top civil servant has been urged to ensure an internal Whitehall dossier laying bare the risks of a no-deal Brexit is published in full, amid fears the document will be “watered down”.

As rebel MPs mount a last-ditch bid to block a looming no-deal departure, reports emerged that the government will publish a neutralised version of the Operation Yellowhammer document, which warned over possible food, fuel and medicine shortages.

The Liberal Democrats have written to Sir Mark Sedwill, the cabinet secretary, to demand clarity over whether the public would be offered a “watered-down dodgy dossier that has reportedly been drafted to suit political agendas”.

In the letter, seen by The Independent, Tom Brake, the party’s Brexit spokesperson, said Whitehall officials who compiled the document should be hauled before MPs to give evidence.

He said: “Sources familiar with the document, which I understand was compiled by the Cabinet Office, describe the version being prepared for release to the public as ‘soft soap’ and ‘neutralised’.

As the Leader of the Liberal Democrats Jo Swinson said, people deserve better than a watered-down dodgy dossier that has reportedly been drafted to suit political agendas.

“I am therefore writing to ask that you confirm that any ministerial demand that civil servants water down or ‘adapt the truth’ in this document would be tantamount to ministers breaking the ministerial code?”

Mr Brake asked for reassurances that civil servants would be protected if they refused to “sanitise” the document, and also asked for the details of those involved so they could be invited urgently to give evidence in parliament.

He added: “Given the serious threat of medicine and food shortages in the event of a no-deal Brexit, it is only right that the government is fully open and transparent about the detail of Operation Yellowhammer.”

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/no-deal-brexit-latest-yellowhammer-food-fuel-medicine-shortages-boris-johnson-a9087666.html

Firecracker123 and Opal, I think you are wrong; it has been said by various Remainers on various threads that if an honest second referendum were to be held and if the result was Leave, we would accept it, however strongly we felt that it was the wrong thing to do.

Wrong, Opal, very wrong!

I would and I've explained before why I would - and why I initially accepted the first vote.

It's partly the attitudes and attacks from people like you which have changed my mind.