This was nearly the best possible outcome for a ridiculous exercise, the origin of which most of the MPs in the chamber seem to have misunderstood. There were some good speeches, many well-meant, but much dross.

In the end, though, MPs voted 483 to 111 against giving voters a referendum on the EU. Much was heard during the debate about the "political élite", but that élite decided the electorate could not be trusted. They knew best. What little pretence we had of there being a functional democracy crashed and burned.

View full article here

You are, I think, fatally mistaken Dr North.

To my mind it is self-evident that these three-line whips were never intended to discipline sceptics; so that they would be sufficiently fearful of consequences to their future careers so as not to vote with their consciences. (Cameron in particular, has been very careful indeed with respect to candidate selection in a House dominated by a sizeable new intake.)

No. They were intended as a convenient means by which the majority of MPs could hide their Euro-philia; from a public opinion all know is largely against such a sentiment. Or, to put it the other way around, hide their absolute terror at the prospect of having to actually do the job they are paid to do and run their own country.

Commentators and newspapers are full of opinions saying how the party leaders have "gaffed" in placing a three-line whip on a non-binding vote from a non-binding petition on a non-binding proposed referendum. That it was totally unnecessary, and over the top.

But this view underestimates the strategic thinking of Cameron and Miliband, I believe. They may be fools but they are not idiots. (Indeed, they probably cooked it up between them just like the AV vote.)

This way the majority of MPs, who are more than happy to indenture their constituents down to the fourth generation in order to bail out the Euro, can conceal this from their voters, and crucially, their local party associations and memberships and canvassers. Thus the whole business of us having a referendum in our generation is happily strangled at birth.

"Oh how I would have loved to have voted for a referendum, but the dastardly machinations of the whips and my party leadership prevented me from voting with my heart..."

In other words the three-line whips were never intended to head-off the possibility of a euro-sceptic parliamentary revolt, but rather their aim was to avoid demonstrating how out of touch the political class is with the public, by a clear underlining of how little support there is in parliament for exiting the EU.

Liberal Democracy is a utopian fallacy. We do not live in any kind of democracy. Politicians are only concerned with their own agendas and are not representative of the electorate. Every time I have contacted my MP I am met with 'party/government' rhetoric. Time and time again we have been told by those we elected that they know best for us, and our views really don't count. The reality is that we live in a kind of East German sate where the State controls our lives through legislation, a politicised police service, political correctness, and a surveillance system the Soviet Union would be proud of.
I believe a great proportion of the people in the UK would welcome a debate, and a referendum on Europe. But why do our political elite shy away from this? Are they so insecure as to face up to what the people want? What drives the major political classes?

Have you read Watership Down?

I regret, and am ashamed, to say I have not. What is the relevance, please?

It's a book for children intended as a political primer.

You misunderstand me. I have seen the film, know the plot and characters etc., but have not read the book. I was asking what relevance it had to the point at hand, not what it was. Apologies.

Billy goat in wind-up mode??

First....Cameron's remark on a neighbour's house being on fire.
You must remember he thinks neighbours live 2 miles away outside of his family estate. This is ETON mentality.
Cameron and the ETON boys have no concept of the semi-detached home which means that if their house is on fire, then so is yours. LISBON has made us semi-detached home owners with the other EU provinces. But we do not control the keys to the front and back doors nor access to the windows.
We are ruled by ETON mentality....

Second, the papers are giving Cameron and MPs a real doing ! Papers are voting with their readers in increasingly (compared to early 2009) getting nearer their readers' concerns...(still more to do but the trend is encouraging on global warming, us and them politics, the political class etc)

Third, Miliband could have defeated The Government on this vote. The 80 Tory MPs plus Milliband's 258 and the DUP 8 seats would have crushed Cameron. That Miliband chose not to shows how hard core his EU devotion is. Yet my belief is that it is traditional Labour voters more than Cameron voters who are most prepared to vote to leave. Increasingly Michael Foot looks like a hero. He was the last mainstream Party Leader who really wanted to leave if elected....and Maggie did not deliver freedom but corporatism.

No relevance at all. Does the phrase 'pearls before swine' mean anything to you?

Ram Shandy in wind down mode?

Cue: PEP, Rosie et al.

I am sad, but expected no different.

I shall be voting for independent candidates in all elections for the rest of my life.









PS My grammar is not good, but it was intentionally that way.

Yes I recognize it. Just as I would, say, a pointless conversation.

Its indeed a sad day. Yet another litany of why we to all intents and purposes live in a one-party state.

How many times have we heard criticism of dictatorships allowing opposition parties that are hobbled, or are puppets of the party in power? Sham democracy, democracy in word but not in deed.

Well, we have the self-same thing here. Labour could have voted against the government on this, or at the least allowed their MPs a free vote. Instead they whipped against the motion for a referendum, killing any alternative voice to be stifled and killing democracy stone dead.

The fact that all three main parties so vehemently pushed the pro-EU agenda says volumes for their anti-democracy, anti-UK agenda. It also shows yet again that there is no choice, no democracy in the UK. How can we call this country a democracy when there is no credible opposition with an alternative view we can vote for?

This is a call to arms: if you want the UK to be freed from the shackles of the undemocratic EU, freed to trade as we see fit, with who we see fit, vote for our leaders as we see fit, then we have to band together and create a party that provides an alternative voice. One that is anti-EU, pro-democracy and pro-UK, one that puts our national interest above all. One that provides security not only from a military standpoint, but also in energy generation and supply, one that secures our borders and keeps the population safe from all threats, foreign and domestic.

Right now, we have none of those things.

As for David Cameron's comment about saving a neighbour's house if it was burning, yes you'd help save it if it was an accident. But if the neighbour deliberately torched it to make a political point, I'd let the bloody thing burn and let the stupid oaf make himself homeless in the process. Serve him right.