Brexitwatch: a meaningful vote for MPs - my letter to Sir Keir Starmer

Thanks to the courage of the House of Lords, this week MPs get another chance, which arguably they do not deserve, to ensure they get a meaningful vote on any Brexit deal. 

Last week no fewer than 324 MPs voted that they should NOT be allowed a meaningful vote. What, you might ask, are such people doing in Parliament? Even more shocking, five of them were Labour members who sided with Theresa May to deny MPs a vote. This should not be allowed to happen again. This week's vote may represent the last chance to give MPs a meaningful say on our future.

So if you agree with me, you need to write to your MP to urge them to back the Lords' amendment. I am in a rather special position as my MP is Labour Brexit spokesperson, Sir Keir Starmer. This is the email I have sent him:

Dear Sir Keir, 

I was astonished and mortified to see five Labour MPs vote with Theresa May to deny Parliament a meaningful vote on any Brexit terms last week.

I cannot understand how ANY MP from any party could oppose this measure, and to see Labour members doing so was beyond belief.

As you yourself admitted, there are NO benefits to Brexit. It is vital, therefore, that Parliament gets a final say on any terms. I trust that any Labour MP who votes with Theresa May this time will be stripped of the Labour whip, and expelled from the party. I trust that this will be explained to them in no uncertain terms before the vote.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: Labour too cowardly to have an opinion. My letter to the party's Brexit spokesperson

A crucial vote comes up in the House of Lords tomorrow, with a decision on an amendment that would require the UK to Remain in the EEA, meaning we would stay in the EU's Single Market and Customs Union.

And Labour's view? Incredibly Jeremy Corbyn has ordered Labour peers to have no view - to abstain - just as they did over an amendment to guarantee us all a vote on any deal agreed with the EU. The result was a win for Theresa May's extreme right wing Tories and their extreme Brexit.

My MP is Labour's Brexit spokesperson. This is what I have written to him. Do you know a Labour lord to whom you could write something similar?

Dear Sir Keir,

'Staying in the EEA could preserve our rights to live and work in 27 countries, stop our economy being destroyed, preserve peace in Ireland, and, of course, it wasn't mentioned on the referendum ballot paper, so any 'will of the people' arguments are irrelevant. What does Labour think?'

'Er, we don't really have a view.'

How on earth do you expect to be taken seriously as a potential governing party when you are too cowardly or too clueless to take a position on the biggest questions facing our country?

I was horrified to see Labour sabotaging the chance of a referendum on any Brexit terms by ordering its members in the House of Lords to abstain, so ensuring the most reactionary Tory government I have ever seen would get its way. Now you are planning to do the same on the EEA vote. 

This is inexcusable. I urge you at this late date to change your mind and just for once, put country before party. Every Labour lord should be urged to support the amendment.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: Letters to Lords and Ladies - a referendum on any Brexit terms

The House of Lords has already done important work in trying to stop Theresa May from dragging us out of the EU Customs Union, with all the disastrous effects that would have on our economy and on peace in Ireland.

Over the next few days, the Lords will consider another amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill requiring the government to hold a referendum on any terms agreed for leaving the EU, with an option to stay if the leaving terms are not good enough.

This is the letter I have sent to three members of the Lords - Baronesses Browning and Warsi, and Lord Bridges. If you wish to write to members you think are persuadable, please feel free to borrow from it or adapt it.

I am writing to you to ask you to support the amendment “Parliamentary motions on a referendum” to the EU Withdrawal Bill so that there will be a public vote on any final Brexit agreement reached with the EU.

This is essential because it is plain that the Brexit people were persuaded to vote for in June 2016 cannot be delivered. We were promised that we would be able to stay in the Single Market, that we would be able to leave the EU but keep all the benefits of membership, that leaving would have no cost for our economy, that it would be child's play to reach new trade deals to replace those with 70 countries that we tear up when we leave the EU, that the UK government would save money, etc etc. It is plain now that none of this will happen.

It is also essential because the referendum electorate was gerrymandered to exclude huge numbers of people likely to vote Remain - many UK citizens living in the EU, 16-18 year olds, EU citizens with long residence in the UK. In spite of that, and a rabidly anti-EU press, the Leave campaign was able to win by only a tiny majority. (And I haven't even started to discuss the questions of dishonest financing and foreign interference on the Leave side.)

All respectable predictions say leaving the EU will damage our jobs, businesses, savings, public services, standing in the world etc. Before we take such a fundamental and damaging step, it is essential we know that it really is what people want. 

The 2016 referendum was ADVISORY, and not binding on Parliament. This is absolutely clear from the legislation itself and from the pronouncements of government ministers advocating it. If we leave the EU, therefore, the consequences will be the responsibility of Parliament. I do not think historians will be impressed by its performance so far. Supporting this amendment gives Parliament a chance to start to repair the damage it has done.

Please vote for the amendment.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: let's try democracy!

One thing the Brexit referendum and its aftermath has surely illustrated is that even if we finally defeat Brexit, we cannot afford to just go back to things as they were. The UK needs a whole host of reforms - e.g. an elected Second Parliamentary Chamber, a fair and honest press, and a democratically elected House of Commons.

Because of our antiquated first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system, UK governments are virtually always elected by a minority of the voters. That's right. The governments who wield almost absolute power over us are governments most people voted against. 

Below is an exchange of emails I have had with my MP, Sir Keir Starmer, on the need to switch to a proportional system in which if you get, say, 40 per cent of the vote, you get 40 per cent of the seats in Parliament. Feel free to use any of my arguments if you wish to pursue this important cause.

Dear Sir Keir, 

Thank you for your reply. I am encouraged that you do not oppose a fairer electoral system as many Labour and Conservative politicians unfortunately do, but, respectfully, I think the problem of a government and parliament that fails to reflect the way people voted is a bigger problem than you realise.

You say FPTP has 'a history of generally returning stable, single-party governments', but when such government enjoy the support of less than half the electorate, this is a weakness and not a strength. For it means that governments are constantly imposing things the majority of voters were against.

Often such policies are extremely damaging - the poll tax, the Iraq War, an extreme Brexit. No wonder people are disillusioned with politics!

If the constituency link is something you value, this can, of course, be preserved in proportional systems. However, it is easy to overstate the value of this supposed link. A survey in 2013 showed that barely a fifth of the people in the UK even knew who there MP was. And at the 2015 election, more than half of MPs failed to win an overall majority in their constituency. In other words, in the UK system, most MPs spend most of their time voting for things most people in their constituencies are against.

Of course, it is a good thing to ensure that people register to vote, and I do what I can on social media to encourage this. However, it is not an alternative to having a fair electoral system, and without a fair electoral system, it will not solve the disconnect between what people vote for and the government they end up getting.

As the EU referendum and its aftermath demonstrated, we cannot go on as we have been doing. Sir Keir, I urge you to get on the right side of history and become part of the solution, not part of the problem. We need a fair voting system NOW.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

On 01 November 2017 at 12:06 STARMER, Keir wrote:

Thank you for contacting me recently regarding electoral reform.

I agree that Parliament needs to be representative of communities across Britain and to reflect different views and concerns. I also believe that we must start by making it easier for people to register to vote and to engage more regularly in politics and local decisions.

There are, of course, strengths and weaknesses to all voting systems. The First Past the Post system does have a history of generally returning stable, single-party governments and of retaining the constituency link, both of which I think are important benefits to our electoral system. I appreciate, however, that there is a case to look in detail at our electoral system and that forms of proportional representation are already used in the devolved administrations across the UK, as well as in many local authority elections.

I hope the parliamentary petition debate will allow an opportunity to consider these issues. I also believe more widely that we need to look at ways to ensure our politics connects and engages with the public. Thank you once again for writing to me and for sharing your views.

Best wishes,

Keir

Dear Sir Keir,

I trust you will be lending your support tomorrow to the introduction of democracy to elections to the House of Commons.

It is indefensible that UK governments are able to exercise virtually absolute power for five years having often won the support of little more than a third of voters and perhaps a quarter of the electorate.

No wonder the kind of disillusionment that produced the Brexit vote is rife. 

Our voting system was designed for a barely literate electorate. It is not fit for the 21st century. We need proportional representation NOW.

We have seen the imposition of too many divisive policies that most people oppose - the poll tax, the Iraq War, Brexit. We cannot afford another.

I appreciate that the Labour Party may be disadvantaged (though, of course, if it promotes policies that command majority support this will not happen). But this is a time when the interests of the country must come first.

I am counting on you.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch - MPs' last chance to get a say on Brexit. Write to yours.

After the House of Commons nodded through the bill to give Theresa May a blank cheque on Brexit with astonishingly little dissent, the House of Lords has tried to give MPs another chance by amending the bill to give Parliament a genuine say.

On Monday, it will go back to the Commons with the UK's increasingly dictatorial unelected Prime Minister ordering that the changes be reversed. If you want to stop Parliament being bypassed, it is crucial you write to your MP NOW to demand that they stand up for the amendment and democracy.

My MP happens to be Labour's Brexit spokesperson, Sir Keir Starmer, and this is what I have written to him.

Dear Sir Keir,

When Gina Miller gave Labour MPs a chance to have a genuine say over any Brexit terms that Theresa May may negotiate, you ran a mile. 

Now the Lords have courageously given you a second chance (which Labour does not deserve.) It is vital that this time Labour supports the amendment to give Parliament a meaningful voice. 

I trust you are fighting hard for this outcome with Jeremy Corbyn. If he refuses and continues his Brexit coalition with the Tories and UKIP, I trust you will defy him and vote for the amendment, urging your colleagues to do the same.

If Labour are prepared to show some backbone for once, there is every chance of winning over enough Tory rebels to defeat our increasingly dictatorial prime minister. If Labour again refuses to oppose, you can hardly complain if Tory rebels decide there is little point in sticking their necks out.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch - another pathetic Labour capitulation

Astonishingly Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, which campaigned to stay in the EU and most of whose supporters want to stay in the EU, ordered its members in the House of Lords, to vote against keeping the UK in the EU's Single Market.

The usual bogus 'will of the people' argument advanced by Labour to justify deserting its supporters does not apply here. Voters in the referendum were given no say on the Single Market, and throughout the campaign, Leave campaigners were falling over themselves to promise we would stay in it. Besides, at the last general election, every Tory MP was elected on a promise to keep us in the Single Market.

And the overwhelming majority of businesses and economists think leaving will do terrible damage to Britain. So even by Labour's standards, this is a bizarre decision. Below is the letter I have sent to Labour's chief whip in the House of Lords, Lord Bassam of Brighton, and to my own Labour MP.

Dear Lord Bassam,

I cannot believe that you whipped Labour peers against an amendment to make Theresa May keep us in the European Single Market.

Is Jeremy Corbyn now so terrified of UKIP that he does not realise that most Labour voters throughout the country are pro-EU? Does he not realise that leaving the Single Market will inflict enormous damage on our country, and that those who suffer most will be Labour voters? And does he not realise that his enthusiastic coalition with the Tories and UKIP ensure that when Brexit all goes horribly wrong, Labour will share the blame? What's the plan? To ensure Labour is now as comprehensively wiped out in England as it was in Scotland?

Your usual 'will of the people excuse' can't be used in this case. People were not asked their view on the Single Market in the (advisory) referendum, but virtually every MP at the last general election was elected on a promise to keep us in it, while Leave campaigners were falling over themselves to promise we would stay in it.

Labour's betrayal of its supporters will not be forgotten. For my part, I will not vote in any election for any politician or party that helps drag us out of the EU.

Yours in sorrow and anger,

John Withington 

Brexitwatch: Letter to a LibDem lord

It's good to write to members of Parliament to complain or cajole, but sometimes it's good just to say 'thank you'.

I am grateful to the Liberal Democrats for being the only major party in England to oppose Brexit, so I wrote the letter below to their leader in the House of Lords, Lord Newby. This week the Lords will have probably the last chance to give Parliament a meaningful role in the Brexit negotiations when they consider Theresa May's back-of-an-envelope bill on triggering Article 50.

Dear Lord Newby,

I am grateful for all the Liberal Democrats' efforts in trying to prevent the worst excesses of Brexit. I hope you will keep up the good work in the Lords over the next couple of weeks.

I was deeply disappointed in the performance of the Commons - a point I have made forcefully on a number of occasions to my MP, who happens to be Sir Keir Starmer.

I have also written to the Labour leader in the Lords, Baroness Smith and to Baroness Wheatcroft on the Tory benches. If you have any suggestions about other peers I might write to, I would welcome them.

The points I have made were as follows. The referendum result does not represent the 'will of the people'. The vote was advisory only. If Parliament had wanted to make it binding, it could have done, but it chose not to. Nor is there any moral obligation to obey a result that was won by what the Leave campaign now admits was lies and deception, and yet which was still decided by only a tiny majority among a gerrymandered electorate.

So those members of Parliament who support Brexit are doing so out of choice and they will share in the responsibility for its consequences.

It is the duty of members of Parliament to act in the national interest. That requires the blocking of Brexit, The best option, therefore, is rejection of the A50 trigger.

If that cannot be achieved, it is vital that the Lords pass MEANINGFUL amendments, and if those amendments cannot be passed, then the Lords should reject the bill. 

MPs talked about three concessions they said they had won from the government:

1. A White Paper

2. Regular reports to Parliament on the negotiations

3. A vote for Parliament on the final terms.

In my view, these 'concessions' are meaningless.

The White Paper is so vague and uncosted that it constitutes an insult to Parliament.

Unless MPs suddenly discover some backbone, the regular reports will just be the Brexiters' usual mixture of empty slogans and wishful thinking.

As for the final vote, the government is saying it will still be 'take whatever terms Theresa May has agreed however bad they are' or leave without any agreement, which will be even worse.

So at the very least, the Lords need to pass the following amendments:

1. The government must keep us full members of the Single Market. Theresa May and every other Conservative MP was elected on this promise, and throughout the referendum campaign, Leave campaigners were falling over themselves to say they did not wish to leave it.

2. When Theresa May has completed her negotiations, she must come to Parliament for approval of the proposed settlement. If it is rejected by Parliament, the UK will remain a member of the EU.

3. To be valid, any final agreement must win the approval of the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies. Until this is given, the UK remains a member of the EU.

 Good luck!

John Withington

Brexitwatch: Letter to a Lady

On February 14, I posted a letter I had sent to Labour's leader in the House of Lords, Baroness Smith, hoping to persuade her to fight for meaningful amendments to the government's bill authorising Theresa May to trigger Article 50.

I have now also written to a Conservative peer, Baroness Wheatcroft, who has spoken eloquently about the need to limit the damage from Brexit. This is my letter:

Dear Baroness Wheatcroft,

I trust we will not see the miserable weak-kneed capitulation we witnessed in the Commons on this measure being repeated in the Lords. Most members of Parliament know Brexti will seriously damage our country, and MP after MP said so. Then most of those same MPs trooped through the lobby to give Theresa May a blank cheque, failing to pass a single amendment to her back-of-an-envelope bill which promises the most extreme form of Brexit.

MPs do not seem to realise what a devastating blow they have delivered to Parliamentary democracy. Gina Miller risked her life to give them a say in the most important decision this country has had to take in decades, because they did not have the courage to demand it for themselves. And then they were too cowardly to grab the lifeline Ms Miller had thrown them.

Even among the Leave campaigners, no one seems any longer to argue that there will be any tangible benefits from Brexit, and the only argument advanced is that it is the 'will of the people'.

I hope you agree with me that this is completely bogus. The referendum was advisory only. If Parliament had wanted to make it binding, it could have done, but it chose not to. Nor is there any moral obligation to obey a result that was won by what the Leave campaign now admits was lies and deception, and yet which was still decided by only a tiny majority among a gerrymandered electorate.

So those members of Parliament who support Brexit are doing so out of choice and they will share in the responsibility for its consequences.

It is the duty of members of Parliament to act in the national interest. That requires the blocking of Brexit, The best option, therefore, is rejection of the A50 trigger.

If that cannot be achieved, it is vital that the Lords pass MEANINGFUL amendments, and if those amendments cannot be passed, then the Lords should reject the bill. 

MPs talked about three concessions they said they had won from the government:

1. A White Paper

2. Regular reports to Parliament on the negotiations

3. A vote for Parliament on the final terms.

In my view, these 'concessions' are meaningless.

The White Paper is so vague and uncosted that it constitutes an insult to Parliament.

Unless MPs suddenly discover some backbone, the regular reports will just be the Brexiters' usual mixture of empty slogans and wishful thinking.

As for the final vote, the government is saying it will still be 'take whatever terms Theresa May has agreed however bad they are' or leave without any agreement which will be even worse.

So at the very least, the Lords need to pass the following amendments:

1. The government must keep us full members of the Single Market. Theresa May and every other Conservative MP was elected on this promise, and throughout the referendum campaign, Leave campaigners were falling over themselves to say they did not wish to leave it.

2. When Theresa May has completed her negotiations, she must come to Parliament for approval of the proposed settlement. If it is rejected by Parliament, the UK will remain a member of the EU.

3. To be valid, any final agreement must win the approval of the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies. Until this is given, the UK remains a member of the EU.

Even if you accept the 'will of the people' argument, the only thing the 'people' voted for was to leave the EU. Theresa May has NO MANDATE for taking us out of the Single Market, the customs union, ending freedom of movement etc etc. Indeed after a narrowly decided vote, her decision to go for the most extreme form of Brexit and completely ignore the 16 million or more people who voted to remain in the EU is a gross betrayal of the British people.

And it is not just membership of the EU that is at stake, though that is serious enough. Elements among the Brexiters plainly wish to destroy democracy in our country, trying to shout down anyone who disagrees with them as an 'enemy of the people'. For the moment, they can be beaten, but if Parliament keeps on caving in to their bullying, a time will come when they cannot be.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: Letter to a Lord

With the Labour 'opposition' supporting the Tories and UKIP and nodding Article 50 through in the House of Commons, the action now switches to the House of Lords, who could reject the bill authorising Theresa May to trigger A50, or pass significant amendments. (MPs in the Commons rejected every proposed amendment.)

The pro-EU Liberal Democrats are committed to amending the bill, but will Labour cave in once again?  This is the letter I have written to Labour's leader in the Lords, Baroness Smith of Basildon.

Dear Baroness Smith,

I trust we will not see the miserable weak-kneed capitulation of Labour members in the Commons repeated in the Lords. I have had considerable correspondence with my MP, who happens to be Sir Keir Starmer, and he is well aware of my dissatisfaction at Labour's performance and that I reject the arguments he has offered in its defence.

In particular, I reject the whole bogus 'will of the people' argument - increasingly the only one made in favour of Brexit. Even the Leave side have virtually given up pretending that leaving the EU will benefit the UK in any tangible way - hardly surprising as there is no evidence of any kind that it will, and reams of evidence that it will do serious damage.

Sir Keir claims that the referendum result is binding. It is not. If Parliament had wanted the result to be binding they would have made it so. They chose not to. So anyone who votes to trigger Article 50 is making a choice, and they will share in the responsibility for the consequences.

It is the duty of members of Parliament to act in the national interest. That requires the blocking of Brexit, which, as Labour rightly said during the referendum campaign (though the quality and enthusiasm of its saying might well be questioned), will seriously damage the British people. This is the time to put country before party, whatever Jeremy Corbyn may say.

The best option, therefore, is rejection of the A50 trigger.

If that cannot be achieved, it is vital that the Lords pass MEANINGFUL amendments. And please do not repeat Jeremy Corbyn's foolish mistake of unconditionally promising to support the triggering of A50. You should make it clear that without effective amendments, you will not support the bill.

Sir Keir told me of three concessions he believed Labour had won:

1. A White Paper

2. Regular reports to Parliament on the negotiations

3. A vote for Parliament on the final terms.

I explained to him that the 'concessions' are meaningless.

The White Paper is so vague and uncosted that it constitutes an insult to Parliament.

Unless Labour suddenly discovers some backbone, the regular reports will just be the Brexiters' usual mixture of empty slogans and wishful thinking.

As for the final vote, the government is saying it will still be a 'take whatever terms Theresa May has agreed however bad they are' or leave without any agreement which will be even worse.

So at the very least, the Lords need to pass the following amendments:

1. The government must keep us full members of the Single Market. Theresa May and every other Tory MP was elected on this promise, and throughout the referendum campaign, Leave campaigners were falling over themselves to say they did not wish to leave it.

2. When Theresa May has completed her negotiations, she must come to Parliament for approval of the proposed settlement. If it is rejected by Parliament, the UK will remain a member of the EU.

3. To be valid, any final agreement must win the approval of the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies. Until this is given, the UK remains a member of the EU.

Labour's betrayal of the country and its own voters has done it dreadful damage. You now have perhaps the last chance to repair some of this. 

Gina Miller risked her life to give Parliament a say on Brexit. MPs have shamefully let her down. Don't do the same in the Lords.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington