1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Free votes

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Didactylos4, Nov 29, 2015.

  1. Didactylos4

    Didactylos4 Star commenter

    WARNING -This is not a fluffy post and may attract serious opinions as well as criticism :)

    I am of the firm opinion that any vote on extending our campaign against "ISIL" (pick your own name) should be a matter of conscience for ALL of our MPs regardless of party policy and as such, no party should use a "whip" to force the issue.
    This, along with some other decisions, should be a decision that transcends party politics and should be treated as such by all parties allowing free votes.

    This may (or may not) result in a decision being taken that I do not agree with.
    That is one of the consequences I am prepared to accept.

    Feel free to debate, criticise or even mock the above opinion as I welcome all views
    (Others may not)
     
  2. lunarita

    lunarita Lead commenter

    MPs are supposed to represent the views of their constituents. When they go against those views to vote with the whip they undermine democracy.

    I agree with you, but sadly I think too many of them don't have consciences.
     
  3. Dragonlady30

    Dragonlady30 Star commenter

    I see your point and, to open up the debate, I think that the free vote should be used more often, as long as the MP takes note of the views of his/her constituents as the MP is there to reflect their views. Also, I appreciate this could open an enormous can of worms.
     
    Didactylos4 likes this.
  4. VanEyssen

    VanEyssen Established commenter

    Only Jeremy decides whether there will be a free vote. It's the only opinion that counts;when he eventually gets round to making a decision.
     
  5. Didactylos4

    Didactylos4 Star commenter

    And the other party leaders
     
  6. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    You'd think anyone voting would vote "no" based on past experience alone. Add in the 70,000 moderates claim, which is the modern equivalent of "WMD 45 mins away" and the biggest pile of transparent bollocx this side of Doris Stokes, and you've got be to be batsh1t insane to even think about getting involved any further. We've been bombing Iraq for over a year anyway and others have been bombing on a wider front. When was the last time you saw "our" successes represented on a map on the news?

    I am utterly amazed at people yet again being so ready to make the same old mistakes. If we ever have to send troops, it will make Afghanistan look like child's play.

    It has to be a free vote. However, I am sure that will result in bombing.
     
    grumpydogwoman likes this.
  7. Lascarina

    Lascarina Star commenter

    I entirely agree.
     
  8. lunarita

    lunarita Lead commenter

    What do the public in general think of this do you think? If it were down to a referendum what would be the outcome?

    I ask because today I saw a link to a petition for a referendum. It seems too late for me, but I wondered whether a referendum would result in a different outcome in any case.
     
  9. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    So our Christmas 'gift' to the Syrian people looks like it could be explosions and shrapnel dropped from the air, bloodshed and destruction, a lovely recruiting tool for ISIS et al. and of course, more fuel for those who don't like the migrants fleeing from the very terror and violence we are so keen to collude in.
     
    HelenREMfan and sparkleghirl like this.
  10. Didactylos4

    Didactylos4 Star commenter

    At this point I truly have no idea which is why I believe that any vote has to be a free one
    I'd be quite interested in Lanokia's view on that point as well
     
  11. sparkleghirl

    sparkleghirl Star commenter

    Politicians aren't necessarily the most intelligent but I don't believe our leaders are stupid enough to not realise by now that bombing won't stop insurgecy, it'll increase it.

    So we have to ask what their real motives are for voting to bomb Syria. Is it simply about arms deals? Or are there sinister motives for provoking terrorism and cracking down on civil liberties in the name of security?

    The COP21 summit in Paris for example will be protected from demonstrators thanks to the current security concerns. Is this what they're after?
     
  12. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    True, I did just ramble, not really addressing the point.

    I think any vote to go to war should be entirely a free one where MPs have to consult with their constituents. War is above party lines and a government should be able to make a case for going to war. If a government is unable to make that case then really, it isn't a very good case at all.
     
  13. cuteinpuce

    cuteinpuce Star commenter

    I don't agree at all. MPs stood for election on their own platforms. It's up to them as individuals to decide how they will vote on motions put forward in Parliament. They may wish to take the views of their constituents into account but they're under no legal or moral obligation to do so.
     
    jamiedoorknob and VanEyssen like this.
  14. Lara mfl 05

    Lara mfl 05 Star commenter

    Fortunately we have an MP who does and is on record for not always following the 'party line' but going with what he knows his constituents are asking him to do. As it happens we had him on school in Friday and he mentioned that although he would like to, he would probably never sit in the House of Lords, because he 'isn't on the PM's list. All of the staff nodded - we all know why!;)
     
    sparkleghirl likes this.
  15. cuteinpuce

    cuteinpuce Star commenter

    Do his constituents all agree on everything?
     
    jamiedoorknob likes this.
  16. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    Meanwhile... while we try to work out if bombing will help solve a situation that bombing and war in large part helped create..

    The locals discover the true cost of ISIS

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34954233

    A booby-trapped mass grave containing the bodies of at least 110 people from the minority Yazidi sect has been found in northern Iraq, officials say.

    The grave was found close to the town of Sinjar after it was recaptured from the so-called Islamic State (IS) group earlier in November.

    IS captured Sinjar in August 2014, with reports of massacres and enslavement and rape of Yazidi women and girls.
     
  17. VanEyssen

    VanEyssen Established commenter

    [QUOTE="sparkleghirl, post: 11509660, member: 179185"
    The COP21 summit in Paris for example will be protected from demonstrators thanks to the current security concerns. Is this what they're after?[/QUOTE]
    Yeah. The whole thing is about climate change. Nowt to do with ISIS
     
  18. Morninglover

    Morninglover Star commenter

    Like it or lump it, we have a representative parliamentary system based on political parties - which means we elect MPs to vote according to their conscience, but also to follow the discipline of the party which allowed them to be elected. If we want otherwise then the whole system has to be changed....
     
  19. jamiedoorknob

    jamiedoorknob Occasional commenter

    I don't want taxpayers' money spent on a referendum. In any case Jeremy will probably take a poll of his nutcase supporters and read out the view of Mrs Smith from No 26 in the commons.
     
  20. jamiedoorknob

    jamiedoorknob Occasional commenter

    Was it the British, US and other NATO forces who murdered those Yazidis?

    Are they raping young Yazidi girls, executing Syrians and hostages on youtube, chucking gays off buildings?

    Or is it a pack of murdering stone age barstewards?
     

Share This Page