Last night, Parliament once again held a number of , 'indicative votes'. This time MPs voted on four proposals. These four motions were selected by the Speaker, and each of them were from pro-remain MPs.
60% of Morley and Outwood voted leave alongside 17.4 million people across our great country and this must be respected.
As residents will know, I am a passionate Brexiteer and I am committed to delivering upon the will of the British people and upholding the democratic decision.
Residents told me that the last time I outlined how I voted in these indicative votes, they found it very helpful. Therefore, I am happy to outline clearly once again how I voted:
Credit once again to The Guardian for such fantastic graphics
Red = Against
VOTE ONE: Customs Union.
This vote asked MPs the same question as last week's indicative votes. It asked us to support a commitment to negotiate a “permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union with the EU” in any Brexit deal. Remaining in the, or a, Customs Union with the EU would limit the UK's ability to forge new and bold free trade deals with countries around the world and therefore I voted AGAINST this proposal.
VOTE TWO: Common Market 2.0.
Like vote one, MPs had already rejected this proposal in last week's votes. This vote proposed membership of the European Free Trade Association (Efta) and European Economic Area (EEA). Whilst countries inside these bodies are not EU member states, such as Norway, they still pay some money into the EU and are forced to accept many of the rules handed down from Brussels. This is not respecting the referendum result where people voted to take back control of our laws. Therefore I voted AGAINST this proposal.
VOTE THREE: Second Referendum.
Once again, MPs were asked to vote on a proposal that we had already defeated last week. This vote asked MPs to support a commitment to hold a second referendum. This is totally wrong and I am 100% opposed to holding a second vote, especially before the first one has even been delivered upon. Faith in democracy is essential to its survival and to hold a second referendum could have dire consequences for our country. Therefore I voted AGAINST this proposal.
The final vote was, at least, something MP's had not roundly rejected in last week's indicative votes. This proposal would have handed yet more power to the majority of pro-remain MPs in Parliament who have not accepted the referendum result. It would have required the Government to seek another extension if a deal was not agreed two days before the deadline for leaving. Clearly, in the absence of an agreeable and good deal, this would mean trapping the UK in the EU forever.
This proposal also suggested that if the EU declined an extension, MPs would have to option to revoke Article 50, this would no doubt be an ideal scenario for the EU. I am as shocked as the residents who contact me that the UK is being forced to fight for the will of the British people with so many MP's trying to bind our hands behind our back.
Naturally, I voted AGAINST this proposal.