The Moral Duty of MPs (re Brexit) — The Moral Maze

BBC Radio 4 - Moral Maze, The Moral Duty of MPs

Overall, a weak performance from both panellists and guests, with the exception of Anne McElvoy and Emma Reynolds MP, who it would be good to hear more from. (Well presented by Paddy O’Connell, too.)

Some of the gaping holes:

• Much talk of “The people are sovereign”, with others arguing that Parliament is sovereign, etc. There’s a philosophical or constitutional debate to be had here. But on the other hand — who cares how you define “sovereignty” or “power”? It’s common knowledge that those in the UK eligible to vote choose their local MP via a first past the post system, every few years. The MP is free to vote however they want, but is influenced by factors such as their parliamentary leaders, their party members, their loca voters, etc. There are laws and conventions as which party can form a government, what they can do and what they can’t do, etc.
• Implying that “The people are sovereign” is mostly Brexiteer sophistry. For a start, which people? As of which date? Are dead people sovereign? (Peter Kellner’s research found that, ignoring other factors, an extra 235,000 Remain voters join the electorate each year, as 395,000 reach voting age and 160,000 die. Whereas the number of Leave supporters falls by 260,000 a year, when 320,000 die and just 60,000 reach voting age.)
• In any case, the people most certainly aren’t sovereign when it comes to advisory referendums — the clue is in the name “advisory”. For highly significant, wide-ranging constitutional questions, “grown-up” democracies do not generally accept simple 50:50, Yes:No, ill-defined answers. The cost-benefit analysis of such complex questions is best left to politicians, having considered the best possible advice.
• Some weight should be given to the Brexit campaign, such as messaging associated with the government under David Cameron. But not much weight — politicians promise 6 impossible things before breakfast each day, and no-one considers these legally binding, or binding in any sense.
• Peter Lilley claims that he has never broken a promise in 30+ years in politics — oh, really? Someone should investigate that, including manifesto commitments, and how many untruthful statements he has made.
• “A referendum is a mode of decision”, “deliver on the referendum result”, “the referendum says we’re obliged to leave, not how”, “respecting the result of the referendum”— refer above re the meaning of “advisory”.
• “People want politicians to get on with it”—weasel words — get on with what? A majority probably want want politicians to get on with either cancelling Brexit directly, or putting the matter to a referendum.
• Melanie Phillips is the most fanatical of the panellists, and was particularly mendacious — e.g. “no deal was clearly a possible consequence of the referendum” — this most certainly wasn’t clear — it was “the easiest deal in history”, remember.