Another Posing Question Sorry. Confused ? I Am .

[johnny.5]

If a conservative MP who has an obligation to his constitute and this constitute voted by a majority to remain and have also indicted through their local office that they do not want a no deal brexit at any cost
How should the MP vote in the house regarding brexit ?
with their party or with the people which put him in office ?
and if they were to be expelled from the party as threatened . who would represent tories at an election if one were called and could these MPs join another party at short notice and then oppose the Tories ?

[Old_Geezer]

But first they need a working conscience...

[Peter Pedant]

the only real quandary I have is that
boris dear boris when he displaced May and got to the top of the greasy pole didnt realise:

same ship different colour

a 't' usually displaced the 'p' but it is a phrase from our sea faring days
and means that things havent changed

la plus ca change - - ( forrin)
nos atque mutamur in illis ( ancient forrin ) but have basically the same meaning

[vetuste_ennemi]

//an MP is a representative and not a delegate
this cuts thro the supposed Gordian Knot of 'what on earth does he do?'
//

No it does not: Parliament voted (overwhelmingly) to have the question of leaving the EU or remaining it decided by plebiscite. This was because the composition of the House of Commons clearly did not reflect the split in the electorate on this specific and momentous issue.

To use the cited analogy of the death penalty if the House had voted to for a referendum on the reinstatement of the death penalty, then the House should accept the result of that referendum whatever their personal views.

Honourable MPs who opposed the death penalty would never vote for such a referendum, of course because it would have made a moral issue hostage to electoral fortune.

[Old_Geezer]

The delegate v representative thing is a red herring. You can not represent someone's opinion without arguing for it. If you don't represent the constituents' opinion you ain't representing them and are treating the people's democracy with disdain. It's unacceptable.

[vetuste_ennemi]

// it has always been a matter of great regret to me that theoretical physicists,jurists, politicians and many of AB's constitutional experts...

...disregard simple moral principles like keeping ones promises.

[johnny.5]

thank you all for the input but its very confusing either that or I'm being thick and obviously too stupid to vote

[ichkeria]

As Jim says, it depends which side of the argument you’re on and what you regard as “Brexit”. Many Brexit supporting MPs voted against it as they didn’t think it was the right sort of “Brexit”. And so did many who previously supported remaining but felt that the deal left the EU with too much influence for no input.
Which in my view sort of renders the question a bit pointless. There is no consensus about what “Brexit” actually means

[jim360]

I don't believe in keeping promises for the promise's sake. If you made a promise that turned out to be completely impractical or even impossible then, in the second case, you couldn't keep it anyway; and in the first case, although I'd still try and press ahead as far as possible I'd also be constantly re-evaluating whether or not I should continue to pursue a n increasingly problematic aim.

Of course, the sensible resolution to this is never to make promises you aren't sure if you can reasonably keep in the first place. Parliament made a promise based, it seems, on the false premise that it wouldn't matter anyway. "This is your decision," they said, "so please make the right choice and remain." The public voted to Leave.

[dannyk13]

ich//There is no consensus about what “Brexit” actually means//
For your edification:-
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/brexit?s=t

[ichkeria]

The PM, interestingly, could actually have a vote on just “Brexit”: in other words, on leaving by Oct 31, but he won’t.
When the original vote was held most MPs perhaps foolishly, did not think we would get to this position.

[ichkeria]

That made me laugh Danny thank you. I wonder if Chambers will pinch that as one of their “humorous” definitions.

[Old_Geezer]

One doesn't need a consensus on how to pervert the meaning of Brexit. Everyone knows it just means the UK exiting from the European Union.

No one is daft enough to waste time, money, effort, etc. arranging and holding a vote for something already agreed. That's just a remoaner hope for delaying things further or preventing exiting at all.