No doubt a very talented politician, being the fastest rising politician to Great Office of State since the Second World War, Amber Rudd has also seen her fair share of political ‘scandals’. The controversy surrounding Rudd regarding the Windrush Generation was what ultimately led her out of the Home Office. Unfortunately, this issue was the left-overs of her predecessor that Rudd was tasked with solving. However, in a not-so-shocking turn of events, Rudd is now back in the Cabinet as the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions upon the resignation of Ester McVey MP. These two senior Tories have very different views on that one issue that seems to be the only issue ever right now. Brexit.

McVey resigned because she doesn’t like the current deal: The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill. Oppositely, Rudd has recently asked for a cross-party unity on Brexit and in turn this Agreement. These two have very different views on how Brexit, however is it important that the Commons should generally unite on what we do with the referendum results?

A Remainer turned Brexiteer.

Well let’s look at the referendum results in order to decide the importance of the comments made by Amber Rudd. She has recently said the current situation in Parliament will mean “no compromise, no agreement and no deal”; something that will jeopardise not just Brexit, but the future of the United Kingdom. It will also jeopardise the way democracy works in this nation, which is a core to our liberty. As what Amber Rudd has warned, it is important to respect the referendum, as she was a Remainer but now backs leave – respecting democracy. To sack off the UK leaving the European Union will not only disrespect a referendum, but democracy – only creating a slippery slope for the future of how we treat democratic decisions.

The stats. 

To look at the results of the referendum by constituency, from the data gathered 63% of the constituencies has a majority vote to leave the European Union. In a more striking result, approximately 64% of all Labour constituencies voted to leave. Now we live in a democracy, where our voting system is ‘first past the post’; where a candidate is elected to parliament based on winning a simple majority. By this concept, it is astonishing that 64% of all constituencies with a Labour majority voted to leave the European Union. By convention of representation of the electorate, surely it makes sense for a Member of Parliament (MP) to represent the voice of their respective constituency. So, in this case, surely an MP in in a Leave constituency should listen and adhere to their brexiteer electorate? Well this is some of the wisdom behind the comments made by Amber Rudd.

In a nation so severely divided by the (probably accidental)promise of a former Prime Minister. Inexpertly in an attempt to secure his re-election by attracting UKIP voters and EU-Sceptics, this nation has tumbled into a passionate frenzy for our future in/out the EU. But it cannot be avoided that the majority of the electorate voted to the United Kingdom to exit the European Union. The issue here is if Parliament even manage to accomplish the decision of the people.

Option 1,2,3…

The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill 2017-19 is 599 pages long (apparently Corbyn never even read it all and decided to stand against it anyways) and took about two years to negotiate. The debate is split three ways however; a ‘people’s vote’ on the final deal, a no-deal Brexit, or this agreement. Each have their own problems and each their own positives.

An issue of controversy and upset in the current draft agreement is the ‘Backstop’which means the UK could potentially be entrapped in a single market with EU as it is now. This is in relation to the Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland border and the trade link between the two nations. The draft agreement does allow for a transition period extension of no longer than two years (so till the end of 2022). In this period the ‘Backstop’ issue can be resolved where a long-term agreement will be negotiated and agreed which can take the rest of the UK out of the customs union.

Brexit means Brexit.

Although this seems to be a longer than anticipated exiting process for many people, it is understandable as to why people like Amber Rudd and Theresa May favour it. Both supported remain, but both backed leave upon result of the referendum. It seems in order to please the most in the most sensible way, without completely putting one side off, this agreement is about there. Of course, it will never be an easy task and no side will ever ‘win’ but by Parliament uniting and coming to a mutual understanding and agreement is what Amber Rudd seems to be calling for. A voice from each side, for the sake of getting on with it, maybe it is necessary for a cross-party consensus after all. (Still need to actually leave the EU though).

SHARE
Previous articleTo Norway+ or not to Norway+?
Next articleDavid Cameron: The Most Vilified Man in Politics
Afzal Pervez, a LLB Law graduate, is a former student politician; holding the position as an Inspiring Future Leader. He led the mooting classes, mentored students in public speaking, political activism and academic skills at his university. He has participated in many legal and political debates around the world whilst encouraging young people to develop and voice an opinion. Afzal is particularly passionate about Human Rights and Foreign Policy. As a UK Young Leader for the US Embassy he is regularly involved in diplomatic work and visits. He is also currently a writer and an independent researcher, producing research on Politics, Theology and Economics.

NO COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.