My MP’s response to my Brexit letter
This is my MP’s response to my letter to him in which I suggest that he resists Brexit on account of the referendum only being advisory, not binding.
Dear Mr. Robertson,
Thank you for your letters dated 27th June.
I fully understand your anger and frustration. I supported the campaign to remain in the EU and I share a sense of loss at a decision which has ignored any rational argument. However, in England and Wales the result was narrow but clear.
I have received a large number of emails following the referendum result, some calling for a second referendum to be held. I am unsure whether there is any moral argument to re-run what was, despite the ugly rhetoric, a fair exercise in direct democracy.
It is clear that the leave campaign lied but all these lies were highlighted during the campaign. The people opted not to listen. The British people have voted to leave the European Union and their decision will be respected. The Government must now prepare for a negotiation with the European Union, working alongside the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland governments to ensure that the interests of all parts of our UK are protected and advanced.
As you are aware the Prime Minister, David Cameron, has announced that he will step down in the coming months, stating that new leadership is required for this important next step in the UK’s path. The Prime Minister has also announced that he will leave it to his successor to decide when to invoke article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and begin the formal process of exit negotiations.
There is much debate about the constitutional position and the process for an exit from the European Union and as I am sure you will have seen from the media, much uncertainty. Article 50 is invoked when the Prime Minister writes to the European Council. Parliamentary approval is not required. The UK will remain in the European Union while we negotiate our exit with our European neighbours.
I await with interest how the next few months will unfold.
Member of Perliament for Aberconwy
I have not yet replied to his letter, but it seems his assertion that Article 50 does not require parliamentary approval, is yet to be determined. It appears to me that parliamentary approval will be required, and that that gives the opportunity for debate, and in the meantime, for the mood of the country to change as it sees that it has in fact voted on the wrong basis for an entirely negative act.