Brexit by the stats

Intro

Just read a great quote, from ex Labour MP Gisela Stuart (a Leaver):

I’ve never gone through a voting process where the losers demand of the winners that they explain themselves.

DEMOCRACY?

Similarly, if you look further at the voting patterns:

In the 2017 General Elections:

A perfect summation was recently offered via Facebook by Sky News Australian newsreader Peta Credlin. Got to love those blunt Aussies. A world apart from the flagrant bias shown by Sky News UK!

The PROMISE

On that note I’ll remind everyone of promise by David Cameron, just before the referendum:

David Cameron’s Final Decision Speech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7qZhlrbcB8

Your decision, nobody elses. Not politicians, not parliaments, not lobby groups.

It will be the final decision. So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave, would merely produce another stronger re negotiation and a second referendum in which Britain can stay, I say think again.

The referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice.

When the British people speak, their voice will be respected, not ignored.

If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another negotiation and another referendum.

(Final decision speech is also on Facebook)

Also quoting David Cameron, before he quit in a huff:

The British people have made a choice. That not only needs to be respected – but those on the losing side of the argument, myself included, should help to make it work.

Cite: Gov.uk: EU referendum outcome: PM statement, 24 June 2016

That statement explained for the wilfully blinkered and undemocratic

If you are a remainer / remoaner, or even just vacillating – which should ESPECIALLY APPLY TO democratically chosen (and democratically removable!) MPs – be assured that everyone was given a stark warning that the referendum result would be final and despite ‘politics’ on both sides of the debate, despite a whole bunch of outright lies in Project Fear from Downing Street, and despite the heavily biased government shaking the magic money tree and finding millions of pounds of taxpayers money to spend of pro-remain leaflets, the result was STILL to leave.

Observation about MPs hypocrisy:

[ Hint:
He said that means there will NOT be a ‘people’s‘ vote, but that this will be (WAS) the vote of the people, by the people, for the people. Welcome to democracy! ]

What you – and MPs especially (with their love of a ‘first past the post’ system) – have to remember is this: While, yes, in terms of votes (52:48) it was close, in terms of regions if was heavily pro Brexit, pro Leave. 408 out of 650, or if you prefer 62.8% of constituencies voted to LEAVE.

You might also want to take the time to watch this EU video on Facebook (in German, with subtitles) by Dr Alexander Gauland, chair of the German AfD faction: Brexit must not be used to punish Britain. It is also available on youtube, without subtitles:

TABLES

[wpdatatable id=7]

Notes:

Data sources include:

• BBC (2016) EU vote: Where the cabinet and other MPs stand
• Brexit: Full list of MPs and how they are expected to vote on PM’s deal
• Electoral Commission: EU referendum results
• Find YOUR MPs contact details, FB, Twitter etc. via: Parliament: Members of the House of Commons
• Wikipedia, entry by entry trawl, and BBC 2017 General election: Constituencies A-Z
• A post by Mike Paterson (of the Facebook: GreatBrexitDebate) in the Bruges Group on Facebook, entitled How Do We Stop Theresa May?
• Also of interest: Rolling list of MPs who have submitted letters of no confidence in the Prime Minister (currently 27)
• Estimate of how many Conservative MPs oppose the Brexit deal. (currently 68)
• iNews: Every Leave constituency where the MP voted Remain

Comment and analysis

Firstly I suggest you want the EU video (from 1997) on this Facebook page: Don’t be fooled again. Do not give Britain to the EU

We need a new party first, with people we can (maybe) trust.

Over half the country are pro-Brexit. Yet nearly all MPs are pro-remain and couldn’t give a fig about their voters!

For instance, comparing how MPs voted in 2016 (with reference to those still in a seat), and how they feel about the deal now:

Now compared that to how MPs are likely to vote for Mrs May’s deal (according to the last poll in the papers)

Ignoring the unknowns (44) and pro-Brexit Tories (90), let’s consider how their constituents feel:

Pro remain and/or pro deal MPs

Basically, despite the fact that the EU referendum was 52/48, over 70% of all constituencies south of Scotland want out of the EU and their own MPs have told them to **** off (P.S. Vote for me in the next GE, I love my pay and perks).

Tally of Tory Brexit votes verses their MPs stance:

See also: TRAITORS: 70% Of Tory MP’s Backing Sell-Out Deal Represent Leave Constituencies (References: Sky news: Brexit deal: How is your MP expected to vote? (which has some slick dynamic graphs))

See especially: BBC EU referendum results and EU referendum: The result in maps and charts.

They work for you!

A REALLY useful web site is They Work For You. There are other similar sites, but this is extensive. You search via your postcode (by default) and it tells who who they are, how they vote and so forth, as you drill down. For instance, for my local MP (Conor McGinn), seen from my perspective, he:

Has never voted for proportional representation (fair enough, it’s a Marmite topic)
Voted for a wholly elected House of Lords (good man!)
Voted for the referendum to happen (good man!)
Appears to want more funding for victims of domestic violence (again, a good thing)
Wants more EU integration (hmmm…)
Strongly supports higher benefits for (genuinely) long term ill and disabled. (Decent)
And appears to strongly support Plain English in official papers, tax bills, legal documents etc etc (a very good thing.)

Generally a decent bloke, has replied to my emails, though pro EU, and Labour. A typical MP, really. Not bad in himself, but we don’t agree on everything, nor should we.

[wpdatatable id=2]

The full list I used for the table above is available via the Electoral Commission: EU referendum results. Or you can simply download the EU referendum results data in full (CSV).

NOTE: While the BBC data below is possible of use to some, it is only partial: Of the 9,291 UK wards, the spreadsheet has only 1,283 populated, the rest are empty cells, thus the table below is rather bereft of data and is only included for completeness!

[wpdatatable id=5]

Data for above obtained via the BBC: Local voting figures shed new light on EU referendum. (Searchable)
[ Download the BBC’s EU Referendum ward level data ]

A word on Safe and marginal seats, and electoral reform

Safe seats
Safe seats are constituencies where the local voters are so set in their ways, so hidebound, that the incumbent party knows they barely have to canvas or advertise when it comes to local or general elections, they know they have probably won before it starts, so why bother. This is why you see in the press comments about, for instance, Labour ‘strongholds’; their majority is so great there’s little point in other storming their base. It is also why, if a party loses a stronghold, loses a seat they thought they couldn’t possibly lose, it is headline news and rattles the party in question to the core. That said, as Dr Alun Wyburn-Powell points out on the Democratic Audit web site, “Safe seats” are only really safe as long as rival political parties neglect to target them.

Safe seats are also the biggest argument there is for proportional representation. Under this system if you get 10% of the votes, you get 10% of the seats, making it very fair. Which is sadly why we are never likely to get it, it restricts political to a two party system – to Tory OR Labour (with a coalition is need be). No-one else gets a look in and they like it that way because they hold all the cards, and even if they lose the election, maybe in another 4 years they (and no-one else) can get back in; in the meantime they can sit back, wait, and troll the current government in the House of Commons.

Stupid really, in a way, because consider this from Channel 4, over the 2017 general election:

In this year’s General Election, the Conservative Party only won 42 per cent of the overall vote, compared with Labour’s 40 per cent.

But they ended up with 318 parliamentary seats, while Labour only won 262 seats.

Meanwhile, the SNP got around twice as many votes as the Green Party. But the Greens still only have one MP, compared to the SNP’s 35 MPs.

Cite: C4: How would parliament look under proportional representation

It’s still a two horse race for the most part, but under a balanced system (instead of first past the post) the Tories lead drops from just over 50% of seats (with DUP help) to just a 2% lead. It would also leave 18% for the other parties, so about 117 wild card seats.

The BBC of all places helped point out how ridiculous the current system is: Election 2015: Does every vote matter in a parliament of so many safe seats?

…225 constituencies that has not changed hands electorally since before 1950. Thirty of those pre-date 1900.

… 368 seats are considered so safe by the Electoral Reform Society that it has already called the winners.

25.7 million voters live in safe seats.

Thirty districts so set in their ways that constituents haven’t voted for another party in over 100 years! (Our town is like that, because “Me dad, an’ ‘is dad always voted Labour, so I will”. When my children were old enough to vote they asked me how they should vote! I told them to research and make up their own minds.

Marginal / Swing seats

In contrast, marginal seats are where all the bitter political fighting goes on. It is where a 5% swing or less in votes decides the seat. These can decide who is in parliament, or if needs to be a coalition party. The lead can – and has been – as narrow as one single vote. Just a few people here, a few people there decide the fate of the nation, whether they bothered to vote, or not. Bit like the Brexit referendum, really: 4% is marginal, but it is still a clear democratic win, which in terms of individuals across the country was over a million votes. 4% is narrow, 1,261,501 is not, to put it into perspective.

Consider the 2017 General Election results. According to The Sun, there are more than 50 seats that were won with a majority of less than five per cent. Those 50 seats would have give us a Labour coalition party – not something I’d want, but the current government is worse than useless as well, so… As you can see, they could barely form a government even with the DUP’s help – they had 318 and needs 326 seats, yet the margins below show they still barely made it.

Apparently of the 650 seats in parliament, in the last general election 179 had a majority of under 5,000 votes, 100 of these had less than a 2,500 poll lead and of these 50 of them held on to their seat by under 1,000 votes. One held on to their seat by a single vote!

For instance, here’s a selection:

Inews.co.uk (and the BBC) gave an even better insight to how close some polls were:

See also:

Parliament: GE2017 marginal seats and turnout

Finally, I offer this extract from a recent BBC panel show, as posted on PolicalUK. The comment, on Question Time, by Julia Hhartley-Brewer, argued that No Deal is a true Brexit:

I’m trying to work out exactly what MPs have voted against so far.

They voted against Theresa May’s deal, they voted against a Customs Union, EEA, No deal, a second referendum, they voted against the Malthouse Compromise.

They’d probably vote against the Bourne Ultimatum if they ever came up as well.

They did vote, for one thing, they voted to give us a referendum and they said they would implement the referendum result and then they voted to trigger Article 50, which had in it, no surprises, basically, deal or no deal, we would leave two years later on the 29th March 2019.

It didn’t say "if we’ve got a deal everyone is happy with", it said ‘we would leave’.