MPs represent conscience or people? (2)

In the wake of the strong yes vote obtained in the divorce referendum, the focus has now shifted to Parliament, and how our MPs will vote when the relative Bill is being debated.

Some MPs are still claiming the right to decide how to vote strictly according to their own “conscience”. I respectfully submit they no longer have that right.

Our legislators were not obliged to call a referendum on this issue. They have every legal and constitutional power to debate and pass (or otherwise) any law which does not touch the entrenched clauses of the Constitution. They had no hesitation in doing so in the past, even in matters potentially as controversial as divorce, like decriminalisation of adultery and homosexuality. In fact, many would argue that submitting minority rights to referenda was a contradiction in terms and a pious homage to the letter of democracy at the expense of the spirit.

In the end, our parliamentarians decided not to shoulder (the uncharitable would say shirked) the responsibility of taking a decision and preferred to put the matter directly to the people.

The people replied in a clear and unmistakable manner. And those MPs who now find themselves on the wrong side of the verdict cannot hide behind the convenient screen of their conscience. They discarded that when they opted for a referendum. If I may be allowed to paraphrase a popular aphorism, they declined to lead. Now they have only two options: follow, or get out of the way.