Geraint Davies MP tables Early Day Motion 243 - NEEDS SIGNATURES FROM MPs

If you are still in touch with your MP, Geraint Davies's motion calling on parliament to allow UK citizens to agree the terms of any UK-EU exit package or stay in the EU by default needs MPs signatures to get it through.

If this doesn't interest you please simply ignore this post.

Those who are interested and think they could "nag" their MP to get on board with this will find the wording of the motion below, plus a link you could send your MP so he/she doesn't have to go find it.

This could be a way for the government to redeem itself in the eyes of the voters after the appalling campaign tactics, ministers walking off left right and centre and, well, as for Boris ...

Early day motion 243


  • Session: 2016-17
  • Date tabled: 27.06.2016
  • Primary sponsor: Davies, Geraint
  • Sponsors:

That this House notes that the EU membership referendum was lost by only 1.25 million votes, 1.9 per cent; further notes that 3.7 million people have called for a second referendum in a petition as the winning margin was less than 60 per cent and the turnout less than 75 per cent; notes that the decision is binding on future generations; notes that the pledges to reinvest £350 million in the NHS and to curb immigration on which voters relied have been withdrawn; believes that UK citizens must agree on the terms of leaving the EU and, if not satisfied, be given the opportunity to opt for the UK to remain an EU member; calls on the Government to ensure that there will be a referendum allowing UK citizens to agree on the terms of the UK-EU exit package and associated constitutional changes or on the option to remain; and further believes that this referendum should be called before Article 50 is triggered.

Filter EDMs by:

Total number of signatures: 5

  1. Show:

    Supported byWithdrawn signatures

Showing 5 out of 5

Name Party Constituency Date Signed
Davies, Geraint Labour Party Swansea West 27.06.2016
Edwards, Jonathan Plaid Cymru Carmarthen East and Dinefwr 27.06.2016
Lammy, David Labour Party Tottenham 28.06.2016
Meale, Alan Labour Party Mansfield 28.06.2016
West, Catherine Labour Party Hornsey and Wood Green 29.06.2016

Footer links

Hi Valerie,

Having read the motion, it seems to me to be rather self defeating in its own wording. My understanding from the media is that the EU has said quite plainly that there will be no negotiations until after Article 50 has been triggered. Therefore, I don't see how it will be possible to know the terms of the UK-EU exit package and then hold a referendum on the matter before Article 50 has been triggered as is suggested in the motion. Rather makes me wonder as to what angle The Honourable Geraint Davies is approaching this issue from.

I saw two options with it. Firstly, the government actually comes up with a plan (!!) of what it proposes in draft form. Word will get out within 5 minutes and there'll be enough murmurings both UK and abroad to see if they're going in the right direction.

Secondly, I believe if the EU are seeing something proactive being done they will start tentative negotiations.

The government simply need to get on top of this. The EU has been dismissive so far, I believe understandably, because of the claims put forward saying there'll be membership of the single market but no freedom of movement etc etc and then a certain Mr Farage insulting the entire European Parliamant.

I think when the internal politics settle down a little, new PM in place and something is at least put on the table an outline can be agreed, something non-fictional presented to the population, the benefits or either being in or out and then they can decide whether that's the way they want to go or not. It would need to be done purely in an informative way though, no hype, no fuelling emotions, just simple facts. The finer details could be worked on later but absolutely nothing must be hidden amongst those.

Yes a plan is definitely a good idea. Rather a shame that Mr Cameron was so confident of the result being 'Remain' that he failed to have a contingency plan drawn up beforehand.

Would be nice if the EU folks would negotiate reasonably. However it seems that they are in no mood to do so at present. Understandable that they are annoyed, faced with the prospect of the second largest contributor to the EU budget leaving. It's going to leave a huge hole in their budget. Salt in the wound is also that the London stock market has recovered all losses and is now 150 points above pre referendum levels, whilst the markets in Germany/France/Holland/Belgium are still in the doldrums.

It's going to take time for the dust to settle, and I think that we are just going to have to wait patiently for the result of the Tory party leadership contest before anything concrete can happen.

I agree that Nigel Farage went a bit over the top, but then he has been working for Brexit for over 20 years, so I think that perhaps we should excuse his 'over exuberance' just that once.

My ex-local MP, Richard Benyon (Newbury), has said "Please be aware that I do not sign Early Day Motions because they have ceased to be an effective Parliamentary means of raising an issue.".

This seems entirely superfluous. There is legal action already taking place to ensure a commons debate and vote on the issue, as required by the EU themselves and without which anyone triggering Article 50 would be in breach of the law. We understand that the majority of MPs are against leaving so if they are allowed to vote for themselves rather than for a whip they'll vote it out. The danger is that not all the contenders to replace Cameron may be up to speed on the game and actually force it through too soon. Even Merkel and Hollande are not expecting UK to trigger it this year.

Yes it has possibly been overtaken now - it was tabled on 27 June, before legal experts started examining possible ramifications more closely.

My understanding is that Article 50 must be triggered to start the leave negotiation. There is a 2 year period to produce a leave deal. The country triggering Article 50 could withdraw the trigger at any time up to the 2 year limit, or extended limit (if other 27 countries agree).

A referendum on the terms of leaving EU and future relationship makes the best sense. There is a risk that the other EU members will not allow the 2 year limit to be extended but if there is a chance of Britain pulling back from the brink, I think they would all agree.

The FTSE 100 may be back to pre-Brexit levels but that's only because the BOE is suggesting lowering interest rates and flooding the market with money. Sterling is at its lowest levels for 30 years, so UK stocks are cheap.

Actually it was WON by 1.75 million votes! How many votes do the losers want? They have already had one as did everyone else.

No Government has been elected with this number of votes.

Accept it as those of us who voted to leave would have done had it gone the other way.

That's democracy.

The referendum result may be unique in the politics of the United Kingdom. As covered by others the majority of MPs supported remain. 52% of those voting (with some interesting regional variations) supported leave. Could both camps have presented their case more rigourously? For myself, I do not understand what access to the free market means pratically. I travel in the UK, in France and Spain. I observe for myself the litle signs of economic strength, business closing, construction work, shoopers in the hypermarket. I read that the EU imposes austerity on Greece. Can we realisticaly expect Greece to service the loans (or other countries within the EU "affected" by poor econimic management ). The voters elect their government, The voters do not elect the faceless bureaucrats, do not elect the investors whose actions do more for an economy than Chancellors can do in a five year parlimentary term. David Cameron fulfilled his election pledge. The goverment gave the voters a referendum. What was distinctly lacking from both sides were solid facts that could be verified. But, those voting colectively exercised their intelligence. If the two sides failed to explain the arguments in the referendum, Can they explain the leave negotiations any better. A vote on the leaving terms is simply a poorly disguised second referendum that if it could be done is not binding on the remaing citizens of the EU. I am 1/4 scottish but had no vote in the scotish referendum yet some of the taxes I pay go to the Scottish Parliament. If I live in one of the other 27 EU counties my government makes contributions to the collective EU. (As a side issue I have sympathy with those countries on whom severe austerity has been imposed when they see no matching austerity in the bureaucracy of the EU). Should the citizens in the rest of the EU also have a vote on UK EU leaving terms.

I wrote to my MP (tory) suggesting that he might hold open surgeries (perhaps even with the MP (labour) to explain the options and seek guidance from their voters. Are you surprised to learn I have had no response!

In the UK we have a real opportunity to recover some democracy, bring greater accountability, not just on our elected reprensentatives but also on our "civil" servants.

Recovering democracy requires accurately informed debate. Governments can start by greater openeness within their own national boundaries. But in addtion, there needs to be more openeness on the political, economic, security relationships, not only between members of the EU but also with the major economic blocks. Essentialy , 99.9% of the citizens of the EU want the same thing: a secure, healthy, reasonable standard of living where they feel that their input is commensurate with their output (Was a resigned footbal manager really worth £3.5 million? is an ex prime ministerial candidate worth £250K for 52 articles in a daily newspaper? is an ex PM consultancy businessworth several millions a year?)

UK voters were given the opprtunity to remain pr leave the EU. The respective campaigns were weak on both sides, but the voters voted. It is undemocratic for the loosing side to say "the voters did not understand, they should be given a second chance". Who would go into negotiations with such a weak mandate (if there were to be a second referndum with a remain result) when there are much poorer countries in the EU looking to join demanding what they see as their "fair" share of the EU social security handouts.

I would change that slightly to "Accept it as most of us who voted to leave would have done..." because of course Mr Farage, who must have had a crystal ball at the time, said at 52:48 result would be "unfinished business". I will not be instructed simply to accept something so marginal (more so now that 7.1% of leave voters say they would have voted to remain) as what happens next could destroy the life I have tried to build for my son. That is not whinging, that is not say boo hoo not fair, that is try to do what I can for my family.

The Parliament petition calls for a vote by the country on the terms of the UK exit deal, not simply another referendum. Instead of the misrepresentations made by both sides during the campaign voters would be presented with an A, B, C, this is what we can get/not get, and they vote yes or no.

This is now becoming a cringing spectacle, by those in the remain camp who lost the referendum, to continue throwing out the dummy at the result and trying to attempt an undemocratic 2nd referendum on the UK nationals by underhand means.

In our household we were also the potential 'turkey inviting itself for Christmas' by voting for leave whilst living here, and have already suffered abuse at the hands of remainers who cannot get their heads around why we would vote such, knowing us to be educated, tolerant, non-racist ,etc. But this vote was for what in the opinion of the voter is best for UK citizens going into the future. We voted for democracy rather than remaining in an undemocratic, overblown and corrupt edifice aka EU in Brussels. It wasn't a vote to leave Europe, or break ties with various countries, etc, so for those who 'lost' and now wish to overthrow the democratic majority vote, by whatever stealthy means is thought up, I would urge you to get over your disappointment, drop the hysteria, and get behind what is now best for UK to ensure that the citizens of UK get the best result.

One look at the markets will show that the crash, following the actions of frenzied and greedy traders who called wrongly, and yet which already has stabilised despite this hysteria and dangerous sedition now being activated by the sore losers, show that the ageist, bullying, nasty and alarmist campaigning by remain didn't work then, and would certainly not work again in a second vote, as the sky didn't in fact fall in and we all woke up in the same state of health we went to bed in! We do not yet know what can be negotiated, but we do already know that a good and powerful section of the remaining EU members are already poised to get rid of the poisonous Juncker and enter into robust trade deals with UK, as well as countries outside the EU.....

And to say I am ashamed of the younger 'voters' now braying about their 'lost future', the vast amount of them not bothering to actually vote (despite a 2 day unprecedented extention for them), but feeling entitled to try to steal that most precious thing the UK still has left to call its own, democracy, is a huge understatement. Led by the likes of that well known clean-living Irish millionaire 'Sir' Bob Geldolf, it is akin to watching a herd of alarmed, braying donkeys rather than a thoughtful and respectful people in the minority who should instead be asking themselves why over half of the UK feels so dis-enfranchised and with no other voice?....Do not now try to silence their voice again for personal and selfish gains. In 1973 my partner and I voted against entering what was supposed to be the Common Market...we lost, but did we go on to try to overturn democracy because we also were furious at the outcome of that vote? No, but it has taken all these decades later to finally have our say on what that became, and we will not take it lying down if the losers now try to overturn this referendum. Wait 40 years like we had to and then we may indulge you.

I read "... believes that UK citizens must agree on the terms of leaving the EU" as being democratic but there you go, different interpretations. Many voted on the basis of immigration. Many on autonomy for british businesses. Some simply voted because they were pi&&ed off with the government. With the pillocks vying for power now they could happily sacrifice "less important" issues to secure a trade deal or reduced tariffs or immigratino control. Who knows? An EU-UK exit deal could include no access to single market without freedom of movement or money that was 'promised' to the NHS going in additional tariffs. The people who voted to leave may not have had those or other things in mind when they were considering in or out. Without any consultation of 'the people' all these decisions will be left to a bunch of MPs who at the moment appear simply power hungry. They won't give a hoot about the population. Much of the negotiation will centre around business. But it's undemocratic to let the people decide whether what is settled upon is actually what they envisioned and that is the way they want the UK to be?

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, whether that be in the voting booth or here. As I said, the circumstances of this means that I will most probably lose what I've tried to build for my son. He is happy here but I will have to take him out of school and move elsewhere. If in your opinion that means I'm throwing my dummy out of the pram I think that's extraordinary. You gave your reasons for voting out. I should be entitled to express mine for wanting to stay. As I posted in the introduction, if the petition doesn't interest you then ignore it.


I think you are being somewhat disingenuous by attempting to justify your wish to overthrow the result by these means, because of your pleasant life outside the UK. None of us as yet know what will be achieved, as it is obvious that the terms to be agreed will take years to reach fruition. Most of us understand that what took years to build up will take years to unravel. If you are naturally concerned to retain your future here in France then the obvious is to seek to become French nationals. That is a completely separate issue from accepting the rights of those in UK to now go forward with their futures, especially as there is clearly a majority who do not consider their lives right now to be as cosy and secure as yours. I am firmly convinced, however, that especially for those of us already here there will be no changes, as outlined before the referendum by some leaders and now re-affirmed by the same leaders within EU. Why would there be when it has been mutually beneficial for France and UK to each have hundreds of thousands of citizens entrenched?....just more alarmist talk.

If you firmly believe you now have a right to call on other members of SF to add their voice perhaps it would have been better for you to have brought up any inconsistencies perceived whilst the campaigning was in progress, as I'd bet my sweet bippy you would be keeping quiet now if the vote had gone your way....n'est pas?

It is my fervent hope that those losers from this referendum who seem to feel aggrieved, will accept the result and thus respect democracy.

Or will they, like the Labour MPs who were aggrieved when Mr Corbyn was elected democratically, try every trick to circumvent democracy by forcing him out despite the improved results by labour in subsequent elections under his watch.

If one tries to look dispassionately at the present situaton in Westminster, one is not surprised at the low opinion of our politicians held by so many of us.

It would be so much better should everyone accept and concentrate on the positives -rather than follow the press and other self-seekers in exulting in the negatives.

That campayne is over -let's go forward -hopefully together.

Profile photo please David - cheers.

Sorry Robert - I'm one of those 'losers' and I'm not accepting it as for starters, my vote never arrived. Not democratic in the slightest!

That is both condescending and absurd. I'm being disingenuous because I think the British public should be able to decide if the final deal the government comes up with is actually acceptable? What if it's not and goes against what a high proportion voted out for in the first place? I suppose you believe they should just lump it as well. How very democratic. I'm not sure which reassurances you're referring to about the status of individuals not being changed. Theresa May and others were only saying today it would be “unwise” to guarantee EU nationals living in the UK assurances they could stay without UK nationals abroad getting the same assurances. Fine, they'll settle on something but there could be restrictions. That doesn't apply to me in any case. You know nothing of my family or my work life, yet you feel entitled to sit in judgment. Extraordinary.

As to the rest of your outpourings, no I don't speak in an alarmist fashion, yes I did bring up inconsistencies while the campaign was in progress, no I wouldn't keep quiet if the vote had gone the other way - I'd be petitioning for changes in the EU, so I'm afraid your sweet bippy yet again is wrong. But then of course it would be - you know nothing about me.

I won't be responding any more on this. I have a deadline to meet and a son to tuck in. Some things are far, far more important than debating with someone who assumes my life is all rosy and secure. As I said, condescending and absurd.

Robert, how can it be the voice of the British people when two million were disenfranchised because they have been living outside of UK for more than fifteen years! They are British citizens who will be more affected by the result than those who were persuaded by the lies that the NHS was going to benefit by £350 million a year.

Catherine, have you complained to the Electoral Commission covering the constituency in which you were supposed to have a vote?