to think that the conservatives are bad for democracy.

[L1ttledrummergirl]

Two days ago there was a vote tabled by Labour "Ban on Fracking for Shale Gas Bill" something the conservatives promised in their manifesto.

This should have been a free vote, allowing MPs to do the right thing by their constituents. Instead, the government turned it into a three line whip, meaning MPs who didn't vote for it would no longer represent the conservative party.

This involved senior members of the Tory cabinet manhandling junior MPs into the correct lobby, meaning they are now being investigated for bullying.

Those who abstained and therefore should have lost the whip include Boris Johnson, meaning he would not be eligible to lead the party. Yet there is seemingly no action being taken as he appears to be being touted as a candidate to lead the party.

Am I being unreasonable to be really angry that conservative MPs voted to allow fracking under false pretences and the short sighted panic by the party could lead to lasting consequences for the country, and that this is not how a democratic system should work?

Manhandling would definitely not be OK.

Three line whips are a regular feature of politics and used by both sides when in power though - so not particularly a Tory or any other party thing.

You are right, they all use three line whips and they understand the consequences. In this case though there have been no consequences, meaning that those who voted with the government under duress and in a number of cases against their better judgement must have been left asking why?
It's changing the rules after the event, something the tories are good at, but a sign of bad governance.

At least they’re not taking us into an illegal war on the basis of a fake dossier dreamt up by their spin doctor

Three line whips are a party issue. It's an entirely internal matter and they can deal with it how they want. I doubt they'll do anything about it because the new leader might be against fracking so what would be the point?

Whips, from all parties, have always used threatening tactics to get people to vote in certain ways - usually constituency financial threats or enticements. However, these are grown adults that should be able to withstand pressure.

Manhandling people, if that's actually what happened, is against the law, let alone Westminster rules but it would be for the Speaker to investigate.

It could have been worse, they could have deployed a four-line whip.

Ooooo that's one I've not seen recently. Torybots must be getting desperate to be raiding the emergency whataboutery cupboard.

You do realise that 146/166 MPs voted in favour of intervention in Iraq right?

Also Camerons intervention in Libya was described as being "founded on erroneous assumptions and an incomplete understanding of the evidence. That no proper intelligence analysis had been undertaken, and that the intervention drifted into an unannounced goal of regime change and shirked its moral responsibility to help reconstruct the country" by the foreign affairs committee in 2016.

So I'd be careful about giving the tories the moral highground when it comes to things like that.

The difference between Iraq and Libya is that France and the UK made the decisions they did based on requested help and information they believed to be true. Whereas Blair and Campbell knew the information they were giving was based on dodgy information, unreliable intel and made up stuff. They were even warned by the secret services that they were saying things beyond what was actually believed, never mind proven. Blair just hoped it would be true.

It's sad to me that this is party political and despite the condemnation of an official enquiry, people still choose to defend the Blair govt for deceiving people into war. It's not the war per se that is the problem. It's the lying that took place to get us there.

Although I think bringing either Labour or the Iraq war into this thread is unnecessary and ridiculous, there is no comparison between a three line whip and the Iraq war. And to try to mitigate that war by bringing Libya into it is really reaching.

You do realise that 146/166 MPs voted in favour of intervention in Iraq right?

Sorry, I missed this. Its immaterial. MPs were given a dossier of information that the govt had been told by the secret services was unreliable and the govt let it stand. You have no idea whether the MPs would have voted the same way if they had been given honest information. It's the lies told to ensure we'd go to war which is so very wrong.

I think most of the population agree that Blair shouldn't have taken us into the gulf war, I wouldn't dispute that. I can't change that now though.

Forcing your MPs to vote in a particular way by threatening them with being thrown out, then not following through is wrong. The consequences of Boris Johnson abstaining in that election were that he should no longer be able to stand as a Conservative MP. How then is he able to lead the bloody party?

No wonder he thinks that he can get away with whatever he likes.

What precedent is being set for future votes and party discipline? How can the electorate ever trust them again?

@L1ttledrummergirl you are not wrong at all in what you say.

I would say that if you are desperate enough to start fracking then you are doing it because it is a vital part of national energy security. So I don't see why that should be a free vote.

Fracking as a technique works pretty well in the US and produces a huge amount of hydrocarbons, so much so that the US has gone from a declining producer to the largest producer in the world. It's completely revolutionised the energy market over there. But the US is a different country esp. with regards to population density and the co-opting of the local populace. The nature of the geology there is also a lot different to the UK.

I think fracking was and still is a distraction. Even if fracking is successfully implemented its going to be years before we start getting significant gas production from it.

The Tories would have been far better off working on other aspects of energy production, promoting wind power, building the second nuclear plant, subsidising solar and encouraging north sea investment (which is why a north sea windfall tax would be so detrimental).

So pursuing fracking in my mind was a mistake. The potential always was to create a massive political row with very little short term benefit and highly questionable long term benefit. I believe the amount of angst it creates is no way consistent with the (potential) energy security benefits might bring.

I'm pretty sure MPs have often rebelled against three line whips in the past without being thrown out of the party. Three line whips are different from confidence votes.

The issue I think is that there was confusion about whether or not the fracking vote was being used as a confidence vote. MPs can be excused for not being clear about that.

The whole thing was a complete shambles obviously, and I imagine contributed to the PM's decision to resign.

To be clear, I think Boris Johnson coming back would be a complete disaster and I hope he will
decide not to stand (not least because of the danger that he gets back in), but I don't think he should be ruled out simply because he abstained in the vote.

Whatever the rights and wrongs that was a very long time ago and the players are all doing other things. If you insist on dragging it up I feel constrained to point out that almost all Tory MPs voted for the war - in fact there was more dissent in the Labour ranks, including my Labour MP at the time who voted against.

I don't think the iraq war is relevant to what happened over a 3 line whip.

But as you've brought it up, Tory MPs did vote for it but that's a specious argument because you have no idea how they would have voted if they hadn't been lied to.

It isn't rare for three-line whips to be ignored, and unless it is a vote of confidence or the rebel is a minister, there are often no consequences. Some of the biggest recent examples are:
47 Labour MPs disobeyed a three-line whip requiring the party’s MPs to support the triggering of Article 50 in 2017
118 Conservative MPs voted against the Government’s Brexit deal in January 2019.
97 Conservative MPs voted against the introduction of compulsory Covid passes for nightclubs and large venues in December 2021.

Thats the other thing though, they were told it was a confidence vote, then it wasn't, then it was.

Nobody knew in all the confusion.

The Conservative party is unbelievably corrupt.

The political system isn't working as it should at all because these people are supposed to represent and work for us and our interests.

That's impossible firstly because they follow mandates from above them, not below. The majority didn't want all the trans nonsense for example but it's a global policy above. They are implementers of policy and not responders to citizens' needs. Who are they taking orders from on that? Global pharmaceutical interests or some body not in the public eye.

they also can't possibly have the average person's interests at heart as they live in a completely different world, why and how could they possibly be working for our interests which would be in opposition to our own?

Lastly I don't think democracy in its true form is possible with this number of constituents. Thomas Paine said it first but it has always rung true. Too many competing and conflicting interests to ever make a policy that represents any majority.

*their own not our own

Only 15% think you ABU
Matches polling info

Well the fact that the tories did the exact same thing over Libya and again voted in favour of intervention suggests that they wouldn't have changed their vote regardless of the information presented to them.

Remember, above all else, war creates profit and there is nothing a tory covets more than profit.

It's nice to no the majority feel the same way as me, it means there's some hope left for society.

I hope we get answers to this soon. The trouble is there doesn't appear to be anyone asking the question, everyone is being distracted by the circus.

And haven't they redrawn some borough voting boundaries in ways that conveniently favour them?

Yes. Going by polling figures today though, it won't make much difference.

It appears that most (all) of the country would be anywhere but tory.

Manhandling of MPs is completely unacceptable and should never happen.

Whipping is part of politics. It’s how parties maintain discipline and how governments get their legislation through Parliament and into law.

If MPs don’t like the policies of the party under whose banner they stood for election, they are free to leave that party and sit as independents, or ‘cross the floor’ and join another party. Similarly, if MPs refuse to support their party’s policies, the leadership are entitled to kick them out by ‘removing the whip.’ Both happened a lot during the Brexit wars.