Posted on: March 25, 2020 Posted by: Brexit Glory Comments: 0

M479 was introduced into parliament today, causing an uproar in the commons, with over 200 contributions from MPs. The motion that was seemed to be deliberately vague and lacked detail as savaged by MPs from across the political spectrum. Labour MP /u/plebit8080 called it “pointless due to the lack of detail”. LPUK frontbencher /u/LeChevalierMal-Fait questioned how MPs or the public were supposed to “make up their mind on the issues if politicians won’t be straight with them”.

The raucous over the lack of detail came from the following clause in the motion that urged the government to:

Take substantive measures to increase the intake of refugees into the United Kingdom.

Cabinet members, including the Chief Secretary and the Transport Secretary, were initially sympathetic to the motion but became concerned about how it opened the doors to unlimited numbers. Labour were asked over 25 TIMES to give a rough estimate on figures that they would sue the motion to justify. Most of these questions were directed at the leader of the opposition who continually failed to answer the question, repeating phrases such as “as many as we can”.

Pro-immigration Conservative Peer /u/Tommy2Boys who leaned in favour of the motion asked Labour to “cut out the rubbish” and dismissed their question dodging as “virtue signalling”. The Prime Minister also got involved, defending his party members, stating “that is not an answer, [it] is a soundbite”. Both contributions were left unanswered by Labour.

The leader of the opposition had been mostly successful in shutting down the debate with their dishonesty, but had not finished with their outbursts. /u/Friedmanite19 took to the floor to examine the ridiculous motion the only defence the leader of the opposition could come up with was to call him “far-right”, a comment that had MPs from all across the house crying “shame” down at /u/ARichTeaBiscuit. The Spectator gave the leader of the LPUK a chance to defend themselves against the viscious and decietful attack, in a statement to this paper they said:

“It’s complete and utter rubbish. Labour seem to decry anyone that dares to question their open border fanaticism as racist or far-right. I’m a proud immigrant and I can assure the Leader of the opposition that their party do not speak for many hard working immigrant families up and down this country. It’s not far-right to want a common sense migration policy that benefits our economy and the taxpayer. Labeling anything labour doesn’t like as far right shows disrespect to those who have suffered under brutal fascist regimes and the LOTO should apologise. They probably won’t but I think this whole debacle shows how out of touch Labour truly are.

However /u/ARichTeaBiscuit was not done there, they turned their attention to the aforementioned Labour member, /u/plebit8080, who dared to see sense and honestly criticise the motion. He too saw the harm that could be done by an unspecified number, a number that the leader of the opposition failed to clarify, and stated:

This house should absolutely not support the unspecified increase of asylum seekers and the honourable member should pull the motion and return with a more substantial version.

In a poor showing of leadership /u/ARichTeaBiscuit attempted to sweep away the troublesome member from the floor urging him to talk “in private” rather than in the house. Earlier this month we saw the Labour party banish the Blue Labour faction that /u/Plebit8080 had put his support behind. /u/ARichTeaBiscuit did not answer whether there would be a second Blue Labour purge or not. 

The appalling behaviour from Labour, and especially the leader of the opposition, drew parliamentary criticism from all sides of the debate including within their own party. /u/ARichTeaBiscuit offered no apology for shutting down debate, lying, using personal attacks or telling off their own members within the house. 

The following two tabs change content below.

Brexit Glory

BrexitGlory is the Conservative MP for Essex and the Secretary of State for Transport