Abstract
ABSTRACT Advisory ex ante referendums, such as the referendum on the UK membership in the European Union in 2016, provide MPs with a (more or less) clear mandate from their principal, but they are not legally binding. Implementation thus still requires a legislative act, usually by parliament. MPs therefore face the decision whether to follow the will of ‘the people’ or to decide according to their own judgement, and thus whether to act as delegates or trustees. Just as importantly, advisory referendums can create situations where Members of Parliament (MPs) as agents are faced with conflicting mandates by different principals – i.e. by the electorate as a whole, by their own constituency and/or by their party. Agents facing conflicting mandates cannot avoid voting against one or more of the mandates and thus have to choose, which principal to ‘serve’. To explore this issue, the paper analyses MPs’ votes on the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill, and thus on triggering or not the Brexit process. Given the outcome of the referendum as well as the fact that most MPs did vote in favour of triggering the Withdrawal process, our main interest lies in exploring the decision of MPs not to follow the mandate given by the country.
Highlights
The outcome of the referendum in the United Kingdom on membership in the European Union (EU) on 23 June 2016 is well known: With a turnout of 72.21%, 51.89% voted to leave the European Union
While the results presented so far all test hypotheses based on a delegate logic, albeit for different principals, our final hypothesis (H5) was based on a trustee logic, assuming that MPs take the potential impact of Brexit on their constituency into account when deciding whether to vote for or against triggering the Withdrawal process
We have argued that advisory referendums may prove rather challenging for MPs
Summary
The outcome of the referendum in the United Kingdom on membership in the European Union (EU) on 23 June 2016 is well known: With a turnout of 72.21%, 51.89% voted to leave the European Union. We turn to the impact of the party office status of MPs. we were only able to test this for the Labour MPs. As Figure 4 indicates, office status had the expected effect: experienced Backbenchers were twice as likely to vote against the Bill than Frontbenchers (32 vs 16%), with parliamentary newcomers in between, but closer to the frontbenchers with 17%.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
