The post you are reporting:
Mr Elphicke, in this situation, is just another member of the UK electorate placing his single vote for the choice that he has made in relation to EU membership. My own belief is that he has taken more of a risk with his Parliamentary career by declaring in favour of an 'In' vote in this constituency than he would have done by declaring for 'Out'. That balance of risk would have been different in a different constituency. So, in this instance, I am inclined to believe that he has declared for the option that he thinks is best for the UK.
It is nice that Mr Elphicke has let us know which way he will be voting and has given us some explanation as to why he has chosen to vote that way, but, in the end, it is his choice for his vote, just as it will be my choice for how I cast my vote. For this referendum he can, and should, be allowed to choose and vote as an individual whether his constituents or his political party agree with him or not.
Just like the ECJ will do with the UK-EU deal, Mr Elphicke has undoubtedly taken the views of his constituents into consideration when coming to his decision (Mr Vic - this is a pointed comment about the legally binding nature of the deal that Mr Cameron reached with his fellow EU leaders).
I had hoped, but not expected, for Mr Cameron to ask for something truly significant and fundamental to be changed - like the terms of Maastricht or Lisbon treaties to be rolled back in whole or in large part - but he only asked for relatively minor things and didn't get them in full either. We hear that an exemption from ever closer union for the UK is a fantastic outcome, but all that does is to maintain us in our current situation, Maastricht and Lisbon Treaties, and the closer union that they facilitated, still apply. To my mind, Maastricht was already a treaty too far and Lisbon was worse. I am glad to at last have a real and direct say in the future of my country in the EU and will definitely be down the polling station casting my vote on the day.
The stuff being pushed about our referendum vote determining whether or not the bi-lateral border treaty with France is maintained is essentially rubbish - border controls will stay as is or revert to how they were prior to the treaty depending on which political party controls most influence in Paris. In short, the treaty principally stands or falls on changes to policy in Paris, which in turn will be decided by French voters in French elections.
