Many people will look at the news headlines saying 79 Tory MPs voted against the Government and in favour of a referendum on the EU.
But before genuine Eurosceptics get too excited, the reality is the majority of that group of 79 are pro-EU MPs who believe in reforming the EU. They are not genuine Eurosceptics, they are the Europlastics. If the motion yesterday had been to approve a referendum offering a straight In/Out option the number of Tories rebelling would have been less than 12.
To put it into context, Chris Heaton-Harris, who has voted more than half the time for further integration within the EU, went through the Aye lobby to support the referendum call. He would not have done so if the wording had been for an In/Out referendum. He believes in staying part of the EU and in the myth of ‘renegotiation’ of our ‘relationship’ with it.
The fact remains, the interests of the political class do not match the interests of the ordinary voter.
Autonomous Mind 
Despite many of the 81 Tory rebels’ lack of clear red-blooded euro-rejectionism, among their number I counted 14 females. I have found in my male life that women do not forgive deceivers. Cameron has made enemies. And because of his constantly deceptive conduct he deserves everyone of them – & all the harm they bring him. Good!
Eustice abstained.
My take is that many of the “rebels” know that they’re in a one-term government and will be looked on more kindly by the next idiot. Many will also have had an eye on boundary changes.
Thanks OF. I got it from an inaccurate report before checking the vote tally and have removed the paragraph from the post above. A reminder to not believe everything in the media.
As I commented elsewhere yesterday AM, this was pure theatre, and I would not be surprised if some of those “rebels” were instructed by the whips to vote “aye”… We wouldn’t want to have a “democratic” vote that gave similar results to one of those elections in Soviet Russia, or Sadaam’s Iraq would we?
If those rebels were really intent on defying their masters, they would have followed their vote with the next logical step, which would be a change (or a threat of a change) of party (and I know you won’t agree with this) to UKIP or something like it. In other words, they didn’t want to sacrifice their chances on the greasy pole, they just wanted to present what looked like a rebellion, not an actual rebellion.
Voters that don’t really think about politics, don’t vote for what is logical, what they agree with, or what makes any sense… They vote for what they think will be the winning side. If Cameron or Milliband (though he hasn’t been tested yet) looked like losers, they wouldn’t get many of the votes that they do; it’s all about a winning “brand”.
Funny thing is, that half the people outside with UKIP (and other placards) were just as important in the play as those inside…. They didn’t really know what they were there for either.
I’m no fan of UKIP and the whole farce of the commons debate and vote was ludicrous considering all the other major problems we ae facing as a anton but if UKIP cannot capitalise on such political capital and taske ownership then they are doomed as a party to being a fringe irritation at best hampered by teh baggage Farage brings….