Brexit

No it isn't. Constitutional law was unclear. A point was settled. Now it's clearer. That's how stuff works with a constitution, particularly a largely unwritten constitution.  Why do you think the Queen acceded in the first place.

I marched for the first time when Johnson prorogued parliament. I may not have liked what other politicians did in the past but to shut down parliament to stifle debate and scrutiny was essentially a coup. I do not always like what parliament decides but I acknowledge that their authority top trumps anything else (including a referendum that was advisory even if the executive at the time said it would be binding)

It was an unresolved aspect of an unwritten constitution that has now been resolved for posterity. We all know where we stand. Excellent. Whatever else it was, the matter was firstly about constitutional clarity, and not the stupidity of this handbag waving partisanship.

It's a pity that someone like James Dyson hadn't taken Bercow and the Remainers to court and said they were denying the views of the people in a Referendum. There would have been more indignation than when Sour Sowbury was called a Nazi.

How can you say Parliament is doing it’s job when the majority are Remainers, pushing their own agenda and voting, plotting and attempting to block the UK leaving the EU, against the will of their constituents?

It’s all very well to say that this is all about preventing No Deal, but it isn’t - it is about stopping Brexit. Parliament could not agree on what kind of deal it wanted when it had a series of votes a few months ago. Parliament failed, it is as simple as that. It had the opportunity to sent Mrs May to Brussels to ask for a certain type of deal and it couldn’t even back a single option on what to tell her to ask for.

Parliament has decided nothing since then on what to do about Brexit, other than mandate that the government must ask for an extension. The entire thing is a total farce and nothing, absolutely nothing is happening other than the MPs attempting to drag it out.

The way things are going I’m surprised article 50 even made it through Parliament.

We have a representative parliamentary democracy.

Members of Parliament were voted in by their constituents at the last election - post EU referendum - to use their best judgement, experience and knowledge in running the country to the benefit of their constituents.

By definition, they are acting on the will of their constituents when they make those decisions. That’s what they were voted in to do.

Blocking No Deal is their clear duty to their constituents as there is a huge risk of disruption to basic standards of living if we leave without a deal.

You may not like it, but they are doing their job.

This is why Johnson, Cox et al should not be allowed to get away with attacking this Parliament. This Parliament is the most recent, in the wake of the referendum, reflection of the will of the voters*. Attacking it, insulting it and proroguing it unlawfully is therefore, by design, also an attack on the very people who voted it in as a response to that referendum. 

* Of course, it would be even more representative if not elected by the unrepresentative ‘first past the post’ system.

Well none of those manifestos included "We will leave the EU without a deal"...

They are attempting to block the UK leaving the EU without a deal. That is NOT, despite what some Brexiteers rant ad nauseum, the same as blocking the UK from leaving the EU full stop. It is a necessary first step to either getting a deal or not leaving at all, but both of those outcomes are still on the table and could be achieved.

Remaining is obviously Lib Dem and SNP policy, but it isn't Labour policy, so your accusation of what they are doing is false.

And don't forget the will of many constituents is either not to leave or to leave with a deal - blocking No Deal IS representing their constituents in that regard.

And all of that is beside the fact that the political landscape has changed dramatically since 2016, and politicians have to consider that as well.

Add also everything kathryn said far better than I could.

The thing that is obvious is you don't have involvement with your local constituency party of choice. MPs desert party manifesto's at their peril, as mine has found.