I keep reading the term
'Snouts in the trough' and looking after themselves and their future.
That is very disingenuous and if that is how it appears why vote?
A small amount might be like this but not a great majority.
Many were very rich in their own right before this vote and brexit in or out will not affect them.

Rubbish. Put aside the NHS slogan on the bus (which can be justified), what examples of misleading information was there?

Would you change the way you voted? No.

Don't kid yourself that anyone else would either.

Like every vote in history the information to make a considered choice was in the public domain and as ever there were those who sought it, and those who didn't: on both sides.

"You were lied to" is the pinnacle of pot calling the kettle black. You honestly trust the word of politicians and the media on the remain side? Anybody basing their vote on the say so of Blair and Campbell, or Farage and Bojo, are representative of those who cast from a position of naïvety: given the record turnout, you will always get a healthy cross section of this demographic no matter how many times you run the process. I add, with all sincerity, that these votes are as equally valid as those from people who may feel more "in the know". Every vote cast is subjective and the owner of it entitled to respect.

I do agree that there is no chance of us leaving now, but that's the will of the political elite: no matter your position, this inability/unwillingness to steadfastly implement a promise is of concern to us all. I, for one, still believe in us and them, no matter your stance on Brexit, and will always be on the side of us.

Correct, it is. So where's that recognition that you're wrong?

You've presented a link to a report from a select committee, this isn't a definition. They've referenced a famous quotation that many MP's use as a standard: subjectively, incorrectly and the suit their own agenda.

Your own link concludes the role as:

supporting their party in votes in Parliament (furnishing and maintaining the Government and Opposition);
representing and furthering the interests of their constituency;
representing individual constituents and taking up their problems and grievances;
scrutinising and holding the Government to account and monitoring, stimulating and challenging the Executive;
initiating, reviewing and amending legislation; and
contributing to the development of policy whether in the Chamber, Committees or party structures and promoting public understanding of party policies.

I don't know how we can go much further with this: you are clearly wrong.

You are a stubborn man. The select committee is an official part of Parliament. It is cross party and to suggest it presents "subjective" statements is just wrong. The first paragraph I referenced is a summary of Burke's principle, which is universally accepted as the way our Parliament works. You cannot make it no so just because you wish it wasn't so. The following paragraph's, which you quote, are merely another summary of their daily duties, albeit expressed in a more detailed way than the link you provided. Your link is, I suspect, intended, as a simple summary for students whilst mine is from an official Parliamentary report.

I suggest you discuss this with your own MP, if you still don't believe me.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

You must have quite a draft coming in from that glass ceiling...

As for the thinly veiled "my link is better than your link" line?

You reveal yourself.

There's no harm in being wrong pal, you said you had no problem with being proved so, when clearly you do. Take care my friend.