LAST week, our MP, Esther McVey took to the stage at a Leave means Leave rally alongside the likes of Tim Martin, Richard Tice and Nigel Farage. She talked about Brexit being ‘the cause’ and the ‘infiltration’ of Remainers and insisted she would not rest until leavers got what they voted for.

This week she has launched a series of social media videos to promote leaving the EU on WTO terms, in other words, with no deal.

The first of these has been comprehensively trashed by numerous trade experts, lawyers and professional negotiators. It was embarrassing.

Tatton is now polling at 57 per cent Remain and while we have to acknowledge that the slim national majority was to leave the EU, the proposition was never to leave without a deal at all and the profound dangers of that have been shared relentlessly across all serious news sites, by the Government itself, by numerous business leaders, the NHS, farmers, universities, the automotive industry and most recently Airbus.

When Ms McVey says leavers must get what they voted for, perhaps she could respond to our requests for a public meeting and tells us exactly what that was, as there is no consensus in government or across the country as to how that referendum should be interpreted.

What cannot be argued however is that, according to their code of conduct, it is our MP’s duty ‘to act in the interests of the nation as whole; and a special duty to their constituents...Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.’ It is categorically not in the interests of the nation to support a ‘no deal’ Brexit. It is categorically not in the interests of the nation to fail to come up with a workable alternative to the Prime Minister’s deal if you are going to vote it down and, given that she is not responding to our requests for a meeting, she is also failing to ‘submit herself to whatever scrutiny is appropriate’.

We are now deeply concerned that the people of Tatton are not being represented at all and worse than that, that we have an MP who is actively working against us in favour of a political ideology that will never translate into the ‘pragmatic’ solution that she once claimed to us she was working towards.

Is Ms McVey advancing her constituents’ best interests when she champions a ‘no deal’ Brexit and shares a platform with Nigel Farage? Or is she seeking to advance just her own and those of her funders, her friends and her faction?

Sarah Murphy, Judith Hughes, Julie Laot Wilmslow for Europe