LAST week our elected Parliament was suspended under the order of the Prime Minister.

He removed MPs' ability to raise questions with ministers, scrutinise the Government and represent you.

Putting aside the extraordinary political times we are in, this is an outrageous precedent to allow a PM to silence Parliament when he or she does not hear the answer they want.

We can never permit a situation when a single person can force onto a country what they believe to be the best course of action without scrutiny.

It is a slippery slope by a slippery PM and why I was so strongly opposed and appalled by his actions.

In my view the real reason he shut Parliament was to limit Parliament’s ability to ensure the UK did not leave the EU without a withdrawal agreement.

This is absolutely not about stopping Brexit, but ensuring we maintain the strong economic relationship we want with the EU in the future whilst also bringing the country swiftly back together after three years of vicious division and polarisation.

I understand and share the deep frustration we all feel at Brexit, we all want to move on.

Many understandably believe that leaving with no deal would now be the quick, easy option to lance the boil, get it over with and move on.

Many others believe we should just revoke Article 50 and move on, forgetting the referendum ever happened.

Both options are short-sighted and neglect the realities of the situation we are in and neither will end the crisis.

No deal especially will mean years of more chaos, negotiations and division without any consensus.

Nobody is advocating for us to leave without a deal and trade on WTO rules for the rest of time with our nearest and most important trading partners with the inevitable disruption and tariffs that will entail.

Even the hardest of Brexiteers who want us to become a bargain basement economy of deregulation and rights stripping agree we need a free trade deal eventually.

So why would we endure the pain of a no deal exit, start from scratch, negotiate a trade deal whilst, as the Yellowhammer document revealed last week, we particularly harm those on the lowest incomes?

And why would the EU give us any form of deal if we leave without settling our pre-existing commitments we signed up to even before the Referendum?

Surely we need to take a bit of time to get the future relationship right before we leave.

We’re all advocating similar end points, but a deal is the quickest route of minimal friction and the best chance of a good deal for the future.

After all, "negotiations followed by implementation including both a new Treaty and domestic legal changes"… "There is no need to rush. We must take our time and get it right." is exactly what it still says on the Vote Leave website from the referendum.

I understand the deep division this has caused and the frustration we all feel but the only route to end the chaos, reunite our communities and move on is by consensus around a deal that both Leave and Remain voters can live with.

What's your thoughts on the MP's column? Email