The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandLady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂

Hold the line Brexiters!!

Nearly there...

Only 53 days to go!

🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Arf song!
Of course it's better for UK to be small swift moving, able to do what we want and what we need in times of down turn!
Why stay shackled and chained to cumbersome caravan chain that is as good as its worst caravan!

..

He acts like rules and conventions don't matter to him...

He has no sense of irony....

How can anyone with a modicum of sense stand up and say these things when she's openly campaigning to trample on the vote of 17. Mill people.

Boris is so going to revoke.

How many votes has Boris lost now?

Glad to see the back of Bercow, he has destroyed the speakers impartiality.

If parliament can ignore national votes then I dont see why Boris cant ignore parliaments votes. Hopefully he will martyr himself to save us from the EU.

If parliament can ignore national votes then I dont see why Boris cant ignore parliaments votes

I wouldn't expect someone from the far right to be able to see the difference.

Boris = Martyr, really ?

Vote on snap election is due at about 11.30

continuity Bercow is not the Law on this matter as the article discusses. BBC this evening theorising no10 policy is to challenge Benn Bill in the courts.

Is Mr Johnson the one in the middle? A plant (Russian)?

No, thats Jeremy in the middle!

It’s not a plant it’s a weed

I’ll stop being Juvenile now!

Forever, promise?

No

Doh!

Howabout from the article you posted:

It is settled law that once a Bill has passed through both Houses and received Royal Assent, it is then too late to raise any possible difficulties over Queen’s Consent. It goes without saying that the government has to comply with the precise wording of any Act of Parliament.

Which suggests it’s too late to challenge on Queen’s Consent?

How long before you happy few start promoting an NI only backstop?

Most people would support a border in the Irish Sea I would have thought. Except the DUP and the people they represent. What can we offer those people to make up for it? Real legally-binding longterm investment in NI?

This is where a deal can be found.

If I were Johnson I would ask Clinton to come back and help get an agreement on the island of Ireland.

I heard a suggestion yesterday, no border poll as long as the backstop is in place. I'm not sure how that could work with the GFA though. It would have to be clear that it only applied if the backstop was actually in place, i.e. NI doesn't have regulatory alignment with rUK.

If the DUP scupper the financial prosperity of their voters, they won't have as many voters.

continuity I beg to differ - I could of course be wrong which is why I think there will be a court case.

My understanding is that the Bill cannot compel the Executive (Government) unless it exercises prerogative power. This means it needs Queens consent, contrary to Bercow.

"Sir,

The power to extend Article 50 is either a prerogative power, or it is not.

(a) if it is a prerogative power, the Benn-Burt bill (a.k.a. the “Stop Brexit Bill”, which orders the Prime Minister to seek yet another Brexit extension) requires Queen’s Consent before it can become law;

(b) if it is not a prerogative power, the UK already left the EU on 29 March 2019. This is because in that case, the then Prime MinisterTheresa May would have lacked authority to extend Article 50. No relevant primary legislation was enacted or amended prior to that date to enable her to do so.

...

The Speaker has ruled (see here) that the Benn-Burt bill does not require the Queen’s Consent but he cannot have it both ways: either it does, in which case it requires Boris Johnson to advise the Queen to grant it, or it doesn’t, in which case the UK has left the EU already."

independencedaily.co.uk/letters-to-the-editor-saturday-7th-september-2017/

FWIW I disagree with point b in part. Again there is ongoing legal discussion on this. My understanding is that Theresa May exercised her prerogative power to extend Art 50 acting on the advice of Cooper-Letwin.

The fact that the Govt has no majority takes away any implicit assumption that Parliament and Government can be conflated, although I think that would be a very outre interpretation in any case.

It is not the case that Parliament can make any laws it likes and they are then watertight. Constitutional safeguards are there and open to the courts to uphold. This is one of those cases. Why? Ask yourself if it would be OK for Parliament to decide to compel the PM to declare war on someone against their judgement?