Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westministenders: The Non Re-Opening Of Parliament

989 replies

RedToothBrush · 24/09/2019 19:40

Parliament will reconvene tomorrow, at 11.30am, as if proroguation never happened as the Supreme Court ruled that the government acted outside the limits of its power and this was therefore unlawful.

The most senior court in the UK has ruled unaminously to defend Parliamentary Sovereignity and the Rule of British Law.

Unusually for a Wednesday there will be no PMQ, however there will be time for Ministerial Statements, UQ and Debate under S024.
See the abbreviation thread if you are struggling with these

So tomorrow is sure to be explosive on way or another.

The Government is hitting back by questioning the Supreme Court whilst also saying they respect the Supreme Court's authority. This is an oxymoron. Its being done for political reasons and is, in its own way, a direct threat to the Rule of Law.

Robert Buckland is, again, having to do a lot in Cabinet to assert the point of the importance of the Rule of Law and how it prevents mob rule. Something that seems to keep getting forgotten by anonymous No 10 sources.

The political fallout from the ruling is sure to lead to calls for the Supreme Court to be politically elected. This has been a long term goal of parts of the hard right.

Johnson, is currently in the US, so the announcement that parliament will be back tomorrow has rather spoilt his jolly to see his mate Donnie. He will have to get on a plane smartish.

But for all the hard talk there will also be ramifications for Johnson. Whilst there will be a lot of 'nothing has changed', and there is no chance of a VoNC in the HoC being tabled by the opposition whilst no deal is still on the table on the 31st Oct, there will still be problems for Johnson.

There will be a post mortem within his own party. The next Cabinet Meeting will almost certainly be explosive. There are already attempts to set Geoffrey Cox, the Attorney General who apparently advised that proroguation was lawful, under the bus as the fall guy. This will perhaps be a deflection to try and protect Dominic Cummings, as there will be moderate Tories who will seek to use this as an opportunity to have him sacked. But more than this, its likely to result in other Cabinet Ministers being more forceful and to challenge Johnson more, both for their own political gain and for their own political protection. He will certainly be more questioned from within, about his poor judgement.

We also have him facing an investigation from the London Assembly over his conduct and suggestions of an inappropriate relationship with a busty blonde American woman.

Next weeks Conservative Party Conference is now in tatters. Whilst Corbyn has wrapped up the Labour Party Conference early to avoid a clash with Parliament being open, Johnson is stuffed. Next week's PMQ will clash with the schedule for his Party Speech. Normally parliament would be in recess for the conference season, but parliament has to vote to allow this. And there isn't a majority for the Conservatives to now be able to do this. So Parliament almost certainly will be sitting next week.

Unfortunately, the Tories are a little stuffed with their conference being held in Manchester. If (and lets face it, with the gloves off and time short) the opposition want to cause mischief, they will try and schedule crucial and embarassing debates during the party conference, to keep MPs stuck in Westminister as much as possible. And with good reason under the circumstances.

We still have the small matter of the 31st October deadline which Johnson is still sticking to saying we will either have a deal or we will leave without a deal - unlawfully.

Remember on that note, Johnson has already acted beyond his power and unlawfully on the basis of bad advice. Johnson being hulk, rather than a girly swat, relies on the advice of others more heavily than his own wisdom and experience - of which he has been exposed time and again - to be somewhat lacking in.

As a side note, its also worth reflecting on the NCA having dropped charges in relation to Leave.Eu and how the Electoral Commission has commented on this decision:
"We are concerned about the apparent weakness in the law, highlighted by this investigation outcome, which allows overseas funds into UK politics. We have made recommendations that would tighten the rules on campaign funding and deter breaches. We urge the UK's governments to act on those recommendations to support voter confidence"

In the context of an imminent General Election, this is really very concerning indeed.

Just WHO is in control? Cos it doesn't look like its Boris Johnson right now, thats for sure.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
25
OhLookHeKickedTheBall · 24/09/2019 21:09

I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.
Not often I feel the need to quote Thatcher but sometimes opportunity presents itself

Alsohuman · 24/09/2019 21:10

Haven’t seen a post deleted here for ages, it wasn’t that bad, surely? Quite mild in terms of leaver abuse really.

TheElementsSong · 24/09/2019 21:11

What, we've had a deletion already?

Belindabelle · 24/09/2019 21:11

10 hours is amateur level.

NoWordForFluffy · 24/09/2019 21:12

Oh, I get a right too. But not a majority of questions! It's not the standard I hold myself to, ha ha! Grin

BigChocFrenzy · 24/09/2019 21:14

red I wish Grayling were still in Cabinet
I could feel more reassured that those sent to carry out the coup would be found sobbing in a dark tunnel after being trapped several hours on a train with no drinks, loo or air con

BigChocFrenzy · 24/09/2019 21:16

I see how a party that has say 2 terms could stack the UK Supreme Court, like the GOP in the USA have been doing

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JudgesofftheSupremeeCourtofftheUniteddKingdom

Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by The Queen by the issue of letters patent, on the advice of the Prime Minister, to whom a name is recommended by a special selection commission.

RedToothBrush · 24/09/2019 21:20

Lewis Goodall@lewis_goodall
It’s far too easy to become inured and immune to massive news; but we shouldn’t. We should take a moment to step back and reflect that the PM advised the Queen to act unlawfully, to “change the fundamentals of our democracy” as the SC put it. I can’t think of a moment like it.

Tim Shipman @shippersunbound
It’s a bit like the moment when the Speaker of the House of Commons tore up 300 years of precedent to please his mates

Lewis Goodall@lewis_goodall
It’s really not, Tim.

Tim Shipman @shippersunbound
And that, my friend, is why this is going to end very very badly

Xander Fox @xanderfox
oh tim, come on. you are angry about the result, you dont agree with it, fine. but this is unedifying.

Tim Shipman @shippersunbound
I don’t disagree with the ruling but I think the court will regret making it

Sam Freedman @samfr
What are they supposed to do? Make the wrong ruling to avoid angering people?

Xander Fox @ XanderFox
and i heard the same angry voices after miller 1, then it went quiet. see also, the joy at which the london high court decision was received last week, people are applying their own bias to a matter of law. the court is asked to interpret a law, it did its job.

Lewis Goodall@lewis_goodall
Respectfully completely disagree.

-Changing Commons standing orders ≠ breaking the law.

-Courts have always (rightly) arbitrated on politicians acting unlawfully.

-if the PM doesn’t want the courts involved in politics, be should be certain everything he’s doing is lawful.

-the court not acting would, equally have been a political act.

We will only be in trouble if those on the losing side of this judgment don’t accept it or impugn the court by saying they have acted with a political motive rather than a legal one, thus delegitimising an important institution we desperately need now and will again.

Tim Shipman @shippersunbound
I don’t think they acted with a political motive, I think they will regret allowing themselves to be dragged into politics. It can only mean scrutiny they won’t enjoy

He was told by his attorney general that it was. Court says it wasn’t, fine. But the degree of gloating today is exactly why people voted to leave and exactly why if the establishment is seen to overturn the referendum result there will be hell to pay at the ballot box and worse

I think there is a problem in that whatever the SC did they were going to leave things open to political abuse and potential manipulation after the fact, because that's the political climate atm. That's how the country is being run.

If they felt that the executive was abusing power by prorogating in this way, they were duty bound in their decision and there was not much room for them to avoid being set on a future collision course with politics.

In short, they were damned whatever they did. They either failed to uphold the law and leave us at the mercy of an executive acting beyond its powers or they left the course exposed to future political fall out.

Neither is desirable and both are frightening in terms of democracy and freedom.

And this is precisely why where we are is so dangerous and I'm not sure how many realise just how dangerous it is.

OP posts:
flouncyfanny · 24/09/2019 21:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RedToothBrush · 24/09/2019 21:22

I rest my case

Jack Doyle @jackwdoyle
🚨 BREAKING 🚨

Jacob Rees-Mogg told this evening’s Cabinet call that the Supreme Court judgment amounted to a ‘constitutional coup’.

He also described it as ‘the most extraordinary overthrowing of the constitution’.

Full details in tomorrow’s Daily Mail.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 24/09/2019 21:27

Papers

OP posts:
TheElementsSong · 24/09/2019 21:27

Tim Shipman @shippersunbound
I don’t think they acted with a political motive, I think they will regret allowing themselves to be dragged into politics. It can only mean scrutiny they won’t enjoy. He was told by his attorney general that it was. Court says it wasn’t, fine. But the degree of gloating today is exactly why people voted to leave and exactly why if the establishment is seen to overturn the referendum result there will be hell to pay at the ballot box and worse

Hey, wasn't there an actual hoenst-to-god lawyer on the previous thread who pretty much said all this word-for-word? Hi, Tim, we're honoured that you've graced MN with your wisdom!

RedToothBrush · 24/09/2019 21:29

Jack Doyle @jackwdoyle
:: Mr Rees-Mogg accused the judges of making errors, saying ‘some elements of the judgment are factually inaccurate’.

:: Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said he didn’t believe ‘any prorogation over the past 50-100 years would have survived today’s judgment.’

OP posts:
BigChocFrenzy · 24/09/2019 21:31

Yep, red Safeguarding our democracy became a much higher priority for me than Remain from about December
I think you saw the degree of danger quite a bit earlier
I seriously underestimated it until then - maybe I'm too far away here

The courts have done their duty all along
The media have failed disgracefully
Parliament also - being divided is one thing; being so ignorant is quite another

We'd be in even worse straits if BJ, JRM, Patel et al weren't such bungling incompetents - I suspect it's arrogance & laziness getting in the way

However, that won't hold things up much longer
I wish the Rebel Alliance looked a lot more capable & united

RedToothBrush · 24/09/2019 21:36

Laura Kuenssberg@bbclaurak
1. Several Cabinet ministers say mood of the conference call was just to move on, to get back to sorting out the political problems -official line and the PM's line is to respectfully disagree with the judgement but get on with trying to get over the next enormous hurdle

2. But some expressed more frustration with the court in line with No 10 source earlier - one Cab minister says “interesting for justices to be giving political direction"

3. Another source says Jacob Rees-Mogg described what happened as 'constitutional coup' - his team not denying tonight, but won't comment

Rees-Mogg is the one doing the parliamentary address in the HoC tomorrow.

Rees-Mogg is also directly criticised because of his personal role in the prorogation.

OP posts:
BigChocFrenzy · 24/09/2019 21:37

": Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said he didn’t believe ‘any prorogation over the past 50-100 years would have survived today’s judgment.’"

So Buckland is respectful of the court, Cox not

Buckland was a Remainer in the ref campaign; Cox a Leaver
Even among the govt lawyers, we see the divide affecting their professional opinions / attitudes

BigChocFrenzy · 24/09/2019 21:37

": Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said he didn’t believe ‘any prorogation over the past 50-100 years would have survived today’s judgment.’"

So Buckland is respectful of the court, Cox not

Buckland was a Remainer in the ref campaign; Cox a Leaver
Even among the govt lawyers, we see the divide affecting their professional opinions / attitudes

JuliaCheeser · 24/09/2019 21:38

JRM sounds just like his sister Annunziata R-M of Brexit Party fame.
This is all moving to the extreme Right, with shouts of coup and the smearing of the top judiciary.

Which is where they want it to be ime.

I hope that Parliament treads a careful path.

yolofish · 24/09/2019 21:41

Anyone got a Black Swan update? have googled and cannot find anythng..

IDontBelieveYou · 24/09/2019 21:41

PMK

pointythings · 24/09/2019 21:42

Going back to the previous thread, what concerned me about the frothing Leavers there was the way they attacked Lady Hale - and only Lady Hale for the verdict. They used awful vicious misogynist terminology too, attacking her appearance and not the substance of the ruling.

Life looks pretty bleak for women if that mob get to run the show. Be a strong, powerful intelligent woman who has influence and you're for it. Angry

fedup21 · 24/09/2019 21:44

What a mess. What’s the betting nothing gets sorted in the next month though!

TheElementsSong · 24/09/2019 21:49

frothing Leavers there was the way they attacked Lady Hale - and only Lady Hale for the verdict.

Standard operating protocol.

As so many individual usernames came up with the same particular words and phrasing, presumably the tropes were imprinted directly into the blank slates from social media as per usual.

I noted earlier today that the "can someone tell me which law was broken?" pseudo-gotcha was being heavily pushed. And of course the "old witch/coven" thing.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 24/09/2019 21:52

PMK

JuliaCheeser · 24/09/2019 21:52

Arlene Foster Verified account @DUPleader
10h
10 hours ago

More
We have always respected the principle of the separation of powers upon which our constitutional law is founded. Therefore the judgement of the Supreme Court has to be respected.
Our focus must remain:

  • Defend the Union
  • Deliver Brexit
  • Restore Devolution