Wither our constitution?

I was surprised to learn reading the Supreme Court text of Lady Hale’s statement about the judgement that “Mr Mark Harper, chief whip” attended a meeting of the Privy Council at Balmoral on 28th August 2019.

I seem to recall Mark Harper ceased to be Chief Whip well before recent events.

I was also interested to read that “During a recess (as opposed to a Prorogation break) written Parliamentary Questions can be asked and must be answered.” When we broke for the last summer recess the Order Paper told us written questions submitted after the last day of session would be tabled and answered when Parliament returned in September.

The Supreme Court argued that Prorogation was different from recess though there are many similarities.

Lady Hale argued that the memorandum from Nikki da Costa which recommended prorogation left out important matters Lady Hale wished to see in it. She stated that the “effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme”.

Most of us believe in the separation of powers. We need independent judges to judge individual cases and sometimes to interpret Statute and Common Law, and all the time we are in the EU overarching EU law as well. Where Judges use their powers to interpret Statutes in ways Parliament does not like, then Parliament can of course amend the Statute to clarify the intent.

Parliament has more power to decide the law by passing Acts of Parliament and Statutory Instruments, but usually has no power to judge individual cases under the law. Parliaments develop their own relations with the Executive or government which is part of Parliament but also has independent powers to decide and spend beneath a general Parliamentary approval. By convention government proposes new laws to Parliament for Parliament’s approval, amendment or rejection.

The danger of the present situation is no-one is in charge because the government no longer has a Parliamentary majority. We see daily jousting for temporary power or control of the agenda where no-one has the authority that comes from commanding a majority of MPs. The right answer is a General election so the public can decide who they want to govern the country. Instead we have a PM being held hostage by Parliament and Courts who are seeking to force him to do the opposite of what he has promised and believes to be right.

It cannot be the right answer to the big question of whether we remain or leave the EU to have that finally determined in a court of law based on an Act of Parliament rushed through against the wishes of the PM, the government and the majority who voted Leave in the referendum. Acts of Parliament were designed to provide sound and fair law for us all, not to be political traps and political statements against a Prime Minister who has insufficient MPs to endorse his view.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

417 Comments

  1. Harpool
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:07 am | Permalink

    You lost, get over it.

    • Anonymous
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:19 am | Permalink

      Such a force for unity, this EU thing ain’t it ?

      • margaret howard
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:10 am | Permalink

        Yes it is among the 27 nations in it. The one rogue member is leaving. De Gaulle has been proved right when he vetoed our application all those years ago. 51st US state now?

        • NickC
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

          Margaret H, 51st US state?? Not for me, I want independence. It’s you who wants subservience.

        • Fred H
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

          what was he right about? Do pray tell?

          • Anonymous
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

            De Gaulle wanted us in but delayed to get the CAP sorted out.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:30 am | Permalink

      John’s attempt to represent the Courts unanimous, robust defence of parliamentary sovereignty as bad news does look like a lack of grace, yes.

      His claim that “no one is in charge” is incorrect.

      Parliament, quite rightly, is.

      The fact that the Government cannot command a majority says vastly more about the Prime Minister and his ministers than it does about Parliament.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:42 am | Permalink

        Disagree Marty.

        It says that Parliament, as ever, wishes to delegate responsibility for governing our country to a soon to be Federal states of Europe.

        The Prime Minister and his Ministers wish to leave that framework as advised by a referendum design to so advise.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:13 am | Permalink

          The UK would be out of the European Union by now if John and his like-minded in the ERG had not voted down May’s Bill.

          Whatever, the claim that “no one is in charge” is wrong.

          Under our Constitution, Parliament is sovereign, and the Court has just resoundingly emphasised that.

          Rejoice!

          Reply If all ERG members had voted for May’s Bill it would still have lost – and it was not Brexit. The Court did not reinforce Parliamentary sovereignty, it placed government under new rules.

          • Martin in Cardiff
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

            Well, the ERG de facto really includes the DUP, doesn’t it?

            You use sophistry John. It clarifies the common law, such that government now knows that it must in future not impede the sovereignty of Parliament in this way.

            Incidentally, if the prorogation was, as claimed “nothing to do with brexit”, then how can cancelling it possibly frustrate the “will of the people” to achieve that?

            If people are going to lie, then they need memories at least marginally better than goldfish, don’t they?

          • NickC
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

            Martin, Why do you keep lying about May’s treaty taking us out of the EU?

          • Edward2
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:24 pm | Permalink

            Martin your memory also fails you.
            Did you not get a leaflet from the Government way back in 2016?
            Let me remind you
            “This is a once in a generation decision. This is your decision, we will implement what you decide”

        • Hope
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:42 am | Permalink

          Professor Elkins Cambridge view is well worth a read.

          Parliament has the power to intervene/challenge the executive/Johnson’s actions by voting no confidence and demanding a general election.

          The Supreme Court should not have intervened because Parliament has ample remedies. The fact it politically does not wish to do so is not a matter for the courts.

          ThenSupreme Court unnecessarily intervened, making a power grab. It should have followed the High Court ruling which was very clear and seemed to be lost on the Supreme Court.

          The next govt should reaffirm by passing law that courts cannot intervene in such matters per the Bill of Rights. Secondly, scrap Supreme Court or make them elected Judges so the public can scrutinise them.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:32 am | Permalink

        The majority was lost due to liars getting elected to allow Leave to take place, then jumping ship. I trust the People will remember.

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

        Martin, Our Referendum vote is our sovereignty. Parliament only exercises sovereignty temporarily whilst the people lend it, in a democracy. That’s what the term “democracy” means. And because sovereignty is not Parliament’s, but only on loan, Parliament cannot give away what belongs to us, not them.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

          Where does it say that in any historic constitutional document, such as the Bill of Rights?

          Nowhere, does it?

          I suppose that you made up the answers at school too.

          • NickC
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

            Martin, Where does it say that??! It’s right in front of your eyes – MPs are only in the HoC because they are elected. It is what democracy means: demos = people; kratos = power. It seems you didn’t go to school at all.

        • bill brown
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

          Nick C

          Sovereingty in its purest form no longer exists, but I am not going to tell you why once more gain

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

        Marty

        The problem with this level of stupid , is that you fail to see that once something YOU DONT LIKE happens using the same terms you will be the first one screaming and crying.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

          The Courts have ruled many times in ways where I backed the losing side.

          I did no such thing, because I respect the rule of law and the institutions which sustain it.

          I am a patriot.

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

            Marty

            Ive saved your tweet for reuse on Nov 1st

        • bill brown
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:52 pm | Permalink

          Libertarian

          you really need to behave yourself, grow up

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

            billy

            Grow up?… this from a silly old boy who doesn’t even know his own name

      • rose
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

        The majority was lost by Mrs May in 2017. Other MPs then trickled away without facing by elections. That reflects on them, not the PMs. The most recent defectors were betraying the Government even when they were in the Cabinet and under the whip. Again, that reflects on them, not the PMs.

        This parliamentary putsch began under Mrs May and has continued under the present PM.

        It is Brexit which cannot command a majority, in either House. Again, this reflects on the MPs, as most of them stood on a manifesto to honour the referendum. Once there, they reneged.

        HMG is trying manfully to get us out of the EU and the remain parliament is trying to stop it.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

          But you – and John as far as I recall – claimed that the prorogation was “nothing to do with brexit” didn’t you?

          Do you now say that it was?

          If not, then why all the fuss?

          • Dennis Zoff
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

            Martin in Cardiff

            What did Boris Johnson do wrong? (He requested a longer period of Prorogation).
            Prior to the Supreme Court ruling, no law had been broken.

            Therefore, I ask you, which law did he break exactly prior to the legal ruling? Do you see the judiciary chasing him down?

            Again, if Johnson broke an existing law, shouldn’t he now be in prison? But he isn’t in prison; he is still Prime Minister and addressing Parliament in Westminster.

            This will be forgotten the back end of next week, and as it stands, it is business as usual.

            Gina Miller’s legal action has achieved absolutely nothing in the immediate, apart from drawing more anger from the populace and wasting time and money?

            Let the Remainers squeal…nothing has changed!

          • Anonymous
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 4:27 am | Permalink

            That’s a bloody good point, Martin.

            (Anyone got an answer ?)

            If there’s anyone making me doubt my voting Leave it’s you. Please avoid personal insults otherwise it closes people’s minds (and don’t be tempted by that open goal either !)

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

            Martin

            How many times do you need to have the same thing explained?

            The government prorogued parliament because
            1) Nothing left to talk about
            2) It has been the longest session in parliament for years
            3) We needed a Queens Speech

            It was the speaker, Labour, LibDems and rogue remainers & the supreme court who made it about Brexit , as they are still trying to stop us leaving at all

            Glad I could clear that up for you

            Anonymous

            Dont be so easily led and naive

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:32 am | Permalink

      Interesting, when you lost it appears you did not “get over it”. Instead fighting a damaging rearguard battle to undermine the advantages we had in negotiations.

      Why should we now get over it. We have as many subversive disruption techniques available to us as your side. We also have more people.

      • Leaver
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:54 am | Permalink

        I think he is making the point that both sides are just saying ‘you lost. get over it’ and it is getting us nowhere.

        Still it appears that parliament is refusing to vote through the withdrawal agreement, which is the only show in town. I am waiting for Boris to run down the clock, then present parliament with the withdrawal agreement, which they will hopefully vote for this time. Then, at last, we can get on with leaving.

        I still think the ERG and labour are to blame for this. They are defying the wishes of the 17.4 million who voted for May’s agreement.

        • a-tracy
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

          Leaver, but the Leave side didn’t lose, furthermore it elected a Tory and DUP government who both had a mandate to leave with no deal is better than a bad deal and if anything it was the DUP who insisted May’s deal was a Bad deal even though even Barwell now admits they made negotiating mistakes.

          The withdrawal agreement shouldn’t be the only show in town. If all the MPs were sincere they would vote for a general election giving the electorate their clear individual intentions this time. Leavers are not being treated as equal by our elected MPs. We are supposed to live in a representative democracy they got elected on a manifesto promise the 21 have been deceitful over.

          The ERG! Give it a rest remain MPs are to blame for this! They are defying the wishes of the 17.4 million who voted to LEAVE

        • NickC
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

          Leaver, Not one of the 17.4m voted for May’s dWA. Not least because it didn’t exist when we voted. Why do you lie about it? You know as well as I do that the dWA keeps the UK subservient to EU rules and courts, in the SM and CU, paying huge sums to the EU, and allowing them to continue plundering our fish. That’s Remain.

        • Special Powers
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:28 pm | Permalink

          “Vote through May’s Withdrawal Agreement and get on with leaving”. Hahaha!
          You either have very a strong sense of humour, or you are employed by the EU.

          Either way, shame you cannot be bothered to read and understand the WA.
          It is not leaving the EU.

          Quotes:-
          “The WA makes the UK a “Colony of the EU”.
          “It is an Agreement that only a Country defeated in War would sign”.

          But you remain blind to the facts, apparently.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

          Yet Parliament, which is representative of our views, voted against the Withdrawal Agreement three times by large majorities.
          It united all sides of the House in opposition to its content.
          The Speaker has said he will not allow it to come before the House a fourth time.
          In various polls large majorities of people say they don’t want the Withdrawal Agreement either so your last para is nonsense.

        • John Hatfield
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

          Remain a member of the European Union
          Leave the European Union.

          ‘17.4 million who voted for May’s agreement.’
          I don’t think so.

        • Oggy
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

          I nor anyone I know voted for May’s putrid agreement as it is not Brexit.

        • Special Powers
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

          “I still think the ERG and labour are to blame for this. They are defying the wishes of the 17.4 million who voted for May’s agreement”.

          If you repeat a blatant lie often enough you begin to believe it yourself and other fools may also do so.

          It is exceedingly odd, that all eligible voters were asked to chose between “Leave or Remain”.
          For some reason, your unique and individual voting slip said:-

          “Remain” or “Vote for “May’s Agreement”.

          My…oh my!…How the Remainers twist the truth, to suit their cause of stopping a proper Brexit from happening.

        • Dennis Zoff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

          Leaver….are you Andy incognito?

    • Arthur Wrightiss
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:32 am | Permalink

      “You lost, get over it “. ??
      I assume you are referring to the 2016 referendum.

    • Ben
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:34 am | Permalink

      Bright and early for the vested interests, as ever, I see!

    • John Fitzgerald
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:09 am | Permalink

      What like the remoaners (you included by the look of it) have not yet got over loosing the referendum? Get your own house in order first. This is yet another trick to stop the wishes of 17,4 million people!

    • NickC
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

      Harpool, No, we won. Get over it.

  2. Garland
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:10 am | Permalink

    You are right to say that the danger of the present situation is no-one is in charge because the government no longer has a Parliamentary majority, and that is why you should be cheering the Supreme Court’s excellent judgment. The Supreme Court cannot deliver a General Election, but it can make sure the government does not close down Parliament just because Parliament won’t do what the government wants. And that, quite simply, is what the Supreme Court did. Well done the judges!

    • Hope
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:53 am | Permalink

      The ruling was perverse. The highest court in England and Wales deemed it not judicable. This was more a policy decision by the Supreme Court. The decision has created far worse consequences for democracy than it ever attempted to resolve.

      The Supreme Court (a creation of socialist Blaire) decision today marks a clear need for elected judges. They need to be scrutinised and vetted for suitability. Judiciary cannot be allowed to sabotage the will of the people. They are appointed not elected. By whom? Who deems them suitable? If their decisions affects our lives and society we deserve to be able to scrutinise, question, vet and elect them.

      We see through the likes of Keir Starmer- who was head of CPS- that some of those in the legal profession have very strong political motivation. Many MPs are formerly from the legal profession. To suggest they do not have likes dislikes or prejudice is for the fairies. Therefore to suggest the court is blind is a complete nonsense.

      We have seen sham inquiries led by people from the legal profession. Again, they need to be scrutinised and vetted by the people not appointed by the govt of the day that might seek an interest to the outcome.

      Brexit has been an eye opening experience. It has laid bare that change must be brought about in HoC, HoL, MPs code of conduct in every aspect, to the public sector, civil service and judiciary. Our democracy demands it.

    • NickC
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

      Garland, Parliament is not doing what we want as expressed in out vote to Leave. And that decision was provided by . . . . . . Parliament. Which promised to implement what we voted for. And which would have implemented Remain like a shot, if we had voted that way, even by 50% plus 1. It is doubly ironic that you extol UK Parliamentary sovereignty only to see Parliament give away that sovereignty to the EU.

      • Garland
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

        Do tell me what you voted for. To vote to leave with no deal, to vote to leave with a deal like Norway’s, to vote to leave with a deal like Canada’s? Parliament cannot possibly implement what you voted for until you choose an option. We are in this mess exactly because Leavers in 2016 refused to tell us what Leave meant – except that it would all be very easy and we’d hold all the cards

        • NickC
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

          Garland, 17.4m of us voted to Leave the EU. Why the problem with a Primary School level comprehension?

          Norway is partly in the EU – it signed up to the EEA Agreement so is subject to the EU’s single market rules. That isn’t leaving, it’s part way in.

          Fully leaving, with or without a trade deal, provided the EU has no control over the UK as a state, is Leave. I would accept either.

          • Martin in Cardiff
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

            Farage cited Norway as an exemplar, as to how great life would be outside the European Union publicly at least six times.

            Owen Paterson advocated EEA membership.

            Daniel Hannan said “no one is thinking of leaving the single market”

          • Edward2
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

            However the EU has said it will not allow those options for the UK
            So your post is irrelevant Martin.

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:28 pm | Permalink

            Martin, Your claim about Hannan’s view has been debunked before. Hannan was talking about access to the EU’s single market, not membership of it.

            Farage was comparing our current membership unfavourably to the Norway (EEA) option – because it would take us further out of the EU than now. It is not his favoured outcome.

            As for Owen Patterson I quote his letter to Jeremy Corbyn: “At Prime Minister’s Questions today, you told the House that I had once said: ‘Only a madman would leave the Single Market.’ I did not say this.” Patterson explained that only a madman would vacate the market – that is, the UK would continue to have access to the markets of France, Italy, Germany, etc, but not be a member of the EU’s single market (see Shropshire Star).

            Martin, all three of your claims are false. So you’re either strangely gullible to Remain propaganda, or you’re lying. Again.

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

            Martin

            Would you care to list claims by every Tom Dick & Harry during the referendum?

            None of the people you quote where actually part of the Official Leave Campaign

            Why dont you post quotes by Nick Clegg, David Cameron, George Osbourne etc

            Yours is a pointless argument

            If I was a remainer I would be livid at ho the official remain camp blew the campaign, blew an opportunity to get a good result AFTER the referendum by having the worlds biggest, longest and stupidest hissy fit

      • bill brown
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:51 pm | Permalink

        Nick C

        Even more nonsense as we do not even know what Parliament ahs given away yet

        • NickC
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

          Bill Brown, See Lisbon. Doh . . .

  3. Pominoz
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:13 am | Permalink

    Sir John,

    This whole situation stinks! The information you give in your first three paragraphs adds to the perceived stench.

    The end result must, without fail, be a quick and clean break from a failing EU. I do, however, very much like the thought of an appeal to the ECJ of the Supreme Court decision. Hopefully the timescale involved would see us out before a judgment could be made.

    Delightful irony, but possibly whimsical thinking on my part.

    The nightmare continues.

    • Helena
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:26 am | Permalink

      There is no such thing as an appeal to the ECJ from the Supreme Court. You hate the EU but you don’t understand the first thing about it

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:43 am | Permalink

        That depends on precisely what is meant by “appeal”.

        https://www.supremecourt.uk/about/the-supreme-court-and-europe.html

        “References to the Court of Justice of the European Union

        Like other final courts, the UKSC is, in the areas of European law in which the United Kingdom has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), under the duty imposed by Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to ask the CJEU to give preliminary rulings concerning:

        the interpretation of the Treaties; and
        the validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the Union;

        where such a question is raised in proceedings before it and it considers that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to give judgment.

        Where an application for permission to appeal raises such a question, the UKSC does not, when considering whether in the light of that question to grant permission or to make a reference to the CJEU, apply a test of whether the question is of general public importance.

        The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is a member of the Network of the Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union.”

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

          A pity this is still in moderation.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 11:30 am | Permalink

            Especially as it is the definitive statement on the subject from the Supreme Court itself.

      • Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:37 am | Permalink

        Helena – and you do, I suppose?
        Perhaps someone who lives a few thousand miles away can see it far more clearly than someone in thrall to it.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

        Helena….a point of fact, since you indicate that you are an expert.
        Can I ( getting crowd funding, or perhaps from a dubious financial group) appeal the S.Court decision with the ECJ? I have been lead to believe that the ECJ was the higher? Lately everybody finds ways to appeal all sorts of decisions and often succeeds.

        • Helena
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:19 pm | Permalink

          No, Fred, you can’t. The ECJ deals with EU law. Our Supreme Court deals with our British law, which is what yesterday was all about. If someone has been telling you the ECJ is higher, they have not been honest with you. They deal with different things – ECJ/ EU, Supreme Court/UK

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

            Helena, UK law must conform to EU law. That means whatever the CJEU decides, the UK must obey.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:33 am | Permalink

      As I say, there is no more such a thing as a quick, clean break from the European Union than there is a neat and tidy train crash, a pretty disembowelment, or a mess-free oil refinery explosion.

      You have been sold a fantasy.

      • Hope
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:56 am | Permalink

        MiC, Utter drivel.

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

        Martin, Very clearly it is not such a “fantasy” as you fantasise, or exaggerate. Brexit is not a crash, nor a disembowelment, nor an explosion, it is simply a change of government – something we were used to every 5 years or so in the past.

        We know that being out of the EU is fine because 165 states in the rest of the world are not in the EU, and do as well as you would expect from their other politics (ie: the Anglosphere does very well). Nor need the transition be difficult.

        • bill brown
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

          Nick C

          I am afraid your generalisations of 165 other nations most of them not in Europe does not serve your argument particularly well and I am sure you know better , as well

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

            Bill brown, Why not?

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

            Billy hans

            of those 165 USA, China , India and Brazil

            Thats the worlds 1st 2nd 6th and 7th largest economies , what does being European have to do with it? We live in a GLOBAL trading world.

            Although its quite funny that the UN miost successful nations include in the top 5 3 European countries none of whom are in the EU

            Youre supposed to be a strategic business analyst , youre appallingly bad at it.

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

        Martin in Cardiff

        What you mean just like East Germany when the Berlin Wall was in place. Or Maybe Hotel California, you can check in but you cant leave

        Keep going Marty you are selling it to us … no you really are

        ( todays poll 60% now want to leave immediately)

        ps As always of course you are totally wrong. We leave as per EU Article 50 and trade under WTO rules. Really really really clean , simple and easy

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

          Ask all the people who have already lost their jobs thanks to the weak pound etc. and who are struggling to provide for their families whether it is clean and simple eh?

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

            Martin, Yet employment numbers keep going up . . . .

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

            Marty

            Who are these people then? There are 812,000 unfilled full time jobs in the UK today . Stop making it up and talking drivel

        • bill brown
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

          Libertarian

          Easy yes, simple conversion not and you know it as well

      • dixie
        Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

        You are repeating yourself Andy

    • villaking
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:38 am | Permalink

      Pominoz, the ECJ has no jurisdiction over matters of national law. It is one of the great lies of the Leave campaign that the ECJ has jurisdiction over all UK matters. A very clever lie, you fell for it. Sadly, many millions of others did too

      • Hope
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:57 am | Permalink

        The ECJ is the highest court not the Supreme Court.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

          Only in the limited areas of law covered by the Lisbon Treaty.

          National constitutional matters are not covered, along with most other law.

          • NickC
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

            Martin, False. All UK law must conform to EU law because EU law has primacy.

          • Martin in Cardiff
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

            OK Nick, why don’t YOU try to appeal to the ECJ on behalf of the Government then? Go on, get crowdfunding eh?

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

            Martin, Whilst the “ECJ” (CJEU) is the highest court in the EU (and hence the highest in the UK), it is also a political court, always advancing EU power. And therefore not fair in the English understanding of the term.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:06 am | Permalink

        Basically the ECJ has jurisdiction over UK matters where it chooses to interpret the EU treaties to give it jurisdiction. That may not be “all” UK matters, now, but equally it could be “all” if the ECJ so chose, and there would be nobody to gainsay that other than the member states making a treaty change to effectively overturn the court’s decision.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

          The European Council and the European Union Parliament would not permit the ECJ arbitrarily to extend its remit.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

            They have already done so in the past.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

        In that case what use is the ECJ? EU citizens have their own national laws – why have a ECJ? – – More jobs for the (tens of thousands) boys!

        • villaking
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

          Because if you have a single market of 27 (currently 28) member states with one set of rules, there needs to be a sole arbiter unconnected to any single member. A bit like the UN’s ICJ in The Hague

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

            Villaking, No there does not have to be a centralised, dirigiste, single set of rules. The market could work by mutual recognition.

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

        Villaking, EU law has primacy over UK law (Declaration 17, Lisbon Treaty), so the ECJ does indeed have jurisdiction over UK law. And so all UK law has to comply with EU law and hence ECJ rulings. You obviously have no talent for subtlety. Your lie is not so clever, and only Remains have fallen for it.

        • villaking
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

          If you really believe that the ECJ can involve itself with yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling about unlawful prorogation, why do you think the government has not even raised the possibility of appealing it to the ECJ?

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

            On what grounds?

          • NickC
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

            Villaking, Strawman. I did not mention the Supreme Court ruling about prorogation.

        • bill brown
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

          Nick C

          More nonsense stick to the facts as most of do it would serve your argument better, your generalisations undermine your arguments

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

            Bill Brown, What about some facts from you, rather than incoherent rambling opinions?

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

        villaking

        Er … wrong

        The European Court of Justice, is the supreme court of the European Union in matters of European Union law. As a part of the Court of Justice of the European Union it is tasked with interpreting EU law and ensuring its equal application across all EU member states.

        To do that it would in certain circumstances override national laws if they aren’t in line with EU laws

        Youre welcome

        • Helena
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

          Wrong, libertarian. The ECJ has no power to override national law. It is the job of national courts – OUR courts – to decide on cases where EU law and national law come into conflict. The job of the ECJ is only to decide what EU law means, it is after all the EU’s court

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

            You’re the one who’s wrong, Helena.

          • NickC
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

            Wrong, Helena. EU law has primacy over UK law. So the ECJ does have power to override UK law, or provide guidance to the lower UK courts, where our law conflicts with EU law.

          • a-tracy
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

            The ECJ does decide on whether equality rules have been broken and I feel that Leave voters have not been treated equally by the current UK MPs. They told us one thing to get elected and certainly the 21 Conservative MPs, one of which was my MP, voting against Johnson’s government have gone against equality of the Leave voters intent to Leave. The UK parliament has fallen at the equality hurdle at the ECJ before when not giving bus passes to men and women at the same age, then insurance discounts for women because as a group they made less claims was found to be unequal, so how do our current MPs square their unequal treatment of Leave -v- remain in the Benn Bill?

          • Dennis Zoff
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 1:28 am | Permalink

            Helena

            UK law vs ECJ supremacy

            You may get away with your comments in the Guardian, but here most are somewhat more erudite!

            May I suggest you be more diligent with your research, else it makes you look foolish!

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 6:01 pm | Permalink

            Helena

            The above quote is taken directly from the ECJ website

            Bet you feel a right stupid berk now

      • acorn
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

        I haven’t found a commenter on this “no-deal leaver” site that knows the difference between Common Law and Parliamentary Statutes! You have to blame the collapse of the education system post-1966. How otherwise could 17.4 million citizens have been conned into voting for Brexit?

        A very wise politician once told me, as a then callow youth; the more you hear a political activist rant about democracy and sovereignty, the more that activist doesn’t want to get anywhere near either.

        • Anonymous
          Posted September 26, 2019 at 4:20 am | Permalink

          One of my A levels is in law, actually.

          • Anonymous
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 4:21 am | Permalink

            Ner. So there !

        • Edward2
          Posted September 26, 2019 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

          Ah acorn with the cliché remainer snobby slur that only they knew what they were voting for.
          The rich metropolitan elite love the EU and look down on us all.

        • NickC
          Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

          Acorn, Since Andy at least is convinced that all 17.4 million Leave voters are pensioners (and you have not disagreed with him), that means Leaves comply with the better education obtained prior to 1966 which you claim existed.

    • Old person
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:40 am | Permalink

      I made a short post at the beginning of this month and asked the question:-
      “On a serious note, as anything is possible now, if Article 50 is eventually withdrawn would the UK be liable to compensate the other EU27 for their outlay preparing for a no deal Brexit?”

      Nobody answered this question.

      It now turns out as the Daily Express reported yesterday:-
      “THE EUROPEAN UNION is demanding payment for an extra £14billion from the UK to cover the bloc’s no deal Brexit contingency plans, a Eurocrat has revealed.”

      Is a quote from an unnamed Eurocrat possibly fake news?

      It is strange how such small amounts of money can ruin friendships.

  4. Adrian Lloyd
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:15 am | Permalink

    Why is it only Remainers who challenge decisions in the courts? Is there nothing in the behaviour of the Speaker or this rogue parliament that can be challenged? What about the rights of the 17.4million of us who voted to leave?

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:38 am | Permalink

      If you can find something that Remain backers have done which apparently breaks the law, the take them to Court.

      Ah, there’s the rub…

      Parliament can never be “rogue”. It is the supreme authority as to what is right. It is sovereign. That is for what you voted, remember?

      • Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:35 am | Permalink

        Sidestepping the question again, MinC?

      • Mockbeggar
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:01 am | Permalink

        Since ‘convention’ now seems to have the force as an Act of Parliament, could not the government challenge the Act in the High and Supreme Courts that instructed the PM not to leave the EU without a deal?

        This seems to me to be just as much a breach of ‘convention’ that the Government decides International relations and negotiations, not the House, as was the PM’s prorogation of Parliament for longer than usual.

      • Iain Moore
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:07 am | Permalink

        Bercow allowing Parliament to take control to initiate legislation and instruct the Executive on treaty negotiations.

      • rose
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:14 am | Permalink

        Foreign rule has a habit of diving a conquered country. It also ensnares and corrupts the ruling class first.

        • rose
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:14 am | Permalink

          dividing, sorry.

      • Original Richard
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:21 am | Permalink

        Parliament is only sovereign for the Parliamentary term after which it needs to be re-elected by the country for another term.

        Although Parliament is sovereign (or should be if it weren’t for the fact that we have given away major parts of our sovereignty to the EU) it does not have the right to give away all our sovereignty to a foreign power.

        Only the people can do that and the referendum decided that giving away our sovereignty to the EU was no longer acceptable.

        • NickC
          Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

          Original Richard, Very well explained. Even remains should be able to understand.

      • Anonymous
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

        Martin in Cardiff.

        It’s important to note that The Bus issue was thrown out of court and that Aaron Banks has no case to answer – despite Remain’s predilection for taking people to court who think differently to them.

        Boris broke a law that didn’t exist, so the Supreme Court effectively created one for him to have broken retrospectively. Then they usurped the Queen and have now ended her constitutional role as Monarch.

        I doubt you will find a Leaver on that panel of judges. The court itself was created by federalist and republican Tony Blair.

        The referendum result has been nothing if highly illuminating about the EU and about the ruling elite and about the value of our democracy itself.

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

        Martin

        Well for a start 3 of the remain campaign groups were found guilty of illegal funding of the remain campaign. Next the Speaker broke the same unwritten constitution as prorogment by overriding the governments right to set the business order of parliament .

        Parliament has gone rogue

        ps The government has no need to take them to court. The squealing on October 31st is going to be hysterically funny , you heard it here first

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

        Martin, Don’t be silly, MPs such as Anna Soubry were not born with “supreme authority” like some ancient king anointed by God. MPs in a democracy derive their “authority” from the people. Soubry would not even be in the HoC if she had not been voted there by the electorate.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

          Strange, Cox said that I was right in the House not long ago.

          That is not what I said, is it?

          • NickC
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

            Martin, What? – that Anna Soubry would be in the HoC even if she had not been elected?? I doubt very much that Cox said that.

            MPs only have authority because they have been elected by the people. So where does their authority come from again? – themselves (they’d like to think so, of course)? – or the voters?

        • Fred H
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

          Ah..The poor people of Broxstow who voted for a Leave manifesto Conservative, only to find she was lying. Jumped ship when her views changed (revealed in flash of light?) to the rag, tag and bobtail ‘party’ who sometimes don’t remember their name. Never mind – those voters will put the cross somewhere else next time.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:50 am | Permalink

      What would be the point of taking any pro leave case to justices such as these 11? All eleven are surely strong remainers. There is no other explanation for their bizarre hugely dangerous and very damaging ruling.

      David Starkey has it right on Iain Dale yesterday.

      Another David Starkie also has it right on How to help children deal with eco-anxiety in Telegraph letters on Tuesday.

      “SIR – The best way to counter children’s eco-anxiety (Features, September 21) is to teach the history of climate change. Starting with the Ice Age, study could progress to the late Roman warming period and then cover cooling in the Dark Ages, the violent storms of the late 13th and early 14th centuries, and the series of mini ice ages that followed. “

      The Climate (and indeed sea levels) have always changed and always will do so just get over it children and indeed adults! The richer we are the better we will adapt and cope with any changes. Time to grow up.

    • Iain Moore
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:50 am | Permalink

      Because the Judiciary would come over with a severe case of ‘nothing to see here’ and ‘nothing to do with us’ , as Stewart Wheeler found when he took the Labour Government to court when failing to honour their election promise for a referendum on Lisbon.

    • Pete S
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:00 am | Permalink

      Tilbrook challenged the way May modified the date. The courts said it was without merit. Again I disagree with the courts. The Miller case established that if you are going to change current law; then you need parl permission first. May in gaining an extension, got the extension first before she got permission. Cart before the horse. Cannot see how it was without merit as it directly contradicts the Miller ruling.

    • Paul Bishop
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:03 am | Permalink

      It is entirely predictable that the judicial / establishment system drag their heels in processing a case which doesn’t suit their agenda and then treat it as vexatious or without merit – Tilbrook vs being a current example.

    • The Prangwizard
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:28 am | Permalink

      It has been tried. The courts and judiciary don’t allow it. It ought to be clear that there is no purpose appealing in such a way as if a legitimate impartial authority existed.

      Our ways have been taken from us. Welcome to a liberal fascist dictatorship.

    • Bob
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:36 am | Permalink

      “Why is it only Remainers who challenge decisions in the courts”

      Robin Tilbrook tried to challenge Mrs May’s power to extend Article 50 under Prerogative Powers without a Parliamentary vote, but the court wouldn’t even allow a hearing and the case was dismissed as “totally without merit”, despite Mr Tilbrook’s legal advice that the case was very arguable.

      The reason you’ve never heard about this case is that the MSM have hushed it up because it’s very embarrassing to the Remoaners (which includes the judiciary).

      The tricky manoeuvres by the legal establishment to delay and frustrate Mr Tilbrook’s attempts to get a hearing lay bare their pro EU bias.

  5. Dominic
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:18 am | Permalink

    The British Judiciary has become a political player though that was always the intention of the 1997 PM and his project to construct a client state that protects both Labour and the EU’s influence in our constitution

    Yesterday’s decision was a direct challenge to the Monarch’s authority and role within our constitution and to the very foundations of our ever weakening democracy

    Judicial activism is a serious threat to the ability of the British people to assert democratic control over the actions of those who choose to govern over us

    Judges and the administrative class represent unelected power. They must be brought under constitutional control.

    Those celebrating yesterday’s ruling are a disgrace to our nation, its constitution and a poignant that there are those who genuinely regard democracy as meaningless and troublesome

    • Dominic
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:20 am | Permalink

      ‘poignant reminder’

      • cynic
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:51 am | Permalink

        Yes, our top judges have now involved themselves in the biggest political battle of recent times. They have even managed to involve the Queen!

    • David J
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:52 am | Permalink

      This is a very good and well balanced commentary.

    • Timaction
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:36 am | Permalink

      Indeed. They invented political correctness to deal with right minded people, indulge the left and minority groups! They then ensured all selection processes reinforced that view in all public services, health, civil serpents and quangos which leaves us in the mess we are currently in with inadequate people in charge!

  6. Ian!
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:20 am | Permalink

    Going forward, it is becoming a trend that MP’S will lie to their electorate to get their job, then fight them tooth and nail to stroke personal egos

    Making and interpreting laws to suit personal egos while also ensuring you are not held accountable or responsible is not democracy. That is not a Parliment representing their electorate that is Parliament fighting the people.

    A General election is required to restore the status quo. The problem there is so many in the HoC have shown themselves as out and egotistical liars that they know an election sees them disappear into obscurity

    It is the people that are being held hostage, treated with disrespect and kicked in the teeth

    • hefner
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:00 am | Permalink

      Has anyone looked at JR’s comments as pre-election statements? Seen like this, given the slowly changing composition of his Wokingham constituency, one can understand some recent more “centrist” positions together with his more usual right-wing comments.

      Reply I have always favoured decent budgets for schools and the NHS in my constituency!

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

        you are of course correct. The voters here are changing slowly. Why? Well many voters are commuters into London, where they are paid good salaries and bonuses as a result of financial and european trade. Whether to Leave or Remain has been swung according to self-interest, the Leave view includes ability to develop outside of the EU involving a degree of risk. The Remain view is narrow and wants to continue with personal security above all else. Leave looks to the future with pride, Remain has no courage and wants to be under the foot of unelected, foul-mouthed career opportunists. Sir John’s predecessor must be restless in his grave to imagine the poor integrity by so many constituents.

    • bigneil
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:11 am | Permalink

      Agreed – when the Polling Station doors close, the manifestos get shredded.
      As for the General election – would it improve things – or just replace the bad apples with yet more of the same. Nepotism is rife.

  7. Ian Wragg
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:20 am | Permalink

    Parliament and the Judiciary versus the people.
    There are more of us and we will win.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:51 am | Permalink

      “The people” means all of us.

      That is, Labour voters, Lib Dem voters, Green, SNP, Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru, etc. and the young who cannot yet vote, three million fellow Europeans from the rest of the European Union, besides Tory, tbp, and DUP voters.

      Yes, there are more of us than there are of you, and Parliament will reflect this.

      You will wait your turn.

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

        Martin, Many of the Labour, LibDem and Green voters voted to Leave. Parliament set the Referendum rules and passed the decision to us. The people by the requisite majority (at least 50% plus 1) voted to Leave (by 52:48). There are more of us than there are of you. Parliament does not reflect this.

      • Edward2
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

        In current polls the Conservatives are 15 points ahead equivalent to a 75 seat majority.
        Your fantasy political landscape doesn’t exist in reality.
        There are rules for general elections.

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

        Martin: I believe in parliamentary democracy

        also Martin We will give the vote to any foreign national in return for free benefits and free access to the NHS , we will also allow children the vote

        OK mate, if you say so

        ps Corbyn will be obliterated at the next election

    • MPC
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:52 am | Permalink

      How can we win? We won the referendum battle of ideas and utterly lost the Brexit war. Government is now obliged to seek an extension from the EU. What’s to stop them really twisting the knife? They could easily impose say a 5 year extension with the WA one of only 2 other options the other being full membership – Euro, Schengen and the rest. Prepare for more MP comments that the referendum was but a ‘snapshot ‘. The Tory party has always prided itself on being a ‘broad church’ so there will not be a mainstream party that will again promise to take us out of the EU. We truly live in an elective dictatorship.

      • Andy
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:37 pm | Permalink

        You can ‘win’ by delivering what you said you would in the 2016 referendum – which is all the benefits of EU membership with none of the costs.

        You can catch some unicorns at the same time if you like.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 26, 2019 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

          I can’t remember MPC promising all the benefits of EU membership with none of the costs.
          Also I never heard the PM or Chancellor or Boris saying it.
          I’ve just looked at the Leaflet the government sent me and it isn’t in there either.

          Maybe your memory is fooling you young Andy.

        • NickC
          Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

          Andy, We don’t want all the “benefits” of the EU. That’s the point.

    • hefner
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:08 am | Permalink

      So is it “Aux armes citoyens!” ?

      Have you ever possibly considered that as the good Mrs T might have said “There is no such thing as “ the people, “only individuals” and that as thinking individuals there could be more than one way for us to look at what is presently happening in the UK.

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

        Hefner, What is currently happening in the UK is that we, as individuals, voted in the Referendum lawfully set up by Parliament; the result being a decisive win for Leave. Parliament promised to implement our decision. And that’s what we expect. That’s not happening, as you know. So why should we honour your voting? You really don’t know what you’re doing, do you?

    • bill brown
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

      Ian Wragg

      more nonsense again

  8. EarleyRiser
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:28 am | Permalink

    Do you mean Wither or should it be Whither in your headline?

    • Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:30 am | Permalink

      Obviously it’s a deliberate play on words. Don’t you ever do it yourself?
      Ah yes – ”Earley”, perhaps?

    • sm
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:32 am | Permalink

      You haven’t become accustomed to our host’s quiet sense of humour yet!

  9. Mick
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:28 am | Permalink

    Mr Johnson should stop playing by the Queensbury rules and take the gloves off , we are regrettably still in the dreaded Eu so turn the table on the smug face remoaners and appeal the Supreme Court decision or better still take it to the ECJ , tick tock

    • Helena
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:27 am | Permalink

      As above. There are literally no circumstances in which the question whether the PM acted unlawfully in closing down Parliament can go anywhere near the ECJ. It is none of the EU’s business, it is our constitution and our sovereignty. You hate the EU. You don’t know what the EU is.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:26 am | Permalink

        Your claim “It is none of the EU’s business” is obviously inconsistent with the EU treaties to which the UK is a party:

        “DRAWING INSPIRATION from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which have developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law”

        “CONFIRMING their attachment to the principles of liberty, democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and of the rule of law”

        “The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law … “

        • graham1946
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

          All of that is for individual people, not governments as an entity, hence the words, ‘human person, human rights, human dignity’.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

            And “democracy”, and “rule of law”?

      • Hope
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:04 am | Permalink

        The Supreme Court listed the case as a Brexit Judicial review, contrary to what Lady Hale claimed. The title was retrospectively changed to Prorogue Judical review. Rather odd for the Supreme Court to retrospectively change the tile of the case after the inconsistency was pointed out.

        If the Supreme Court wants to overrule the ballot box it is time for the judges to be subject of the ballot box.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

        Helena ….then point me to the law that covers it. Surely all lawyers, judges, Supreme Court judges will make the same decision, when tested on it? But they didn’t !!!!!

  10. Denis Cooper
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:30 am | Permalink

    I said that it would be a bad mistake to install Boris Johnson as Prime Minister.

    http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2019/05/31/the-leadership-election/#comment-1025295

    We are totally scuppered, unless and until he can be forced to resign.

    Now that the Speaker has agreed that anti-Brexit MPs can take control of the Commons Order Paper whenever they choose there is nothing to prevent this Parliament prolonging its life indefinitely, is there?

    Until such time as the Article 50 notice was finally revoked, even if that required a new Act of Parliament to amend the Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    The only possible way to defeat them is for Boris Johnson to resign – as he should in any case do, because he is not a fit and proper person to be Prime Minister – and recommend to the Queen that the Leader or the Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, should be invited to try his hand at governing the country without a Commons majority.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:48 am | Permalink

      If Jeremy Corbyn and John MacDonnell get their hands on the means to appoint placemen we should be worried even if they can not pass legislation through their minority in Parliament.

      It is a mess though.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:43 am | Permalink

        It is a mess created by three successive Tory Prime Ministers.

        With the present Speaker MPs can demand repeated and longer Article 50 extensions, finally with revocation of the notice when the EU gets fed up with being messed about, and if necessary even deferring the general election beyond 2022. It would require the consent of the Lords, but that would be no problem.

    • Mark B
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:17 am | Permalink

      So who would you have had to be PM ? And how differently would you have played it ?

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

        MARK – – difficult to argue with the observation of a mess created by the previous 3 PMs.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

        Dominic Raab, as I said at the time.

    • Glenn Vaughan
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:17 am | Permalink

      “…the Leader of the Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, should be invited to try his hand at governing the country without a Commons majority.” Denis Cooper

      Get well soon Denis!

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

        Silly comment, presumably because you have no sensible suggestion.

        • Glenn Vaughan
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

          If you want a suggestion then why don’t you write another letter to your local comic? I’m sure you’ll feel much better.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

            Another silly comment …

    • Dan
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:38 am | Permalink

      In what way do you believe that Jeremy Corbyn is a fit and proper person to lead the country? everything he has said and done in his parliamentary career is to support those who seek to bring it down.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

        That he is not a suitable person to lead the country would quickly become apparent, so his leadership would be shortlived.

    • Al
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

      “The only possible way to defeat them is for Boris Johnson to resign”

      Or through a General Election, which Mr Corbyn and his ilk are determined to deny us.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

        -what would happen should all the Cabinet refuse to attend H of C?

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

          For a start, in that case Boris Johnson would be even further from commanding a majority in the Commons.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

        So how do you propose to get that general election?

      • Martin in Cardiff
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

        Three elections, a referendum, and two Tory leadership circuses in four years would be rather wearisome.

        I applaud their mercy.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

          I bet you do with Labour declining towards third place behind the Lib Dems with Conservatives 15 points ahead in several recent polls

  11. Shirley
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:35 am | Permalink

    This farce has demonstrated all too well how MP’s can lie with impunity to the people who elect them. They were voted in on the basis of their promises to respect the referendum result and their manifestos to Leave the EU. The term of ‘honourable’ in Parliament is a complete misnomer.

    Cannot we impeach all these Remainer MP’s who lied to the electorate in order to get elected? Dishonesty should not entitle anyone to have power over the electorate.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:26 am | Permalink

      Indeed it can hardly be called a democracy if we vote every five years (often for the lesser of two evils) and then often for someone who just does the complete opposite of what they promised to do at the election.

    • Pete S
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:56 am | Permalink

      I searched the court rulings for the word lie. It does not appear, where did you find that statement ??

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

        Pete S, I searched Shirley’s comment for the word “court”. It does not appear, where did you find that statement ??

    • Robert Riley
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:01 am | Permalink

      Of course this could all be a very shrewd move by Boris and Cummings to totally discredit all those politicians on the remain side so that come a GE the public being so disgusted with their antics will vote en-masse for anyone as long as they are leavers. Thus for the first time in more than 50 years tipping the balance in Parliament from pro remain to pro leave.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

        Robert – nobody has to do anything. The remain MPs are doing an exemplary job discrediting themselves without our help.

  12. Dominic
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:36 am | Permalink

    Disband the Supreme Court.

    Pass new legislation to curb the power of the British judiciary.

    Pass new legislation to de-politicise and limit the actions and influence all non-political activities of the State

    Brexit has assisted in smoking out those people who resent democratic interference. It has shed a light on those who represent a serious danger to this nation’s democratic structures

    • Fred H
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:39 am | Permalink

      Dom – – and all this might be possible if only an arrangement could be agreed to produce a majority of Conservatives and Brexit Party.

      Else we witness a collapse of government and possible Bill passing until a future GE.
      A shambles unprecedented?

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:49 am | Permalink

      Oh do calm down.

    • Mark B
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:24 am | Permalink

      Brexit has assisted in smoking out those people who resent democratic interference.

      This was predicted by someone on his blog as far back as 2012. He saw the need to codify our constitution and to separate the Legislature from the Executive, and to make the people sovereign. He also saw direct democracy as a means of taking power from those that have, and give them to us. BREXIT has made people more interested in politics and how and who governs.

  13. APL
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:49 am | Permalink

    Well done David Cameron, and your ‘fixed term parliament’ act abomination.

    Another so called Tory, that didn’t know what he was doing. Destroyed our constitution, all to buy off the corrupt Lib-Dems.

    At some future time, perhaps we should pass a law banning advertising executives from Parliament.

    • Sea Warrior
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:11 am | Permalink

      Failed advertising executives, I think you mean.

    • Mark B
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:26 am | Permalink

      To be fair to him he could not have foretold what would happen and, both government and parliament have had ample opportunity to change it. Plus, it was a condition set out by the LibDems in 2010.

    • EarleyRiser
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:23 am | Permalink

      I think it’s the Eton and Oxford combination that we need to avoid for a generation or ten.

  14. DaveM
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:53 am | Permalink

    So …. what can be done about it Sir John? Effectively there is a bunch of people who are acting against the mandates upon which they were elected but not seeking to be legitimately re-elected on a changed mandate. So what can be done without violent rebellion?

    • Dan
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:39 am | Permalink

      A General Election, unfortunately they are not allowing that.

  15. Sea Warrior
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:56 am | Permalink

    I remain surprised that the government didn’t do more to kill off the Benn Bill.

    • /ikh
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:11 am | Permalink

      Agreed! There was a chance that the bill could have been stopped in the Lords by filibustering. I can only conclude that the PM was not concerned by the passing of the Bill.

      /ikh

      • rose
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:09 am | Permalink

        There was an agreement made in the Lords at 1.30 am to call off the filibuster in return for an election on Oct 15. The Opposition, who daily tell us the PM cannot be trusted, reneged.

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

        The Benn bill is a nonsense , you can drive a coach and horses through it.

        Stand back and watch

    • APL
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:29 am | Permalink

      Sea Warrior: “I remain surprised that the government didn’t do more to kill off the Benn Bill.”

      This ‘leaver’ administration, wants to stay. Simples!

      • Mark B
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:27 am | Permalink

        +1

      • Bob
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:46 am | Permalink

        “This ‘leaver’ administration, wants to stay. Simples!”

        That’s pretty obvious, it’s all a bit of panto to make it look as if Boris tried his best.

      • beresford
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:29 am | Permalink

        Perhaps Cumming knew there was a significant chance that Remainer judges would overturn prorogation, in which case the Benn bill would continue through the Lords with great celebration by the anti-democrats.

    • Dan
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:40 am | Permalink

      Boris unfortunately trusted Corbyn to support a GE if the bill passed. Corbyn reneged.

  16. Fedupsoutherner
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:04 am | Permalink

    The whole process since the referendum has been a stitch up of colossal proportions. This once proud and independent nation has been reduced to something you would associate with a Banana Republic. Boris must hold fast for all that is decent. We must get our democratic rights back. A GE must be held. The public must be informed of the corrupt goings on and be given their rights back again.

    • JoolsB
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      Totally agree Fedupsoutherner. Whatever some on here say about Boris, he is all that stands between democracy and all those parliamentarians trying to stop Brexit. No wonder they are crying for his resignation and trying to sully his name. In their quest to stay joined to their masters in the EU, they are making us look a laughing stock in the eyes of the world. Obviously they don’t want a GE because these most undemocratic of MPs we’ve ever had don’t want to give us the chance to kick ’em out on their backsides. They don’t know the meaning of democracy and this in the so called Mother of all Parliaments.

    • bigneil
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:17 am | Permalink

      A Banana Republic? – -well, we are getting the people, and with Climate Change we will get the temperatures as well.

  17. Oggy
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:05 am | Permalink

    and it’s all because the majority of MP’s refuse to accept the referendum result, and are using every trick in the book to overturn it.
    The damage they have done to the reputation of the UK and UK democracy is unforgivable it’s no wonder the UK Parliament is now a laughing stock, how can our politicians preach the democratic process around the world when they make a mockery of democracy in our own Parliament. They are a complete and utter disgrace to the country.

    • Robert Riley
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:08 am | Permalink

      Agreed, but at least we know who they are now come the next GE.

    • bigneil
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:20 am | Permalink

      Their treasonous actions make me wonder what they have been promised in return for selling our country and nation to the EU. They clearly want to destroy the place they are supposed to be defending.

  18. eeyore
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:05 am | Permalink

    Sir John’s headline contains either an inadvertent spelling error (of the kind spell checkers delight to impose) or a painfully significant pun.

    His analysis of some of the abundant errors in this judgement could have gone further. Lady Hale premised it on the hypothetical case of an indefinite prorogation. Had she remembered that only Parliament can supply money, without which government too withers, she would have known her fears were baseless and her argument unsound.

    • Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:25 am | Permalink

      Obviously it’s not ‘inadvertent’! It’s absolutely and very cleverly spot on!

    • rose
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:07 am | Permalink

      She doesn’t appear to understand that we have Parliamentary government or how it works.

    • sm
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:38 am | Permalink

      It may seem trivial, but if the most senior judge in the country, heading a panel of the next most senior judges, cannot accurately name an important player (ie the Chief Whip) in the case she/they are adjudicating, why should we trust the conclusion she/they have arrived at?

  19. Sea Warrior
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:13 am | Permalink

    I am still feeling completely DISENFRANCHISED. Please, Sir John, make the point in the Commons, in the direction of the Speaker and the Remainiacs on the Opposition benches.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:40 am | Permalink

      Indeed, as are the 17.4 million and those many other remainers who respected the referendum result. Also all those who voted Labour and Conservative in the last election who were promised Brexit delivery. Not that Brecow or the Conservative Traitors like Hammond, Gauke, Soammes, Clarkex2, Grieve and the rest will give a damn. These people must never be allowed to return they are misguided Libdems at best.

  20. Pete S
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:15 am | Permalink

    Bits I did not like from the judgement. Did not mention that Parl had gone on summer holidays. If you (the judges) make reference to the current political situation that it is pertinent to Parl being in session. Why where the summer holidays not abandoned ?? Also the opposition demanded a new Parl and thus proroguing plus said they are having their conference.

    The court said in effect the proroguing was too long, by how much it did not say. I think their decision and judgement was very poor. Not impressed by our top judges.

    • rose
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:04 am | Permalink

      They also tried to conflate in our minds the Conference recess with the Prorogation, implying that conferences were not in full swing and it was just a long period of prorogation. It looked unnecessarily vindictive that they arranged things so the Conservative Conference is fouled up by their misjudgement but not the others.

  21. Just Leave
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:19 am | Permalink

    Dear Sir John

    Indeed the PM and 17.4 million leave voters are being held hostage by parliament. Yesterday’s ruling came as a surprise to me . I would have thought the courts would have stayed out of politics. It feels we are up against everyone in our desire to LEAVE. Parliament is against us, the Establishment and now the courts. Yet I still believe stronger than ever this country’s best days lie outside the EU. Preferably with a clean break Brexit. I am a Christian and am praying for our country’s deliverance. Psalm 121

    • villaking
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:37 pm | Permalink

      The Supreme Court ruling concerned the prorogation of parliament which the PM had claimed was purely in order to prepare a Queen’s speech. Interesting that you link their judgement to Brexit, an admission perhaps that the prorogation was really about thwarting parliamentarians trying to stop a no-deal. You have provided justification for the SC verdict, the PM lied about the reasons for such a long prorogation

      Reply The judgement referred to the need for Parliament to be in session to discuss these matters!

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

        Villaking, Parliament has had 3 years 3 months to discuss Brexit. Even the EU only envisaged 2 years! Contrary to your claim a “deal” was not a pre-condition of Leave. So Parliament has no mandate to stop “no deal”. Moreover it is extraordinarily stupid to try to stop “no deal” because it just hands all the cards to the EU. But then that’s what you want, but you’re not honest enough to admit it.

  22. David J
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:22 am | Permalink

    Well, at least the Labour conference and their crazy Marxist ideas show that they are still unelectable! Bring on the people’s decision. Time for a General Election.
    The opposition don’t like Boris (Breaking news)- so call a no confidence vote! No? Cowards

  23. Stephen J
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:36 am | Permalink

    I hope that the traditional parties are punished for this, by losing power to the Brexit Party, which despite its rather unusual incorporation is more democratic and is on the side of the vast majority.

    How many times do we have to witness Labour profligacy and mania for control, or CONservative Party attempts to be socialist, which has been going on since the dreadful Major was insinuated upon us… God help us.

    • Andy
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:49 am | Permalink

      How is the Brexit Party Limited democratic?

      Who elects its leader? Nobody.

      How are its candidates selected? Erm.

      How does it establish policies? Um.

      • Glenn Vaughan
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

        Don’t worry Andy. Once you reach the age of 18 and your name is on the electoral roll, help will be provided for you to cast your vote at the polling booth.

      • Edward2
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

        Why are you concerned you will never vote for them anyway?
        Is their sudden rise in popularity getting to be a worry for you?
        The Brexit Party can organise itself how it wants to within the rules that apply to all political parties.
        And we can vote for them if we wish to.

      • Anonymous
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

        At least it’s popular.

        It gets its mandate via the ballot box.

        • Anonymous
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

          Don’t worry your pretty head, Andy.

          I’m too dumb to vote (Tory) so I’ll stop voting OK ?

          Marxists are coming.

          – abolition of private schools

          – redistribution of middle class wealth

          – enforced hardship in the guise of greenism

          – relocation of offenders and poor people into YOUR area

          Once I would have stood against these things but now I’ve seen that its a sneering Remain middle class against me…

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

        Andy,

        Because it will be elected (or not) by the electorate? As it was in the recent EU elections.

        That’s how its leader will be elected – by the electorate. As he was in the EU elections.

        TBP’s policy is to Leave. Depart. Abrogate the EU treaties. Not re-enter the EU. Brexit.

        You may not have noticed.

      • graham1946
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

        Your knowledge of your beloved EU is extremely limited so we don’t expect you to know much about the Brexit Party.

        For your information the democratic part comes at the election, if the people want to vote for it. They certainly did at the EU elections.

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

        Andy

        You are dim

        EVERY political party is/has registered as Limited Companies Go and look on companies house

        Its candidates are selected and its policies made in much the same way as all the other parties.

        However what do you care, your centrist party folded after 6 weeks

  24. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:39 am | Permalink

    There seems to be no way out of this for your government without resetting the numbers. To reset the numbers there must be a general election.

    The only way to get a general election due to the numbers required by the fixed term Parliament Act is to convince two thirds of MPs that time for change is available.

    The PM should now go to Brussels and ask for an extention until June but with the proviso that any future government can leave on one month’s notice.

    The Conservatives can then fight a general election on the Chancellor’s recent budget and leaving with or without a deal.

    If you win we are out, if not we are no worse off than we are now.

    Is it time for practicalities?

    • JoolsB
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:56 am | Permalink

      In other words – give in to the remoaners. And what makes you think the EU will agree to us leaving when we want? By asking for an extension, we hand them the power to decide when and on what terms.

      • Mark B
        Posted September 26, 2019 at 6:22 am | Permalink

        Agreed. Just wait it out and see what the Remainers do ? The clock is ticking and, the closer we get to 31st October the more desperate they will become.

    • Bob
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:04 am | Permalink

      “ask for an extension until June but with the proviso that any future government can leave on one month’s notice.”

      Not possible. The EU having now gained control of Parliament will make sure that the extension is loaded in such a way as to hobble any future attempts to leave.

      All the while, a billion pounds a month is transferred from UK taxpayers to Brussels. They have no incentive to agree to us leaving.

      This present fiasco was predicted by Gerard Batten is his book “The Road to Freedom: How Britain can leave the European Union – The case for unconditional, unilateral withdrawal”

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

        Bob, Indeed. Batten, along with many others, knew that the EU would be intransigent and vindictive on the evidence of the 45 years of our subservience. What I underestimated was how many EU serfs would be frightened of responsibility, and would fight to remain in serfdom.

    • Fred H
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

      so 3 years of opposition prevarication is fine, but 5 weeks by the Government is not?
      You have the nerve to call for practicalities!

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:39 pm | Permalink

        But the government can not prevaricate it has no majority so is prone to pro EU legislation being passed. The numbers must be reset. They could as Dennis suggests above call no confidence in themselves and give the opposition 14 days instead of extending.

        The way things are at present you won’t get a WTO Brexit. So rather than give in to remainers we should go round them.

  25. villaking
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:43 am | Permalink

    Sir John,
    The big question does not have to be “finally determined in court” since Boris, if he wishes, could simply obey the letter and spirit of the new law and prevent that from occurring. Secondly, you have no evidence whatsoever that the new law is against the wishes of the majority of the people. You make that assertion on the assumption that all people who voted to leave want a no-deal Brexit. There are some in public life (EG Gove) and I know some in my personal circle who categorically state that is not the case. What evidence do you have that 17.4 million wanted an abrupt departure with no withdrawal agreement? How else was parliament to try and prevent that?

    • What Tiler
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:18 am | Permalink

      Tell you what, how about the remoaners in parliament allow us to have a general election, then we can find out. They won’t allow a GE though will they, because they know that if we ever get another one their careers are toast.

    • Woody
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:19 am | Permalink

      What evidence do you have that 16.1 million wanted the UK to offer its resources and lives to an eu army, or that our people wished to join an eu superstate, or that we wished our tax regime to be decided entirely by unelected eu officials. I know for a fact that 17.4 of us did not want that.

    • Dave Andrews
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:27 am | Permalink

      If I can present just my view on this – I was a leave voter and haven’t changed my view. If asked – would I like to leave with no deal?, I would say no because I think a deal would be better, even though the EU have consistently said they won’t do a deal with the UK until after we leave. If we have to leave with no deal, then so be it, but it’s not my preference.
      My guess is this is the view of most leave voters.
      A deal with the EU becomes more remote when Remain campaigners collude with Brussels to put our leaving into doubt, as the Commission feel no incentive to negotiate seriously.

      • NickC
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

        Dave Andrews, that is too rational and measured for Villaking. Like all Remains I know of he is fired by slogans, rather than cogent arguments. By the way, I was a Leave voter who wanted to Leave without a (major) deal – no WA and no trade deal. I could foresee – as many others could too – that the EU would just vindictively take advantage of us begging for a comprehensive deal. We were right.

    • Julie Williams
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:58 am | Permalink

      How many years did Parliament have to agree a withdrawal treaty and how many times was May’s surrender document rejected although the EU refuses to renegotiate and you can’t blame them as it gave them everything they wanted and more.
      The only logical position, as Hammond once said (but then, they’ve said a lot of things and done the opposite) is a clean break as no remainer in Parliament has the guts to put revoke forward again.
      Where does this leave the electorate after three years of appalling chicanery?
      Waiting to remind our “sovereign” Parliament that they are there because we chose them to be and we will remove them and their cronies.
      Watching and waiting to do our job.
      I hope they think that staying in the EU was worth it when the EU goes bust and the UK has an unworkable democracy.

    • Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:22 am | Permalink

      Villaking – then why, in your opinion, does the remain element not want a GE to settle this question? You and they would have your ‘evidence’ then. How else?

      There are many in MY ‘personal circle’ who voted remain and who now, having learned about the imperial dreams of the EU, wish to leave without a trade deal, since far more is involved than simply trade. Those in your ‘personal circle’ and my own can only express their wishes with a GE. But you remainers seem afraid of the idea of putting it to the people.

      • villaking
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

        I don’t think you can say the remain element does not want a GE, how do you know? I do.
        It is true that many remainers in parliament have so far blocked a GE but you must know perfectly well why that is. It is not because they do not want a GE at all, it is because their short term focus is to try and stop a no-deal Brexit and they can not trust the incumbent PM. Boris has threatened to filibuster in the Lords to block legislation from the Commons and has attempted unlawfully suspend parliament for an unprecedented 5 weeks to try to limit anti no-deal tactics whilst pretending it was to prepare a Queen’s speech. You can understand why the House does no trust him. If and when an October 31st no-deal is ruled out beyond all doubt, a GE will be called I am sure

    • glen cullen
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      Binary question binary result….simple

      Thats how the voting public understood it

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

        glen….Do you support hanging? Yes, No, only half way?
        Do we attack a country invading another we support? Yes, No, well …a bit.

    • rose
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      Parliament and the Supreme Court are trying to prevent Brexit. All talk of abrupt departure etc is merely cover.

    • JoolsB
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:14 am | Permalink

      We were given a binary choice – stay in the EU or leave the EU. I don’t remember there being different choices of how we wanted to leave on the paper or if we wanted to be half in and half out. The remoaners now try and insult us by telling us we didn’t know what we voted for as an excuse to stall until they can ask us again or revoke altogether. We voted to leave and LEAVE MEANS LEAVE not some withdrawal agreement and especially not one which bears any resemblance to May’s surrender treaty.

    • Mockbeggar
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:36 am | Permalink

      The procedure for leaving the EU is quite clear under Article 40. That the leaving country must give two years’ notice and that during those two years the terms for leaving AND for for relations must be worked out between the leaving country and the EU and that such future relations should be as friendly and amicable as possible.

      The EU has signally failed to do any such thing despite our bending over backwards to meet as many of their demands as we reasonably could and avoid a ‘no deal’ exit. If they hadn’t insisted on this absurdly petty ‘backstop’ we would have been out six months ago.

    • John Hatfield
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:48 am | Permalink

      I do not recollect the referendum ballot paper mentioning a withdrawal agreement. The idea of a ‘deal’ was introduced after the vote by those who want to remain in the EU.

      • Martin in Cardiff
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

        No, and when you contract to buy a house it says nothing about moving in your furniture either.

        Your point is?

        The second is nothing to do with the first in both cases.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

          The point is the Withdrawal Agreement is not a deal.
          It is a dreadful treaty which has been rejected by all sides in Parliament three times.
          The speaker has said he will not allow it to be brought forward for a fourth time.
          Any deal will only begin to be negotiated after we eventually leave the EU.

        • libertarian
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

          Marty

          I think you just proved his point

          You buy a house based on whats for sale not what you might put in it later

          You vote to leave in a binary referendum and you leave not what you might do once you’ve left

          I think you’ve finally understood

        • NickC
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

          Martin, When I buy a house I don’t go along to the seller and say that I must have his house, whatever the cost and inconvenience, and I will never accept “no deal”.

          I don’t think even you are that stupid in real life. So why do you advocate that level of stupid over something much more important – UK independence?

        • Fred H
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

          oh Martin do read what was written, and preferably engage brain to understand it.

    • Sharon Jagger
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

      Villaking

      The reason more and more people would prefer a no deal, is because it’s clear that any deal would still leave us entwined with the EU and so still under their control. There have been many mini deals agreed for things like aircraft still flying etc. As the the EU refuse to even discuss a trade deal until we have left, it makes sense to leave with “no deal” so to get discussing it sooner than later.

      Unfortunately, with Parliament so intent on wrecking everything and making it almost impossible to breathe….more and more people just want to leave and then sort out the details.

    • libertarian
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

      villaking

      Todays poll 61% now favour leaving immediately . As each day goes past that this rogue parliament operates to thwart the will of the people , the more people join the campaign to leave.

      The remainiacs are so dumb and detached from everyday people that they have no idea of the harm they do to their own cause .

      Its hilarious watching them

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

        Lib …You might be wrong because they keep telling us they are more educated and we shouldn’t have a vote.

      • bill brown
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

        Libertarian

        your generalisations are hilarious and not worth the paper they are written on , you should know much better?

  26. Caterpillar
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:46 am | Permalink

    Yes, the points in your first three paragraphs do make one think the ruling is not on safe grounds.
    Yes, the danger expressed in the penultimate paragraph is real. The HoC and HoL have become locked-in to a childish dysfunctional pattern of behaviour.

    (I do not think the HoC has sufficient ethical MPs to agree to an immediate GE before 31st October and instead will give us a continuation of the elite establishment rule over the people. The Palace of Westminster is no longer a symbol of democracy, but of rule. I doubt the UK will ever recover democracy, but if it does, Westminster needs to be demolished.)

    • Bob
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:08 am | Permalink

      “Westminster needs to be demolished”

      That would save a fortune in refurbishment costs.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

        and build homes to solve the London housing problem for essential workers!

  27. Caterpillar
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:46 am | Permalink

    I read that J. Major was calling for the PM to apologise to the Queen. I would like to hear J. Major apologise to the people for not giving us/them a say on the ratification of Maastricht, including an apology to the ~15 million who died between 1993 and 2016 without a democratic say on the creation of the EU, its increased competences and the UK’s loss of sovereignty (in 1975 referendum it was promised that the right of veto would mean that sovereignty was not given up – veto is now only occasionally applicable).

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:03 am | Permalink

      John Major has still not apologised to the nation for his ERM fiasco costing jobs, marriages, homes, businesses and lives, his appalling period of government and his burying of the Conservative Party.

      Anyway the queen and her advisors clearly thought it was a legal to prorogue parliament, as indeed did three high very senior court judges. What is there to apologise for?

      I am sorry ma’am but I (like yourself and you advisors) really did not thing the Supreme Court would take such a politically damaging and very foolish decision (surely drivel by their pro remain views) perhaps?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:58 am | Permalink

        Most worrying of all was the unanimity and the “group think” of the 11 Justices on the Supreme Court. Not even one sensible Justice pointing out the damaging consequences of such a perverse decision.

        It seem that 17.4 million plus those many millions of remainers who actually respected the result can be overruled by one dire speaker Bercow a few hundred traitor/MPs and eleven remainer Justices. But they are still scared to death of an election it seems.

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

          The court case was not about brexit. It was about prorogation.

          You – leavers – said that prorogation had nothing to do with brexit. You said that it was for a Queen’s Speech.

          So what on Earth do you mean? That you – leavers – were simply lying yet again?

          • Lifelogic
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

            Prorogation was clearly done for a combination of perfectly valid political reasons. The Judgement of the Supreme Court was surely made entirely to aid the Brexit Cause. Nobody rational could believe any other explanation could they? Lawyer tend to like more laws and more ambiguity and more court levels. It is in the interests of lawyers but against those of the people.

          • libertarian
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

            Marty

            Do try to keep up

            Boris needs to have a Queens speech, its part of our unwritten constitution . He prorogued parliament as has been done many times before.

            The Remainics in parliament then panicked and overplayed their hand and let the cat out of the bag, they have just one aim STOP BREXIT.

            So have got their friends in the supreme court to make a political judgement and bring back parliament

            The remainiacs entire strategy now rests on Boris sending the Benn letter ( lol) they then kick it into the long grass for a few months and hope to win an election when the dust has settled .

            The remainiacs are barking mad and so out of touch they are on a different planet

            They are in for a big shock

          • NickC
            Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

            Martin, You – Remains – said that prorogation had everything to do with Brexit. You said that it was not for a Queen’s Speech.

            So what on Earth do you mean? That you – Remains – are simply lying yet again?

    • J Bush
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:12 am | Permalink

      I would like Major to make a public apology for the illegality of proroguing parliament to stop questions about the cash for questions scandal.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

        Also he should say sorry for the ERM disaster, Maastricht and his general gross incompetence as Chancellor and PM. His deposing of Thatcher. Plus for burying the Conservative Party for many terms by not being a Conservative – (it has still not recovered even now). He then lost to Blair’s Labour Party 481 and Conservatives just 185 seats. Blair then gave us the very poorly thought through Supreme Court and a totally unfair (to the English) & incompetent system of devolution.

        Not quite as bad as the appalling Theresa May’s recent fifth place and just 9% but not that far off.

        So Amber Rudd objects to the language of “Parliament against the People”, “Traitors” and the likes. Well dear that is the exact position and they are perfectly appropriate words. If it looks like a duck & quacks like a duck.

        This the dreadful Amber Rudd who even had the gall to sign up to the Boris agenda then kick him in the teeth just a few days later.

    • Ed
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:09 am | Permalink

      John Major is just trying to rub Boris’ nose in it (the High Court Judges didn’t by focusing on the EFFECTS as opposed to the INTENTIONS behind prorogation).

      For some, on BOTH sides, Brexit / EU has developed more into a matter of pride, even a hobby horse, than love for the cause – which should ultimately be about making the UK a happier place to be – which I believe is through making the UK sovereign again but by through the right, honourable means (including not taking short cuts). An honour which matches the honour of the sovereignty, of the British people, and of winning hearts and minds which is absolutely necessary for the long-term success of Brexit.

      • Anonymous
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

        The only way it can be done is through general election. Now.

        • Ed
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:32 pm | Permalink

          I agree.

        • Caterpillar
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

          I also agree

    • Mark B
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 6:17 am | Permalink

      Hear hear.

  28. Sharon Jagger
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:48 am | Permalink

    As things are, with the fixed year Parliament, there’s nothing to stop Parliament from continuing to refuse a general election. Currently, Parliament are doing a fairly good job of running things without being in government. A worrying thought.

    They all know that if there was a general election, Leave would win by a huge margin, and all the remainers would be voted out – so for now they won’t risk that….

    • Neil Turrell
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:51 am | Permalink

      So Lord Sumption believes that, since Leave won 52/48, they can’t claim 100% of the spoils. You’d expect an experienced judge to understand the consequence of binary choice wouldn’t you? Parliament he goes on, is the means by which the engagement between leave and remain takes place. Oh yes, I wonder if he would advance that view with a government majority? How much engagement do you think there would have been between leavers and remainers had the result been the other way around? The Establishment must sense they are very close to victory. I wish Andrew Neil had been interviewing the disingenuous Lord, the BBC reporter was worse than useless.

    • beresford
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:54 am | Permalink

      Not all Remainers. Just those who lied to constituents in order to get to Parliament and block Brexit. Some even lack the courage to meet those constituents in the next GE.

  29. Kenneth
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:49 am | Permalink

    Running away from the ballot box says it all.

    The unelected sector – BBC, senior civil service, judiciary, quangos, charities, some councils etc etc have joined forces with election-shy MPs to attempt to force their will on the country.

    This coup will not be tolerated.

  30. Everhopeful
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:51 am | Permalink

    I think all we need to know about the law is that pro Brexit cases can not even get a hearing while (basically) anti Brexit ones are rushed through to “ success” at top speed.
    It is all so breath-takingly blatant.
    It is all very well lauding our “ democracy” for allowing such cases to come forward but it ain’t much use when the loyalties of the courts lie elsewhere.

    Our constitution HAS been gradually strangled on the vine.
    And where the bl**dy H*ll does it go next?
    Catalonia?

    (But then, everyone knew this was happening for years and years.).

    We have seen similar in. Greece and Italy with imposition of Troika etc…just that here it is the majority of our treacherous MPs who PROMISED. Nobody legally questions THEIR motives, THEIR veracity, integrity….motivation… now do they?

  31. Roy Grainger
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:56 am | Permalink

    At this point surely the government should ask the Supreme Court to rule on Bercow’s plainly incorrect decision that the Benn bill (forcing the PM to request an extension) did not require Queens Consent. The precedent seems to be the SC have taken it upon themselves to rule on issues like that so why not. Well, we know why not, the SC Remainers would throw it out, but as an exercise it would be useful.

    • graham1946
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

      Someone would have to pay. You can only get justice if you have deep pockets or access to foreign money.

  32. BCL
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    At least now we don’t need to wonder which way the 11 judges voted in the referendum.

  33. Alan Jutson
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:08 am | Permalink

    Not really surprised by the Judgement, just another farce to add to the already steadily growing list of actions taken by all sides, which is making an absolute mockery of our so called Parliamentary system and so called democracy.

    Just out of interest what is the difference between illegal and unlawful ?

    Seems like it is now lawful for politicians to lie through their teeth to get elected on one promise, only to deliver another at a later stage.
    Honourable members does not seem to fit really does it.

    Just out of interest, did Boris consult the Attorney General before taking action.

    Perhaps the Queen (aware she is not supposed to do politics) will ask Parliament to hold a general election on the basis that no one can form a sensible government with a majority.

    • Caterpillar
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

      I don’t think the Queen can do that since the fixed term parliament act.

  34. Mark B
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    I seem to recall Mark Harper ceased to be Chief Whip well before recent events.

    OUCH !!!!

    My beef is, since when has the Supreme Court become a constitutional court as in Germany with Karlsruhe ? What laws were broken ? Since, allegedly, a law has been broken, there should be a punishment. If not, why not ?

    It is becoming more and more clear that the Establishment do not want us to Leave and that 17.4 million voters will not receive justice for their cause. A cause, whether you are Remain or Leave, we all undertook in great faith.

    • Andy
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

      But if you look at it from a distance the Supreme Court said that the Prime Minister’s advice to Her Majesty was illegal. Yet, they do not know when the advice was tendered it was either this or that date, nor do they know what that advice actually was as it was given on Privy Council terms and under its Oath. They have ruled as they have based on a few Downing Street Memos which told all but told nought.

      I think this is a disgraceful judgement and it is a disgrace that they have seen fit to nullify an Order given in Council by Her Majesty. Yet again the Supreme Court has made a political decision, so it is time they were placed under control and held to account for their actions.

  35. Kevin
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:21 am | Permalink

    This discussion is something we need to stick a pin in and get back to
    on a later occasion. The question of the moment is: does Mr. Johnson
    mean to deliver on leaving the EU? I have no confidence that he does.

  36. oldtimer
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:23 am | Permalink

    The Supreme Court judgment will be perceived by some, perhaps by many, to be politically inspired. It turns, if I heard correctly, on the length of the prorogation. Yet the length the government sought hardly restricted time spent on debating exit from the EU; it was small compared with the ten weeks or so prorogation obtained by John Major to preclude embarrassing discussion of MPs abuse of expenses. My conclusion is that it was politically motivated.

    We have also witnessed the Speaker apparently reinterpreting the procedures of the HoC to aid the Remainer cause to pass control of business away from the government of the day to a group of opposition MPs.

    The current parliament is no longer fit for purpose. There should be a general election to see if a government can be formed with an effective majority. Until there is we have a state of legalised anarchy in parliament. This is bad for parliament, bad for our current constitutional settlement, bad for the country and bad for the already diminished reputation of MPs.

  37. dennisambler
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:25 am | Permalink

    I think this should be referred to the ECJ, which at the moment is superior I believe to our Supreme Court. It would be interesting.

    • graham1946
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

      Apparently, things Brexit don’t fall within it’s remit. Funny that.

  38. Stephen Reay
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:38 am | Permalink

    Looks like we won’t be leaving on the 31 st of Oct after all. I have said on this site a number of times that Brexit will likely be stolen from us , now the courts are against us.

    You’ve got to admire Boris who’s thicked skined and a true hero of the people I hope he doesn’t quit he is our last chance to get this through. If he quits we’ll end up with slimey Gove as leader and he’s not so bothered about the people, he would sell his soul to the devil.

    If Boris can get an election he’ll win but not by a big enough majority and there might even be a hung parliarment and we’ll be back to square one. Will Boris do a deal with Nigel he might have to do so to get that majority.

    A question for Sir John.
    How long can the government prorogue parliarment now? Is it only for a week or more or do the courts now decide.

  39. Edward2
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    A number of people are saying Parliament is supreme.
    But the people choose who to vote for by looking at the policies presented by the parties.
    In the next election who do we vote for if Parliament and the Speaker and the Courts are running things and making law?
    The usual way is to judge the record of the government over the preceding few years.
    This method is now not available to us because the government is no longer in charge of business.
    We desperately need a general election.
    And then an end to the Fixed Term Parliament Act

  40. Tabulazero
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:49 am | Permalink

    No majority voted to leave without a deal.

    You personally promised that the UK held all the cards in the upcoming negotiations and that they would be easy.

    You were badly wrong and should apologize for your error of judgment.

    Re[ply We held good cards and failed to play them

    • Fred H
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

      the best card was the one that said ‘We are leaving on xx/xx/2017, if you wish us to make payments beyond that date, and to arrange mutual benefits of trade, ask to visit London for discussions. Otherwise Au Revoir….

    • NickC
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

      Tabulazero, Yes, we did vote to Leave without a “deal”, if necessary. All that was absolutely required was that the UK abrogates the EU treaties so that the EU no longer acts as our top tier of government in any way. If a good deal is not possible, then “no deal” it is.

    • J Bush
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:29 pm | Permalink

      Your remain argument is flawed. It was a binary choice Remain or Leave. Not leave with a deal. I am a leave voter and if a deal ties the UK to the EU in any way, then how can it be classed as leaving? I am satisfied the UK leaves without a deal.

      But funny thing is, this rogue parliament is claiming they are upholding democracy but refuse a GE t0 prove BJ wrong. But they won’t. I wonder why.

      • Tabulazero
        Posted September 26, 2019 at 7:36 am | Permalink

        Because Parliament is not dumb enough to believe that Boris Johnson will not set the election date the day after the UK leaves as is his prerogative.

        So to answer that: it’s because no one trusts Boris Johnson and rightly so.

        • NickC
          Posted September 26, 2019 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

          Tabulazero, So you fear a general election the day after we leave the EU? Why? – is that because you know Leave is so popular that Boris would get a thumping majority? Do tell.

  41. Iain Moore
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    Lord Sumption on the radio this morning said the Supreme Court was justified in taking the extreme decision they did because Boris’s prorogation of Parliament was so outrageous, which sounded as if the SC goes in for revenge not impartial judgement , also conveniently forgetting the outrageous constitutional shenanigans that Bercow has been getting upto that may have forced Boris’s hand.

    He finished off by saying that if Boris refuses to comply with Benn’s illegal law then the Courts would take charge and nominate someone else to ask the EU for the extension? Really? Then the revolution would be complete, for then the Courts would be usurping the Queen’s prerogative to negotiate treaties .

  42. formula57
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:51 am | Permalink

    For this parliament of quislings it seems the constitution can wither and perish so long as the U.K. does not quit the Evil Empire. A second Pride’s Purge is overdue now.

  43. George Brooks
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    What a fabulous mess!!!!!!

    Mick was right at 5 28am this morning, it is ‘gloves off time’ and we should stop playing by the Queensbury rules.

    The remainers cover has now been completely removed. They are and have never been anything else other than ”Brexit Wreckers” by whatever means.

    Boris must stay in place and take us completely clear of the EU on 31st October. Yes, there will be some bumps in the road to start with but absolutely nothing compared with significant damage these Remainers are currently do to our economy right now.

  44. Richard1
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    It is a political judgement of course as the public will see.

    But what actually was the point of prorogation given parliament was already going to be in recess for Sept? Looks like an own goal to me – makes any reasonable deal with the EU harder to get.

    Another consequence of the hubristic decision of Conservative MPs to leave Theresa May in office long after it became clear how useless she was. Perhaps it is just too late for Boris or anyone else to dig us out of the hole into which Mrs May dug us.

    • rose
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

      “Looks like an own goal to me ”

      To me it looks as if the Brexiteers continually underestimate the sheer malice and vindictiveness of the Remainiacs: they will do anything in their considerable power to stop Brexit, no matter what the cost, no matter how unscrupulous. They are ruthless but the Brexiteers keep playing by the rules.

  45. A.Sedgwick
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:12 am | Permalink

    David Starkey in a 20 minute expose destroyed this finding on LBC 8pm last evening. His main point being the Supreme Court had created a crime, namely proroguing parliament for greater than four to six days is unlawful. No law passed by parliament has been broken. Their decision was political: 11-0? The English High Court decision they overruled was correct.

    The performance of the Government, its advisers and lawyers was pitiful, this with the approach of the judges caused political commentators widely to forecast government defeat. The reading of the judgement was unnecessary, a tweet would have sufficed.

    I now hope other issues e.g. EVEL, constituency size, postal voting, party moving MPs are brought to the attention of our new leaders.

    • rose
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

      I noticed the Government’s lawyers didn’t seem pugnacious enough last time either and hoped this would be remedied this time. They were gentlemanly, rather. I think nearly all lawyers are remainers.

  46. Ian Terry
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    Sir john

    How will history show this parliament?
    When will Conservative Central Office produce a totally new selection process fit for the 21st century?
    Perception is all there is and that at the moment it would seem in the minds of the electorate we have in place two faced gutless liars with no respect for the people that voted for them.
    I hope that politicians realise that in future every election will be contested by whoever loses demanding a re run until they get what they want.
    The dawning of anachary and public protests.

  47. Newmania
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    I shall file John Redwood`s legal opinion in that same round repository of wisdom his recommendation we simply print money to solve budgetary constraints is stored.
    One point- it is not by means of some conspiracy that Parliament contains significant remain sympathies. Parliament , not unnaturally reflects the country which is a majority remain country according to every poll conducted since 2017 and despite the hopelessness of the cause despite both main Parties, in a two Party system, supporting Brexit.
    For the last three years , you have been telling us we are not “people” and that a narrow and fraudulent referendum result is the end of politics.
    We are people , our representation is not invalid and like many others I am sick to death of the arrogant attempt to write us out of our own country`s future

    • Edward2
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

      After the next election you will see who is in charge.

    • GilesB
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

      ‘A majority remain country according to every poll conducted since 2017’ .

      You ignore the only polls that count!

      We had a very large poll in June 2017 General Election at which over 85% of the votes went to candidates supporting Leave in their manifesto.

      We had a large poll in May 2019 European Parliament elections at which over 50% of the votes went to candidates supporting Leave in their manifesto.

    • Anonymous
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

      The position on the EU of each election candidate was rarely ever discussed. A pro EU flag or other symbol was neither displayed on person nor campaign literature.

      We have a situation where it appears that Parliament is unrepresentative of its people on this key issue, which is why we want a general election – but your side won’t let us have one, will it ! (You know full well you’d lose.)

      – Ignoring a referendum

      – smearing Leavers as racist or corrupt when every attempted prosecution or legal action has told you otherwise

      – blocking No Deal but offering no alternative and refusal to hold a general election

      – creating law after an event and then accusing a PM of breaking it…

      – allowing a Speaker to break every Parliamentary rule all the same

      And finally…

      – turning this nation into a republic by the effective abolition of the monarchy, usurpation by an unelected judicial dictatorship

      I hope your EU’s worth it !

    • libertarian
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

      Newmaniac

      WRONG

      ComRes poll today 61% of people want to leave immediately

      Tell me again about the city

  48. ukretired123
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:21 am | Permalink

    Parliament is sovereign only when it genuinely represents in both goodwill spirit and letter what it’s MPs were elected on – 83% to leave EU.
    They have forfeited their rights to govern by fraudulent deception over 3 years and should be judged in court by this fundamental inconvenient truth.

  49. Polly
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:35 am | Permalink

    The conspiracy to impeach President Trump has the same roots as the conspiracy to stop Brexit.

    Polly

    • Thomas
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 3:34 am | Permalink

      Polly- something has to be done to stop national populism- it has to be turned on its head otherwise we are right back in the 1930’s

  50. glen cullen
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    Agree with your comments Sir John

    If you had a majority the prorogue issue would never have gone to the courts therefore it was political

    It should never be up to courts to decide on parliamentary procedures and systems. It should be left to the ‘court of the people’ in a general election on whether we like or dislike the behaviour of government

    Ref standing order 24 of the HoC, I believe this order should be abolished as it is used for opposite to implement laws through the back door when the government hasn’t got a majority….doesn’t feel right that an elected government has laws imposed on them. When you haven’t a majority you can’t govern and a general election should be called

    Its just wrong that the HoC speaker, the opposite party(s) and the courts now control and govern parliament…..and not the government

  51. rose
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:56 am | Permalink

    These arch antidemocrats in the Supreme Court are letting it be known that they are the guardians of our democracy and of our constitution. With this one misjudgement they have caused chaos, and it has a strong smell of republicanism about it, giving the bent Speaker the power to convene Parliament and sidelining the Queen – her prerogative, her speech, her relationship with her ministers and Privy Counsel. The Parliamentary Junta has the power but no responsibility, the prerogative of the harlot, and the Executive has been shorn of power yet is still held accountable.

    They have completed the coup begun in January and it is terrifying. How do we get them to stand down and grant us an election? They are saying we can only have one when we have given up trying to win back our independence.

  52. Martin
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    As I suggested to you before the government should have let Scotland do its own deal then you would possibly have parliamentary numbers to your liking as most Scottish MPs support remain as do their constituents. Mind you Mr Johnson does seem to be losing Conservative MPs …

  53. BJC
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    For more than three years we’ve witnessed the appalling spectacle of those we expect to lead by example on a spiteful mission to destroy the very thing they’re charged with protecting, democracy. As an insult to our intelligence machiavellian Remainers have the audacity to claim that our government is undermining our democracy, whilst taking extraordinary steps themselves that have achieved exactly this.

    Meanwhile, the self-aggrandising Speaker slumped on his throne surveying his fiefdom with smug satisfaction, doesn’t appear to have the intelligence to understand that he has been pivotal in bringing our country to its knees. He alone has facilitated a proxy government which is using its stolen powers to dismantle our constitution, while transferring the responsibility for the catastrophe they’re working so hard to create to the shoulders of our emasculated government.

    Under normal circumstances Parliament tempers the excesses of government, but our proxy government is shaping policy with impunity. Parliament is abusing its borrowed powers by instructing others to do its job for it and the only way to introduce any scrutiny would be to call a general election. Yet, in a further act of hubris our rights to a GE are being denied whilst MPs patronisingly apologise for their political games, as if it’s nothing whatsoever to do with them.

    It’s abundantly clear Remainer MPs have absolutely no idea how to stop the juggernaut they’ve all jumped on with such abandon. All we can do is stand back in stunned amazement as it gains speed and heads for the spectacular crash we can all see coming. We’ll just have to try to salvage something from the debris.

  54. Ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    The case was ultimately about the Constitution not Brexit.

    It was unneccsary to prorogue Parliament.

    Brexit can still happen.

  55. Polly
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    I nearly forgot…..

    To be absolutely fair to Nigel Farage, if my above analysis is true, than his statement….

    ”This is where the real international political collusion is.”

    ..is absolutely 100% correct.

    Polly

  56. Prigger
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    The Remainer Parliament will be holding up and talking to a skull today. Hilarious.

    Everyone in the country knows the Establishment dare not hold a living General Election. Instead it will prance about histrionically giving bare bone funereal and surreal flowery wordage to our world about democracy, their own alone, so alone.

    Everyone knows, those who voted whatever on 23rd June 2016 in the Referendum that the Remainer Parliament has cut its own throat. Boris should play along and ask Mr Speaker “Who ARE you?

  57. graham1946
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    Does it really matter that Parliament resumes and that they get a few more days to do what they want? The Remoaners including the May Government have had over 3 years to try to stop Brexit and have not yet succeeded, so this bit of extra wind baggery won’t do it either.

    Boris should not resign, he has done nothing wrong. This is a new interpretation of ‘law’ (which law no-one can actually name, not even the judges yesterday), so he obviously acted on the old system which is very old and for which there are precedents. He must sit it out or we will get some Remoaner forming a temporary government to try to scotch Brexit altogether. Let them do a no confidence vote if they have the courage. I don’t think they have the bottle as many lucrative seats will be lost to their incumbents in the following GE. It is now ‘Parliament against the people’ and Boris should start stoking this up in anticipation of the GE. We will leave eventually, even if not 31st. October.

  58. Richard Lark
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    What an extraordinary judgment! I could understand it if the Supreme Court had ruled that BJ had deliberately misled our Queen and must now ask her to immediately end Prorogation, but I do not understand how the Court can say that Prorogation didn’t happen. I have always thought that the Queen is our Sovereign and cannot be overruled in the UK even if She is mistaken, and on that basis Prorogation did happen. The Court Judgement is a major challenge to Her authority.

    • rose
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

      I don’t suppose the Supreme Court sees itself as subject to Her Majesty the Queen, but to the ECJ.

    • Fred H
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

      Prorogation? It didn’t happen – they all spent rather a long time in the loo, having lunch, or in the bar. Plus the bits of torn up manifestos all over the place, meant days of serious hoovering out of the place.

  59. Warren from NI
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:51 am | Permalink

    The Supreme Court – another one of Blair’s great achievements. Our constitution has been slowly eroding away before our eyes.

    The New Labour government (often aided and abetted by the Conservative Party sadly) did immense damage to this great country with its slow motion Coup d’etat on our institutions and way of life.

    If the courts can overrule the Executive, we now live in a Republic in all but name. I suspect that was New Labour’s original intention…who was it that said, “We are now entering the post democratic age.”? Quite clever really, they successfully achieved what the 60’s Trotskyist movements never could.

  60. GilesB
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:00 am | Permalink

    The effective abolition of the Royal Prerogative by the Supreme Court has far-reaching implications.

    Under the ever pervasive dagger of judicial review, the Crown and the Executive can no longer be decisive.

    Without the threat of instant retaliation, we may as well close down our nuclear deterrent and moor the submarines alongside HMS Belfast for all the use that they now are.

  61. Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    I’ve read his article and learned a lot. I am thoroughly enjoying it. Good points. I would like to add one more. Nations with allies thrive, and those without them wither. Alone, America cannot protect our people and our economy… A leader must display strategic acumen that incorporates respect for those nations that have stood with us when trouble loomed…. Using every skill I had learned during my decades as a Marine, I did as well as I could for as long as I could. When my concrete solutions and strategic advice, especially keeping faith with our allies, no longer resonated, it was time to resign, despite the limitless joy I felt serving alongside our troops in defense of our Constitution

  62. Atlas
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:12 am | Permalink

    Simply put, I’m outraged by the way Remoaners have hijacked our vote. Most MPs now have no mandate for what they are doing – yet are cowards in not seeking legitimacy from the people for their points of view.

    • Anonymous
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

      Vote to Leave = Hard Remain

      Try to change that and you get Harder Remain.

  63. Ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    Boris reference to Prometheus and the Eagle frames perfectly the tragic nature of how Brexit has been handled and, more importantly, the modern’s world expectations for quick and easy results.

    Brexit is an HONOURABLE quest. But it must be achieved heroically. And that involves planning, patience, perseverance and honour. If not, you end up in (legal) spider’s webs and or having your lived pecked again and again and again.

    That’s the message of the great myths. It’s the message, to a degree, of traditional values, with Joan of Arc being the Christian equivalent of Heracles – Heracles who rescued Prometheus from the torment of the eagle.

    We need a Heracles now to rescue Boris from the Eagle! We needed a Heracles from the get go before the Referendum ever took place. And more than a Heracles, we ultimately needed someone in the spirit of Joan of Arc who achieved great things for her country, but through planning, patience, perseverance and honour (and above all, faith).

  64. Michael Harrington
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    Whither, even. Freudian slip, perhaps?

    Reply No, a pun

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

      John, I don’t think that many people were prepared for it.

      Warn us in future.

      Thanks.

      • Fred H
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:13 pm | Permalink

        Sir John, I doubt you want to make an exception for friend in Wales, but if he continues to fail to keep up, would you consider explaining your more subtle presentation to him privately?

  65. oldwulf
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    I think that Mr Cummings has a cunning plan.

    His intention is to ensure that, at the next GE, it is the People + Boris versus the Establishment.

    So far, everything is going to plan.

    • Thomas
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 3:29 am | Permalink

      Only one dark cloud on the horizon- even though Boris is legally obliged to seek an extension chances are now that the EU will not grant him one unless we have another referendum- So I can see them then pushing the EU Council meeting scheduled for 17th 18th Oct back to the 7th 8th November to help UK out the door 31st Oct and with no WA. Because as far as I can see they are sure the Withdrawal terms could be picked up later but in the meantime UK would be out the door in economic mess and political crisis probably far worse than it is at present and it would be curtains for Boris and the Tories come the GE. Just a thought- and don’t forget they want to rid the EU parliament of the Farage faction.

  66. margaret howard
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:06 am | Permalink

    An PM foisted on us by 100 000 establishment figures. And Brexiteers keep waffling on about lack of EU democracy. The whole house of cards is falling down.

    Reminds me of the scene in the Wizard of Oz when the old fraud is finally exposed as the charlatan he really is but who nevertheless managed to dupe a whole country for decades.

    • Edward2
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

      A silly repetition of this point of yours Margaret.

      Every PM is elected as an MP by local voters then elected by his or her party to be leader.
      We don’t have Presidents.
      PS
      Borus as a PM is way ahead of other party leaders in polls as are the Conservatives.

      • bill brown
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

        Edward 2
        He has still broke the constitution and the Conservative party is as fit for power as Labour not at all.

        • libertarian
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

          hans

          No that would be the Speaker that broke the constitution and then the Supreme Court who by their own admission had to INVENT a law to find the government guilty of .

          The people are not fooled by this . If the remainics get their way and stop Brexit there will be a huge backlash

          If the 2 main parties attend fit for power god only knows where that leaves the evil lib dems, you know the party openly campaigning to end democracy

          • NickC
            Posted September 26, 2019 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

            Libertarian, Hans??? Good point.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

          Can you rewrite this so I can get to understand what you are saying.
          Thanks bill.

    • Anonymous
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

      That’s why we wanted a general election but you wouldn’t allow it.

    • NickC
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

      Margaret H, You cannot vote an EU government in, and you cannot vote an EU government out. That’s how much democracy there is in the EU – zero. How many people voted for Maastricht? How many for Lisbon? That’s right – zero. Again. See the pattern here?

    • Fred H
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

      MH —-still living the dream of the Wizard of Oz , how sweet, what childish fun! Never grew up to exist in the real world, eh Margaret?

    • libertarian
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

      Maggs

      Thanks for your repetitive and wrong posts

      The fund fell drastically today ( no mention from you as that kind of thing worries you) on news that we might not leave….. ah…. I see

  67. David Maples
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    A metaphor for all your correspondents Sir John:-

    If one party to a marriage wants a divorce, there is nothing the other party can do to prevent it. Were he or she able to do so, and the marriage were to continue in law, then nothing but misery, pain and suffering would follow. That the parties might ‘forgive and forget’ stretches credulity.

    Mrs. 52% wants a divorce from Mr. 48%. She wants control of the matrimonial home, care and control of the children, and no longer wants to tolerate her husband’s allegiances to foreign mistresses. She would also like him to pay maintenance, but it seems she may very well have to pay him maintenance. Nevertheless, she faces a real problem in that her husband’s lawyers are determined to keep her in the marriage, thus circumscribing her freedoms. Who gave them this power?

    • Fred H
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      David…..you missed the case not so long ago when the woman wanted immediate divorce after they had a period of seperation, the man claimed the marriage wasn’t over. The court forced her to wait years……
      Any similarity?

  68. Iain Gill
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    Having been in court a few times and seen first hand how prejudiced and nonsensical many of our judges are none of this is a surprise to me. This pretence that our judiciary are fantastic and the envy of the world should be swept away like many other “emperors clothes” aspects of UK life, like the dire NHS that we are supposed to bow down to.

  69. NickC
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    JR said: “The danger of the present situation is no-one is in charge because the government no longer has a Parliamentary majority”.

    John Bercow is in charge. We have a Remain government effectively in power, but without responsibility. And we have a Conservative party that has apparent responsibility, but no power.

    Who is to blame? Obviously the Remain majority in Parliament who would have implemented a Remain vote fully, but refuses to implement the actual Leave vote.

    But the Tory party itself shares some of that blame: for invoking TEU Article 50 instead of leaving first and negotiating afterwards; for invoking Art50 late; for refusing to eject Theresa May soon enough (2017 GE and at Chequers); and for the CP HQ allowing/imposing unsuitable turncoat MP candidates.

    • Chris
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:28 pm | Permalink

      Your last para, NickC, is spot on. The Cons MPs are very much responsible. They just refused to act apparently because they put Party unity before country. There were so many siren calls on this website alone, and yet the Cons continued to support May. The Dublin agreement in Dec 2017, which Boris supported among so many other Cons “eurosceptic” MPs, represented a “complete capitulation” to the EU, and it is at that point that Cons Brexiter MPs should have refused to support May (in fact long before then, when she was devising said agreement). However, they all apparently went along with it.

    • Len Sawes
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

      Youve had 3 years. Brexit has failed

      • Edward2
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

        Rewrite…remain have had three years to thwart Brexit.

  70. Steve Reay
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    It,s amazing all those MPs shouting to reopen parliament and it was only half full. Maybe they’re on a Thomas Cook holiday , serves them right. They take us for fools but come election day its payback time hooray .P45 for remainer mps.

  71. PleaseSir
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    Tough John- everything seems to be stacked against you- you were one of the champions of this brexit mess and ‘boy oh boy’ what a mess. For years you thought it was going to be so simple- we’d leave and then negotiate the deal of our dreams as equal partners with them and without any cost to us- the ultimate cherry picking charterer’s dream. You and others like IDS DD and of course the ERG set- but foolish man and now you’re crying that dear Boris has overstepped the mark and has his head in the stocks or somewhere else i’d rather not say- dear foolish Boris.

    • NickC
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

      PleaseSir, Wrong. Any trade deal would be our trade in exchange for the EU’s trade. Something along the lines of what Remains used to boast about – EU trade deals with S.Korea, Canada and Japan. That’s not difficult is it? – it’s already been done. And the current mess has been caused by Remain MPs – they gloat about it.

    • libertarian
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:39 pm | Permalink

      PleaseSir

      Complete drivel. You are clearly totally ignorant of international trade

  72. Mark
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

    Revenge at the ballot box is now our only option. Assuming elections are still allowed. Denied that, only some form of revolution can work. Let us hope it is bloodless if that is the route that we end up on.

    • Ed
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

      It’s not about revenge, getting one over, pride, personal ambition.

      It’s about SERVING one’s country. To do what is best for one’s country for the long-term.

      That involves gaining sovereignty and doing so by honourable means.

  73. Peter
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:38 pm | Permalink

    The only reason why we might need a general election is if we accept the hypothesis that the will of the people could have changed in the last 2 years. Are you sure that that’s a slope that you want to start down?

    • Edward2
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

      We need an election to resolve the impasse in the current Parliament.

      In recent polls the Conservatives are ahead by 15 points.
      Equivalent to a majority of approximately 75 seats.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

        The aim of Labour will be to keep Boris Captive and to pass laws to discredit him anyway they can with the assistance of the appalling Bercow the appalling SNP and the profoundly anti-democratic Libdims.

        Labour & the Libdims are scared of an election at this point but it will not get better for them I suspect.

        Boris will surely need some accommodation with Farage. If he takes back the traitors like Hammond, Gauke, Clarke X2, Greening, Sandbach, Rudd, Soames and the likes he will surely be done for. TBP will surely field candidate against all but the rather few real Conservatives. Certainly against these traitors if returned.

      • Martin in Cardiff
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

        There were times when Labour were ahead of Thatcher’s Tories mid term by a comparable amount as I recall.

        Where was all the shrieking for general elections then from the media?

        • Edward2
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

          Ridiculous argument.
          Lady Thatcher had a good working majority.
          Mid term as might be expected, the government were unpopular but they won three successive elections.
          PS
          I haven’t seen any shrieking for a general election from most of the current media.

        • steve
          Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:39 pm | Permalink

          MiC

          More importantly what happened to the LABOUR leader’s demands for a general election ? You know, the demands he made on Monday in Brighton.

          Or has he gone chicken (again) like all left wingers.

          Say’s one thing in Brighton, does the opposite in Westminster.

    • rose
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

      The government cannot govern without a majority. Normally it would go to the country to get one. Worse, it is imprisoned by a malign Parliamentary Junta passing directives in collaboration with the EU, directly opposed to the Government policy. This is an intolerable situation.

    • Edwardm
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

      The will of the people has not changed.
      Many MPs have broken their election manifesto commitments to abide by the referendum result and take us out of the EU. They have delayed twice and are trying to delay again.
      That is why we need a GE, on a matter of trust.

    • Robert mcdonald
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

      I have no doubt the will of the people has changed. The people want rid of the plague of hypocritical and disingenuous MPs who promised one thing when being elected and are doing the exact opposite when in place. It’s time to review their right to continue to represent their constituents.

    • Fred H
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

      Peter…..you may not have been paying attention during the last 3 years, BUT ..the Labour party MPs were elected on a manifesto of supporting Leave, now they don’t. A number of Conservative MPs also were elected on a manifesto of supporting Leave, now they don’t. That to me seems to be the main reason the People should vote in a fresh GE to decide whether the MPs they trusted can any longer be trusted.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:05 pm | Permalink

        Exactly, not that most ever did support their manifestos on Brexit – they just pretended/lied that they did to defraud the electorate and leave voters out of their votes.

    • Al
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

      “The only reason why we might need a general election is if we accept the hypothesis that the will of the people could have changed in the last 2 years. “

      Or if we accept that a significant number of MPs elected as one party, and therefore bound to that party’s manifesto, are no longer members of that party and therefore may no longer represent their constituents’ views.

      I still hold the view that when a politician crosses the floor a by-election should be held as soon as practically possible.

  74. DaveM
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    Thank you Geoffrey Cox.

  75. Pat
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

    In note that the court said in its judgment that this case turns on its own facts.
    On the law course I attended we were taught that this phrase meant “we got it wrong this time, don’t use this as a precedent “. I’ve never heard it used at the time of delivering judgement before .

  76. David Taylor
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

    It cannot be correct that Laws & acts of Parliament are passed on the hoofs , I mentioned in an earlier article here that violent murders are being committed daily in the main on the streets of the capital city of the U.K and the powers that be appear , powerless .
    Yet the Law to prevent the U.K leaving the E.U is passed with next to no scrutiny & in record time , likewise yesterdays verdict in the Supreme Court .
    The Fixed Term Parliament act should be repealed .
    The precedent cited in the Supreme Court Case of Proclamations (1611) 12 Co Rep 74, was made against a King attempting to assert his right to rule , does it not ? it surely cannot be applied against the present Prime Minister .
    Likewise , In the United Kingdom the party conference season is the period of three weeks in September and October of each year, whilst the House of Commons is in recess, in which the annual political party conferences are held.
    The UK political Parties should then have prorogued their conferences perhaps , if the continuing of Parliamentary business was so vital .

  77. Edwardm
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    The Supreme Court have clearly made a one-sided political decision, and has forfeited its authority in the eyes of many. The Supreme Court judges use words like unlawful, not to mean breaking the law, but to mean whatever they want it to mean, perhaps to mean “taking action unhelpful to a cause we support”.

    One can be sure that the more Remainer MPs connive with the EU, make up rules and frustrate the British people, the greater will be the backlash at the next GE.

  78. Augustyn
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    Apparently the majority of 650 MPs can defy the will of 17.4 million electors.

    This is not democracy.

    Parliament has had it’s day. Time to move on.

    • margaret howard
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

      Augustyn

      “Parliament has had its day”

      I agree with you but for a different reason. A parliament that can ignore the will of nearly half the referendum voters to remain is not fit for purpose.

      A first past the post election system is not democracy when millions of us have no representation and it was totally unfit for a referendum of such magnitude.

      Time to move on. We are being ruled by an ‘behind the scenes’ oligarchy.

  79. libertarian
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    Margaret Howard

    You dont seem to have posted today about the pound

    It sunk its back to $1.23 and €1.12 on news THAT WE MIGHT NOT LEAVE on 31/10

    • margaret howard
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:44 pm | Permalink

      Brilliant.

  80. libertarian
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:39 pm | Permalink

    Newmaniac

    This Financial Services are all going to Frankfurt that you assured us was a FACT

    How’s that going?

    In 2016, Britain’s market share of foreign-exchange trading stood at 36.9%. In 2019, Britain’s market share is now 43.1%.

    • libertarian
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

      ps

      London trades as much over-the-counter derivatives as the rest of the world combined.

  81. Prigger
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

    So, Boris has had to miss very important meetings in the USA to fly back to give a baby bottle to Remainer MPs whining their three-year whine against our democracy, our people, and our country.
    Their names,passport numbers, addresses of all homes should be put on file at the Home Office for possible future legal action against their tyrannical and costly behaviour. Robbing our people and country with ‘democracy’ writ large on their swaggering bags should not go unpunished.
    Everyone knows what they are up to. Up to no good. Enough!

  82. BillM
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    It cannot be right that Judges can circumvent British Law when it suits them For according to The Bill of Rights 1689 they have absolutely no right to do so.
    Perhaps the PM will pursue this matter to ensure that British democracy stays with the People and never with the unelected and the unaccountable. These judges have acted much like the Oligarchy that runs the EU.

    “Freedom of speech is guaranteed by article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689: `freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament’.
    It is the single most important parliamentary privilege. Article 9 affords legal immunity (`ought not to be questioned’) to members for what they say or do in `proceedings in Parliament’. The immunity applies in `any court or place out of Parliament’.

  83. Chris
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

    What a splendid and refreshing contrast to Boris and his classical quotes at the UN:
    the Attorney General Geoffrey Cox addressing Parliament: “This Parliament is a disgrace”. GC puts his points over very powerfully indeed. Would make rather a good PM?

    https://twitter.com/StandUp4Brexit/status/1176841848289157122
    ““This parliament is a dead one. It should no longer sit. It has no moral right to sit on these green benches.
    “Twice they’ve been asked to let the electorate decide upon whether they should continue to sit in their seats, while they block 17.4 million people’s votes”

    • Chris
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

      Plus this from Geoffrey Cox (see twitter Steve Baker).

      📺 @Geoffrey_Cox: “They could vote no confidence at any time but they’re too cowardly to have a go. They could agree to a motion to allow this house to dissolve, but they’re too cowardly to give it a go. This parliament should have the courage to face the electorate but it won’t”

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

      Boris is doing very well too. Certainly compared to all the ex-conservative traitors (never to be allowed back one hopes) and the mad & bitter lefty loons on the labour benches. It is indeed the Hillary Benn Surender/Capitulation act, it is indeed parliament against the people, those trying to defeat Brexit are clearly traitors to the UK.

      The idiotic Tracey Brabin MP drags back the murder of Jo Cox (yet again) and calls for more moderate language. Jo Cox was murdered by someone with a long history of serious mental health issues (as very many people are). Boris is using entirely the right language and should continue to use this language. The way to stop such murders is to provide proper mental health care and thus protect the public. Caring for dangerous people with serious mental health issues “in the community” is just encouraging such murders.

  84. Denis Cooper
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

    Will you just look at this:

    https://euobserver.com/tickers/146067

    “Irish PM gives Johnson deadline on backstop ‘plan'”

    “Irish taoiseach Leo Varadkar warned British prime minister Boris Johnson on Wednesday he had until the end of next week to come up with a concrete plan on alterations to the Irish backstop question, in order for any ideas to be discussed at the EU summit starting 17 October. Vardadkar, speaking in New York, said the EU needed “proposals in writing really in the first week of October.””

    That is the state of humiliation to which our country has now been reduced by three Tory Prime Ministers, being lectured by the Irish government for God’s sake.

    • steve
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      Denis

      “That is the state of humiliation to which our country has now been reduced by three Tory Prime Ministers, being lectured by the Irish government for God’s sake.”

      This is indeed so, and an outrage Denis. But please don’t blame three tory PM’s for this.

      The culprits for what has happened to this country are May, Corbyn, Blair, Sturgeon, Major.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 26, 2019 at 11:09 am | Permalink

        Cameron, May, and now Johnson.

    • Phil
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

      What you talking about Denis- veradkar was merely stating the obvious, if the EU council meeting is to be held 17th Oct- proposals for the new WA as promised by PM would need to be in by next week the latest- hardly a warning- just a reminder.

    • Mark B
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 5:01 am | Permalink

      Denis

      Once out of the EU the boot will be on the other foot. Mark my words.

  85. ukretired123
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

    Speaker Bercow in a EU blue suit to show his impartiality on TV yesterday….
    The non-political 11 remain judges on Tony Blair’s (supreme cort) out of touch declaring they were not deciding Brexit and had nothing to do with it….
    How convenient..

    • margaret howard
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

      ukretired

      “John Bercow in a EU blue suit. The non-political 11 remain judges on Tony Blair’s (supreme cort) out of touch ”

      What were they wearing? Any significance in Lady Hale’s spider brooch?

  86. Denis Cooper
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

    I watched Michael Gove gabbling away on the current state of preparations for a no deal Brexit, and I don’t suppose that anything he said convinced many MPs that it would not be the utter disaster that they assume and constantly tell the public.

    It is now over six weeks since it was reported that he was about to set up a rapid rebuttal unit to counter the constant flood of anti-Brexit propaganda:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/10/michael-gove-takes-brexit-fake-news-new-rapid-rebuttal-unit/

    So where is that unit, and how many rebuttals has it issued?

    Well, of course there is no such unit, and there have been no rebuttals; probably there was never any intention to set up any such unit, it was just another lie, and instead all we get is Michael Gove with verbal diarrhoea convincing nobody.

    Once it was realised that Theresa May was working for the other side as much as she was working for our side it became comprehensible why her government rarely attempted to counter anti-Brexit propaganda, and when it did the ripostes were generally feeble, and at the same time it was feeding out propaganda lines against its own official policy; but that has just continued in much the same vein under Boris Johnson.

  87. Jasper
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

    Just listening to Boris’s statement – what a marvellous Prime Minister, he has understood the people’s feelings/thoughts totally.

  88. steve
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    I’m still anxious to know exactly what law is it that Boris is supposed to have broken.

    Anyone know ?

    Was this law in existence when Boris advised the Queen to prorogue ?

    • Chris
      Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:15 pm | Permalink

      No, steve, apparently it was not in existence. The Supreme Court, according to one pundit, “invented” a new law, which Boris was then said to have broken. The implication from that seems to be that they (the SC) were effectively making it up as they were going along, and testing boundaries to see how far they could go with exerting new powers. They have apparently strayed into territory which by understanding/convention over the years was not theirs – effectively a power grab according to some commentators.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 3:42 am | Permalink

      No, it is a law that has clearly only just been invented by these 11 Supreme Court Justices and applied retrospectively. Boris and his legal advisors were obviously expected to be able to foresee this. What naughty boys hey are for their lack of precognition. Nothing to do with Brexit the Justices claim – but no one believes them.

      • Chris
        Posted September 26, 2019 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

        “….but noone believes them”, and that is the point. Quite right, Lifelogic. They have done themselves irreparable damage, I believe, in their apparent powergrab for political purposes. The SC is a good candidate for reform and quickly so that there is not abuse of power.

  89. steve
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    Corbyn, and Labour’s bent judiciary forget one simple fact: ‘there is no higher court in the land than the British people’.

    Anger us at your peril.

  90. tim
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

    Boris should start each parliament session with a request for a General election, he should call them all cowards, traitors, and anything else that is acceptable in parliament. He should say “if you disagree with the truth I have spoken, then accept my challenge for a General Election NOW”. He will set a world record for G E requests, this will be global.

  91. steve
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:11 pm | Permalink

    JR

    “The right answer is a General election so the public can decide who they want to govern the country.”

    Entirely agree Mr Redwood.

    In fact,during his speech at Brighton on Monday Corbyn challenged Boris to a general election. Now what is he doing ?……..yes, the coward is running away again.

    Personally I think Her Majesty should intervene and order a general election, otherwise the people will soon be taking matters into their own hands.

    We demand Corbyn and the rest of the remain hypocrites be forced to face our anger.

    In denying us the opportunity to destroy them at the ballot box, they are breaking the law.

    …..since evidently one just makes laws ad hoc to suit one’s own agenda. Obviously, inversely, any law I deem inconvenient to me will itself be illegal, because I don’t like it I will make it illegal.

    See where these fools are taking us ?…….. that’s right, anarchy !

  92. BR
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    I’ve never seen a judgement using the word “extreme” in this way, especially to describe a government official invoking a power they believed to be prerogative. Notable that MS Da Costa was not writing to Lady Hale, she was writing to BJ and did not therefore expect to have to say anything on the matters Hale bemoaned as being absent. Also, since the courts had (ridiculously) demanded sight of government documents, why could Hale not ask Da Costa whatever questions she wanted.

    Why should Da Costa need explain herself to a judge to use a prerogative power?

    Nor have I seen one where a higher court overturns a lower court without showing where they erred in law.

    Nor one where the judgement does not quote, nor even mention in passing, the law which they are applying.

    Nor one where so many statements of fact are transparently untrue. Not only this mentioned in JR’s piece above, but also the statement that “all parties agreed that the court had the power to rule on the scope of the use of prerogative powers”. So… why were the government arguing that the matter is not ‘judiciable’ then? A matter on which the English High Court agreed.

    The “Supreme” Court – a new court (whose senior judge is from a family law background) – showing that it is not fit for purpose. The Court of Appeals was superb; Lord Denning will be turning in his grave.

  93. BR
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    By the way, JR re your headline…

    Do you mean “whither” our constitution (as in ‘where’s it heading’)?

    Or ‘wither’ our constitution as in ‘It’s withering away’?

    I suspect you mean the former, in which case you need what I’m sure is just a typo.

  94. Ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

    Brexiters have returned to having more high moral ground after returning to Parliament (The High Court has actually done Brexit a favour!).

    Proroguing Parliament was a bad idea. The High Court, working within the logic of its own framework, ruled correctly (by a whisker).

    It’s now time to get Brexit done. The country can’t go on like this. The government has a moral duty to get the best deal possible. But if not possible, leave without a deal.

    We need a general election!

  95. Ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    And the PM should NOT have to apologise to Parliament or the Queen about prorogation. He’s under extreme pressure now, after 3 years, to deliver Brexit to the country who voted for it. Prorogation was a mistake but in the big picture not such a big deal.

    (And although not a personal fan of the PM, for political reasons, I believe it’s best to leave him place to deliver Brexit – we’ve got to deliver Brexit, and move on).

  96. ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 8:42 pm | Permalink

    It is all being staged to keep us in the EU but save the Tory party at the same time. That is why Cummings is good.

  97. ed2
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:00 pm | Permalink

    Boris has been working for Remain ever since he put the higher figures on the side of the bus, I advised him at the time there was no need as the lower figure was just as impressive and people were not voting to leave the EU about money anyway, but he and Gove wanted to use the higher figure knowing it would cause a media fuss and help with a second referendum, which is all Boris ever wanted, for Boris all this is about reforming the EU and staying in. Its just leverage, a trick. All this time traitor Corbyn has been utterly obsessed with hating all things Tory yet the Tories have been working for the same side his party supports, the Eu. Boris was controlled opposition from the start. All this is pantomime is designed to keep us in the EU but to make it look like the Tories at least tried to get us out. Corbyn is so thick he falls for all the false conspiracy theories and misses the real one. He thinks Boris is trying to get us a No Deal, he only wants thicko Corbyn to believe this is so along with the rest of the duped public. We are not leaving the Eu, but Boris will convince you all he tried his best.

  98. ed2
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

    Cummings knew the supreme court would flex its new muscles and rule like this, it is all political aikido.

    • Ed
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

      It’s all much ado about nothing.

      Not a big deal by Boris (prorogation – although a bit of a mistake)
      Not a big deal by Brenda (hats off for the spider broach though – like Boris in some Greek classical myth, caught in a spider’s web – 0f the law – but not too sticky a one to get out of!).

  99. dom
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:33 pm | Permalink

    The UK Supreme Court judges are nothing less than fully paid up members of the EU and its body politic. This European political court is a direct threat to the British judiciary and its functions

    Why do the Tories allow this to happen? Why don’t you oppose you vigorously??

    Why?

    • Ed
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

      ‘The UK Supreme Court judges are nothing less than fully paid up members of the EU and its body politic’

      – At this point I ask, what’s happened to good old British Common Sense and Sense of Humour.

      Sorry but I think you’re making a slag heap out of a molehill.

  100. Ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 10:56 pm | Permalink

    But election can only really happen after extension as remainers will object to election before extension arguing it will get in way of Brexit debate before 31 Oct leave date.

    Mind boggling whole thing right now. God bless UK.

  101. Ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    But we have to leave the EU within 2019 (Democracy demands it and country in limbo land).

    But then the battle only really begins because once the UK is out of the EU a second Ref could be called especially if the economy slips quickly. God bless the UK.

  102. Ed
    Posted September 25, 2019 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

    I think Jacob though should apologise (but not resign) over ‘constitutional coup.’ Harmful to the authority of the Judiciary over all and ultimately unhelpful to Brexit cause.

    • Fred H
      Posted September 26, 2019 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

      Ed….. I think JRM said it was a ‘constitutional soup.’ but was misheard.

  103. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted September 26, 2019 at 1:47 am | Permalink

    Whatever happens, Boris Johnson, other Government members, indeed all Conservatives must refuse to send that letter requesting an extension, no matter what pressure is brought to bear. Mr Benn’s grotty little Act is unconstitutional because it was a Bill with financial implications and therefore it was not legitimate for anyone other than the Executive to submit it. That law may therefore be disobeyed with impunity. If necessary, the Supreme Court (clearly biased) must be defied.

    Corbyn and Bercow must be made aware that the only way that letter will be sent is if the Prime Minister is unseated, which will require a motion of No Confidence.

    If Mr Johnson loses a No Confidence motion, he must visit the Queen and tell her that he is willing to resign but that he doesn’t believe anyone else in the Commons can form a Government. This will put Her Majesty in a difficult position – it is meant to. With luck, Labour and the LibDems will be unable to agree on an alternative PM.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, He graduated from Magdalen College Oxford, has a DPhil and is a fellow of All Souls College. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page