Breixt: Another week of crazy political drama

So a few weeks ago I wrote a thread briefly explaining what was happening with Brexit that brought us to the current mess we are in. In the last week or so however there have been some interesting developments that I again wanted to take the opportunity to explain without political bias. To be clear I voted to remain however I think when you take the politics out of Brexit and look at it form a purely objective stance it becomes very interesting. With that said what follows is a factual account of what has happened, the possible consequences and what we can expect to happen this week. Now it’s a very complex subject so I am going to keep this as brief as possible and I apologise if I skip over any specific details.

Prorogueing parliment


Right with that said lets first look at the first really big development that happened on Wednesday the 28th of August when Boris made the decision to Prorogue parliament.

So, what is Prorogation?

Firstly, it’s important to understand that this is a power that rests with the Queen who under normal convention is asked by her Prime Minister to end the current parliamentary session, usually once a year. When this happens any bills currently passing through the house of parliament die and there are no debates or motions heard in the house, it usually lasts a few days and marks the end of one parliamentary session and the state opening of another parliamentary session with a Queens Speech where she sets out her government’s agenda for the next parliamentary session. The crucial point is that this is a normal mechanism of government.

So what’s the problem?

Boris plans to prorogue parliament from the 10th of September until the 14th of October. This is a very long time to prorogue parliament, the norm is a few days rather than a few weeks however technically he is only proroguing for 4 days as this includes a planned three weeks recess of parliament to allow for the party conference season. The reason that this has been so controversial is because there had been plans apparently in place to pass a motion in the house to cancel this three-week recess to sit in parliament and lay out a plan to block any no-deal Brexit. Boris’s plan has prevented parliament from doing this and has led to those who oppose a no-deal taking action against the government to force Boris to ask for another extension to article 50.

The argument that is being made is that this is undemocratic because it prevents parliament being heard and parliament is the sovereign body that represents the views of the people of the UK. Please note, I am not passing a opinion on this argument merely trying to explain the controversy around this action. As the Speaker of the House John Bercow put it:

“However it is dressed up, it is blindingly obvious that the purpose of the prorogation now would be to stop parliament debating Brexit and performing its duty in shaping a course for the country.”

“At this time, one of the most challenging periods in our nation’s history, it is vital that our elected parliament has its say. After all, we live in a parliamentary democracy.

“Shutting down parliament would be an offence against the democratic process and the rights of parliamentarians as the people’s elected representatives. Surely at this early stage in his premiership, the prime minister should be seeking to establish rather than undermine his democratic credentials and indeed his commitment to parliamentary democracy.”

Parliaments Response.

So, what that now on the table it has restricted parliaments ability to block a no-deal Brexit. I do not want to get into the merits or risks of a no-deal in this thread the only point that needs to be made is that our democratically elected parliament does not support a no-deal. Therefore, attempts have been made to block this.

The first attempt came with a legal challenge in the Scottish courts arguing that Johnsons declaration of prorogation was unlawful as it was an unconstitutional use of the PMs powers, as I type this very thread up this case is currently being heard in Edinburgh. Along with this on Thursday the former Conservative Prime Minister John Major is also going to be part of a team going to the high court to make a similar case.

Meanwhile however in Parliament a move similar to that which we saw in April (see cooper-Letwin Bill) is being planned by those MPs opposed to Brexit. Essentially, they are planning on applying to the Speaker of the House for a Standing Order 24 emergency debate which given his outrage over prorogation he is likely to grant. Based on the current run of business it is expected that this application will happen at around 17:00 and could be debated thereafter for a few hours with MPs voting to take control of the house agenda for Wednesday. Following this they will then be able to use Wednesday to pass a bill that will legally require the Prime Minister to request a 3-month extension from the EU beyond the current leave date of the 31st of October.

The use of legislation to force the Prime Minister to act in this way is in itself very controversial but what is even more controversial is the PMs possible response. He has already said we are leaving on the 31st of October, “No if’s or no but’s” yet this bill would legally force him to request an extension something he is unwilling to do. Some have suggested that the government could just refuse to grant the bill Royal assent or ignore it all together. Under a system of parliamentary democracy, the significance of this cannot be overstated.

Because of how controversial this would be the only real option that Boris would have is to call a general election. This was hinted at in his speech just yesterday, the feel appears to be that any passing of such a bill would amount to a no confidence vote. Boris would be unwilling to go to the EU are request the extension so he would instead call a general election through the Fixed-term Parliament act 2011.

If the no-deal blocking MPs are successful on Wednesday and their bill passes through the house of Lords on Thursday, then is ratified and given Royal Accent its possible that after this on Thursday or Friday Boris could table a motion for a general election to be called. For this to pass he would require 66% of MPs to agree, he would then go to the Queen and as her to dissolve parliament and from here we would have a minimum 25 days of campaigning. It seems highly unlikely that Boris could get this to pass if the campaign window takes us beyond the 31st of October and it seems likely that we could be heading to the polls by the 14th of October despite Boris saying he doesn't want one.

Thats not even getting into the possibility of Conservative rebels being deselected....

Finally

Its only prudent to point out that this entire political drama is now so complex that its becoming impossible to predict what will happen next and I don't think even the most learned of UK political scholars are even clear on all of the details so my apologies if there are any errors in the above I have done my best to fact check everything.

This entire thing is uncharted Watters for the UK, in my personally opinion we are probably headed towards a general election before the 31st of October but time will tell. I think the prospect of a general election is a interesting one and should that come to pass I will post a thread giving more of a explanation around that but right now I don't want to get drawn into much into that possibility however inevitable it seems to be.

Looks like we're in for a interesting week, I hope the above helps some who might not be as familiar with our politics to understand what's going on.

I have to admit this is getting a bit too complicated for me and it's making my brain hurt.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
I have to admit this is getting a bit too complicated for me and it's making my brain hurt.

Most of this stuff is really dry Westminster procedural technicalities its not only very complicated but also rather dull yet is somehow making for quite a exciting end to this whole sordid Brexit saga. Lots of this stuff lies in the details and interpretations of laws and parliamentary procedural norms.

Yeah my head hurt just writing it lol.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
thanks for the update
hope for the best for you guys

somehow I do not see that happening

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Lots of this stuff lies in the details and interpretations of laws and parliamentary procedural norms.

Too true. But nothing to do with actually implementing the clearly expressed wishes of the people who voted to leave. That is why the whole system is broken.

I appreciate the trouble you take to explain things in your posts, they help me a lot - thank you.

Great write up. It's hard to pin down all the exact machinations of what's going on without some sort of bias. I try to keep up with it all via BBC and Twitter but it changes hour by hour. I agree it is fascinating and there's some huge poker games going on, mainly from Boris, which is how Trump deals with things (for better or worse).

Being tough, fair, democratic and honest is the best policy, so lets hope that prevails.

We'll all be glad once this is over, then pick up all the pieces and carry on with our lot. Politics eh?

a reply to: firesnake

Being tough, fair, democratic and honest is the best policy, so lets hope that prevails.

Good luck with any of that!

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin


Doesnt this just come down to politicians not doing what the people voted for them to do?
Three years of basically ignoring the vote?

It's time for Britain to bring back lynchings or at least tar and feathers.

a reply to: Bluntone22

That's pretty much it.

Guy Fawkes had the right idea.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Bluntone22

That's pretty much it.

Guy Fawkes had the right idea.

Killing people is a good idea?

a reply to: micpsi

Do you no have a sense of humour, laddie?

Debates (any moment now) are live on BBC Parliament, and perhaps Americans may be able to catch them on P.B.S.
At least I remember David Cameron , on his last Question Time, recalling an American calling out to him "Hey, Dave! Love your show!"

P.S. Also currently on CNN.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Doesnt this just come down to politicians not doing what the people voted for them to do?
Three years of basically ignoring the vote?

Not quite, you might look at that question and think its a fairly straight forward answer but its not, in fact I am actually working on another thread similar to this trying to explain it. It's a very complicated question that its at the heart of this problem and I honestly don't think I can give you a full answer in one post but let me ask you this.

What does Brexit actually mean?

Now some will saying "Brexit means Brexit" that is a gross over simplification.

We voted in 2016 to leave the European Union, there is quite a debate about what that actually means because there is a whole spectrum of possibilities between leaving the EU and leaving the EU with no deal that technically still respects the will of the people. Voting to leave the EU for example is not technically voting to leave the European Single Market, so we could have Brexit and remain in the ECC but a lot of Breixteers don't like that option. Then we could have Norway style deal, we could have a free trade treaty in place, the point is that there is lots of versions of Brexit that still respect the public vote.

Part of the problem is that anti-no-deal has been framed as anti-brexit and its not quite the same, you can be pro-brexit but still very much against the possibly of No-deal.

Parliament will today vote to extend article 50 even further and remove the bargaining chip of the Prime Minister of a no deal in his negotiations with the EU. This is now a certainty.

So where does that leave us?

A general election you might say - well no, because the same people voting to remove the no-deal option are also going to vote down a General Election.

You see this is not about deal/no deal, it's 100% about strengthening the EU's hand and forever extending article 50 to a point where Brexit can be shelved entirely.

Traitors will have gone through a cycle of
1) rejecting a deal.
2) taking no deal off the table.
3) rejecting a general election.

They are simply blocking Brexit - at all costs.

a reply to: UKTruth

What on Earth is the point of extending Article 50 yet again with a no deal off the table? Seems pretty clear the traitors are trying to block Brexit from ever happening. Disgusting.

a reply to: UKTruth

Would it be possible for the Prime Minister to simply link the extension of Article 50 to a motion of no confidence? As in, if Parliament votes to pospone Brexit yet again, they'd be displaying no confidence in the Government?

originally posted by: UKTruth
They are simply blocking Brexit - at all costs.

Are these people on the payroll of another? It's an extraodinary turn of events really. They won't leave without a deal, and they won't ever agree a deal.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin


I was under the impression it meant British exit from the European union.

Something that probably shouldn't have happened in the first place.

just now - the government just lost it's working majority after phillip lee defects to the lib dems from the tories.