Prorogation - Judgment Day:10.30am Tuesday 24/9/19

[1.618034]

Anybody seen him ?

Did they give him a pistol & a glass of whiskey but he's waiting for Dominic Cummings to tell him what he is supposed to do with them ?

Where the fuck is he ?

New York at the UN.

Morning Boris!

 

[dave_blue12]

My guess is the advice Johnson received was that his proposed course of action was not legal. Otherwise why keep it from cabinet

 

[Chris in London]

I thought it was established that Parliament is only dissolved at the end of a term or with a majority ?

The position is different now because of the fixed term parliaments act, but the point was being taken that if (as was agreed) the dissolution wasn't justiciable, by analogy why wasn't the same true of a decision to prorogue.

 

[FlemishDuck]

What the Supreme Court said is that you can't prorogue parliament without good reason.

So, thats part of law? Aka, it's the (Supreme's) courts job to process "the reason provided" for it's legallity?

Also sorry i'm still shit with astrophefhees, sigh.

 

[Neville Kneville]

New York at the UN.

Morning Boris!

But surely he should be up, speaking to the country ? It's two hours now.

He's supposed to be the fucking Prime Minister ?

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

That meeting was preceded by a telephone call to her from BoJo so he is part of the group. That they failed to produce affidavits stating their reasons were constitionally appropriate was the key to the judgement against them I think. The reasons given were not the genuine ones. So, as has been said, they may well not deliberately have acted illegally but their real motives have been judged unconstitutional and as such BoJo's position as PM is untenable,.

Fully agree. If you listened to the judgement or if you go back and read it is very clear that the reasoning given to the queen and reasoning expressed in private were very different and the motivation for the difference were all considered connected issues and part of an unlawful act.

It sounded and reads as a judgement in a treason case.

 

[mat]

11-0, not even City can achieve that score line

Dunno.

If Ole is still at the wheel come December....

 

[Chris in London]

The problem with that argument was that if the Governments argument was upheld in reality the Executive could simply sideline Parliament at any time of its choosing whenever it felt like it for any length of time. The balance of power between Parliament and the Executive had to be clarified and it has been.

No it couldn't because of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act.

 

[Chris in London]

So, thats part of law? Aka, it's the Supreme's courts job to process "the reason provided" for it's legallity?

The Supreme Court said this case is a one-off so it is very unlikely to happen again, but in the future when the Government decides to prorogue parliament it will probably only do so for clear and easily demonstrated reasons

 

[nmc]

My guess is the advice Johnson received was that his proposed course of action was not legal. Otherwise why keep it from cabinet

Johnson and Cummins brand of car crash / chancer politics really isn’t what the Country wants or requires. The recent comments from Johnson and Raab about pushing the limits of the law really are dangerous and undermine our constitutional principles. I think Johnson’s position is wholly untenable- but he’ll try to cling on but he’s finished.