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

[FlemishDuck]

It depends on whether the Supreme Court think the Court of Session got it right.

You don't say! Still thx for the link and input.

I think ill put my money on them deciding it's illegal. Afterall the political climate does not exactly call for ignoring Scotish court on the matter and otoh the scotish ruling does provide a good or otherwise "workable" reason/excuse for it.

 

[cibaman]

It depends on whether the Supreme Court think the Court of Session got it right.

Is that how they approach it? Do they review the ruling that is being appealed or start from scratch?

 

[Chris in London]

Is that how they approach it? Do they review the ruling that is being appealed or start from scratch?

The former, but that is what the Court of Session did in the first place, and they still overturned the original decision

 

[lancs blue]

Isn't the safeguard about proroguing that parliament will reassemble? The Order in Council states when Parliament will reassemble, so it can't be said that when the order was made it wasn't clear when parliament would be sitting again.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm playing devil's advocate in a case where the outcome seems to me to be on a knife-edge.

I think it needs clarifying by legislation if necessary - it seemed during the hearing that there was little to stop an unscrupulous government deciding that prorogation could last for a year or two and if this prerogative power is not justiciable what protection is there?

 

[Mike D]

I think the ideal outcome would be for the Supreme Court to rule in favour of the government so as to avoid being politicised. And for all of the parties to agree to include in their forthcoming manifestos that they will introduce legislation to restrict the right of the PM to prorogue parliament. Any chance?

Of course they are all going to do that aren't they of their own free will and all that?

 

[cibaman]

Of course they are all going to do that aren't they of their own free will and all that?

I did say it was an ideal

 

[Chris in London]

I think it needs clarifying by legislation if necessary - it seemed during the hearing that there was little to stop an unscrupulous government deciding that prorogation could last for a year or two and if this prerogative power is not justiciable what protection is there?

Tell you tomorrow

;)

 

[George Hannah]

One hour to go - it could genuinely be a turning point in our constitutional history

 

[Indaparkside]

The queen's in the tower talking to the hangman. Borris is fucked lying cvunt

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

One hour to go - it could genuinely be a turning point in our constitutional history

There is a lot at stake. Ruling with the government today basically gives them a green light to halt parliament at will unless the Queen gets involved.

The fact that it is wrong is not up for debate - it is basically a question of is it allowable under current law. Is there a massive loop hole? Under that scenario John Major could have ruled over us as a dictator for the last 20+ years as long as the Queen sat on her hands.

Massive drama either way.