"Suspend Parliament" How Will the Supreme Court Rule ?

[bluethrunthru]

The precedent of being able to close it for a year or 2 years apparently knocked the government’s confidence in winning

Has to be said when the "defence" against such a thing is that Parliament wouldn't allow it is rather stymied by the fact that if Parliament is suspended you can't rely on them to be the ultimate saviour.

I am not entirely sure that the courts view can be solely relied upon to be based on their own survival instinct. The court will have to come to a decision that they can also articulate that can't be seen to be their motivation being survival. They are in a proper pickle but I can see them perhaps giving Johnson quite the headache.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

it was a bit of an aside, and it could be a get-out for this 'backstop issue' - because no-one wants a hard border.

Just a quick google: Christianity is the main religion in Northern Ireland. The 2011 UK census showed 40.8% Roman Catholic.

Catholic majority possible in NI by 2021.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43823506

If NI is approaching a Catholic majority, then there could soon be a definitive push for a united and independent Ireland - i'm not really sure where that leaves the people who consider themselves as British in NI. but, if there is a united and independent Ireland, then that solves the backstop issue. on the face of it.

As far as i am aware the Good Friday agreement states that British and Irish Gvt's have a duty to work together and secure any referendum on independence.

It solves one 'problem' but oc it creates another.

Ok. I see where you’re going with it.
Yes it does potentially create other problems and as I’ve said in exchanges with AlexWilliamsGloves who lives there, I’m not sure a referendum North and South under these circumstances would be the wisest option.

You raise an interesting question though. I’m not assuming that a vote would split strictly down traditional nationalist/unionist lines but if you are actually out of the EU if that was to happen, putting the shoe on the other foot, where would it leave those that would prefer to be British under the GFA.
Yes a majority goes with the United Ireland/EU option, but the minority still have rights under the GFA and this could prove difficult in the details between the two Governments especially with one side in and one side out of the EU.
Not insurmountable difficulties but it would still take considered thought and cooperation from both sides. Not a topic you want knee jerk reaction on.

Sooner or later it will be worked out with a deal. My view would be, I hope it doesn’t lead to a drastic sudden change to the status quo up north.
I don’t see consequential reaction to Brexit as the basis for peace up North or on the island as a whole.

 

[meltonblue]

Think it’s more too many people now think they’re experts as they can use google... I much preferred it when everyone thought they were stupid, we were at least a bit more capable of objectivity (and more intelligent than we are now as a consequence)

Just on the op and some of the subsequent posts, whether someone voted leave or remain should have absolutely no bearing on what they think the Supreme Court should do in this case.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Tbh I think this country is sick of experts

This sub forum probably is.

 

[BobKowalski]

The will rule this is judicable. They will not rule against the current prorogation or order Parliament back. They will set conditions for future prorogations.

I will add that I have gotten zero of these court outcomes right so far.

 

[KS55]

i'm confused about this.

The Oct 3st is the date set in law for our leaving, yet it's also law we can't leave without a deal?

Ireland is the stumbling block, so we are told. If, for arguments sake, Ireland were to hold an independence vote, i think that the Good Friday agreement states that it would be Irish and British Gvt's duty to facilitate the outcome....

i have a niggling feeling that is where ?Boris is steering this. just a hunch.

But, anyway...

Oct 31st is either written into law, or it isn't.

The EU has agreed an extension to the period of negotiation which runs out on 31oct. Our Parliament passed an emergency act which requires the PM to ask for an extension beyond 31oct. He has said " I will obey the law", so in the absence of an agreement by 31oct he will have to deliver a letter to the EU asking for an extension. BUT the EU is not obliged to grant it. The law is a British law and cannot bind the EU. If they do not grant it, we will leave the EU on 31oct, with no deal.
If there is no deal, the EU will erect a hard border between the two parts of Ireland. The anglo irish agreement commits both countries to co operation but the absence of a hard border is not part of that agreement. The agreement makes it clear that the status of n.ireland is a matter solely for the citizens of that province.
That's it. Do not muddle Irish unity with the EU settlement.. They are seperate issues tho' both the Irish republic and the EU have tried to marry the two.

 

[KS55]

The will rule this is judicable. They will not rule against the current prorogation or order Parliament back. They will set conditions for future prorogations.

I will add that I have gotten zero of these court outcomes right so far.

You may well be right, but if they rule that the Queen's prerogative is justiciable, we will have a full blown constitutional crisis. The court will then be saying that the sovereign's will is subject to the law, an oxymoron.

 

[KS55]

Tarriffs would be set as part of any agreement between X and Y, surely?

for instance, we could offer (say) Japanese car manufacturers (insert any industry that employs lots of people) that if they employ 3000 people then we offer them a rebate on the taxes they pay for those employees, 10,000 people (for instance) and the gvt subsidies income tax / national insurance contributions etc and give further (0%) incentives on export duties.

We could realistically rebuild the British shipping industry, the steel / boat yards etc by allowing foreign companies to create jobs en-masse by offering them better deals than they may have in place now.

Here is an important point. The EU fear that the UK will become the Singapore of Europe....low taxes, low wages, no Excise duties etc etc. sucking in investment.

 

[BobKowalski]

You may well be right, but if they rule that the Queen's prerogative is justiciable, we will have a full blown constitutional crisis. The court will then be saying that the sovereign's will is subject to the law, an oxymoron.

It’s the Executive’s will. The Executive argued the Queen had no choice therefore there is no remedy for an Executive if it wishes to suspend Parliament for six months, a year or whatever. As there is no effective remedy the court may wish apply one.

The Queen’s problem is that she has no oversight function or power over the Executive as Head of State so all this calls into question what is the Monarch for and would we be better served with an elected Head of State with oversight powers.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The will rule this is judicable. They will not rule against the current prorogation or order Parliament back. They will set conditions for future prorogations.

I will add that I have gotten zero of these court outcomes right so far.

That would be broadly my guess too.