Dominic Grieve attempt to block Johnson's ability to prorogue Parliment

As for the WTO, there is NO Democracy there - they say jump, and if you want to be part of it- you JUMP. You won't get a chance to Elect Representatives at WTO, for sure.

And will we get to vote in USA elections, I wonder- as we will be ruled by Trump- and if he says 'jump' we will just have to JUMP. Take back control- hurrah.

How is somebody a slimeball for standing up for his beliefs? He can't even be accused of betraying his constituency, which is estimated to have voted just over 50% Remain.

Urmstongran 'It is important to remember what Dominic Grieve means by the end of democracy... it means the end of people like him being elected and then to ignore the views of his electorate because he knows better! '

No, you truly need to go back to history books and study the making of the UK. The UK has been, for a very very long time- a Parliamentary Democracy. This is what our own Sovereign style of Democracy has been- for Centuries. So Brexiters can't shout 'we want our own Sovereign Democracy' back -and at the same time, shout 'down with our own Sovereign Parliamentary Democracy' - it is nonsense, surely you can see that !

I was born, and currently live, in a Direct Democracy - and yes, it is totally different and has its +s and -s - as all systems do. But make up your mind- do you want Great Britain to follow its own Sovereign style of Parliamentary Democracy- or NOT? You just can't have it both ways, for sure.

Brexiteers have become like religious zealots. I doubt if they even think about the outcome.

How dare they bleat on about a "democratic vote" and "taking back control" when it's so obvious now what a dirty kind of game was played.

The only people who will now be in control are right-wingers, who'd sell this country to the highest bidder as long as they benefit from it.

It's fairly obvious what the plan is. There is no way that Parliament will agree to No Deal, so Johnson will have to call a General Election probably by the end of September. There would be a danger that the Leave and right wing votes would be split between the Tories and Brexit Party, so an election would achieve nothing in terms of forming a majority government. Johnson isn't trying to frighten the EU - he's trying to frighten Leave voters into voting Tory by stealing the Brexit Party's ideas and persuading people that the Tories are are a safer bet than the BP. This has the hallmark of Johnson's "new" advisor Dominic Cummings. It's also the reason for the mass sacking of existing ministers. Cummings has already started a social media campaign to "harvest" people's details. Be prepared for all sorts of posts asking for your email address/Facebook/WhatsApp ID etc. There are over 500 versions of the page which is going to be sent out and people have already received some of them.

As a result, the Conservatives still won't have the largest share of the vote, but the FPTP system means they will probably have the biggest party and will push through a no-deal Brexit. Some anti-Brexit MPs have already been deselected, so will be replaced with pro-Brexit MPs, who will vote however they're told to vote.

I wish someone would tell me what is so bl**dy marvelous about 'leaving' the EU that, if the worst come to the worst, we have to ruin the whole of the UK and trash its institutions to do it?

I would like to know the answer to that question too MazieD*

It seems to me Brexiters would support any move to achieve their aim, no matter how bad it would be for our Country!

Putting self interest and the EU first more like, doing everything in his power to overturn a democratic vote.

Slimeball

You will find that many will disagree on this one - a hugely intelligent and insightful man, with absolute integrity- knowing that putting the Country, his principles and Constituents, will eventually cost him his job.

RESPECT

It’s all posturing in an attempt to frighten the EU - a bit of muscle flexing from the Tories. We know it won’t happen, the EU knows it won’t happen and the Tories know it won’t happen, so you have to question what they think it’s doing other than creating a bit of a storm and making themselves look ridiculous in the process.

Creep back in his hole I hope. A complete slime ball.

I wonder what he will do now- resign too? Or stwy and fight with all his might from within?

A few weeks ago, in the Reith Lectures, Jonathan Sumption said that the fact that a Parliament is democratically elected does not mean that it cannot approve non-democratic laws.

This talk of prorogument isn't exactly what Mr Sumption had in mind, but it is very close. The government uses means available to it to overide the votes and opinions of members of Parliament to force a policy through. MPs are our representatives not our delegates, as several posters have pointed out.

It is worth those who support leave remembering, that although the Brexit party won the most seats in the European elections, more votes were cast for the parties supporting remaining in the EU than for Brexit. This without taking into account how many Labour and Conservative party voters also supported remain. If there is another election forced on us by prorogument, now that Labur is officially supporting remain, it is more than possible that the majority of MPs in a new parliament will favour remain.

The bigger the time gap between the referendum and the enventual leave agreement the bigger the change in the electorate and the easier it is to argue that since that time there has been such a change in the composition of the electorate, that a second referendum should be held to ensure that the current electorate still support leave.

I do not support a second referendum, but arguments like the above are becoming persuasive.

It won’t happen, in my opinion. Therefore I’m not going to stress about it.
?

Barrister Jolyon Maugham offers a selection of opinions of constitutional experts on the idea of Parliament being prorogued in order to stop it blocking a no deal exit.

To save you some reading I'll summarise. The experts conclude that it would be constitutionally unsound, and probably unlawful, for the executive to try to override the will of the sovereign parliament by proroguation.

I should jolly well hope they're right. We fought a very nasty civil war and chopped a king's head off to establish the principle that the legislature (parliament) is sovereign, not the executive (the monarch, in the form of the government)

twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1148870904581185536

I'll repeat some of my earlier question. What is so bl**dy marvelous about leaving the EU that we have to trash the constitution to do it?

Remember Sir Thomas More? When you've laid all the laws and the constitution flat where are you going to go for protection?

Don't hold your breath Maizie There is no logical answer to your question.

I wish someone would tell me what is so bl**dy marvelous about 'leaving' the EU that, if the worst come to the worst, we have to ruin the whole of the UK and trash its institutions to do it?

Jabberwok, I read that also it is in the EU small print, no doubt minions somewhere in the basements of Brussels are beavering away to sort this out to the EUs advantage??

As I understand it the extention leave date of Oct 31st was dependant on us partaking in the EU elections, and the withdrawal bill going through parliament by May 22nd . If these two things weren't executed then we would be obliged to leave by 31st May! Well the first took place but not the second! Why have we not left as per the agreement?!

Parliament is prorogued at the end of every session. John Major ended the session 18 days early I believe but not to take us out of our largest trade deal and all the intricacies of being a member of the EU against the will of parliament.

It could be argued that it was never going to be desirable or possible to vote to seriously degrade the uks economy.

It is only the seriously deluded who are arguing for a no deal.

It has been an emergency since parliament has taken it upon itself to prevent the democratic wish of a majority to leave the EU.

But JMs position was entirely different to what is facing us.

He had a majority government, went for a vote of no confidence and won, he prorogued parliament to delay a cash for questions report. Absolutely nothing to do with trying to prevent parliament from voting for something he didn’t agree with.

This prime minister, will possibly attempt to prorogue parliament to stop MPs from exercising their democratic right.

It is so serious as to be an emergency.

The Queen will be dragged into the whole debacle and if it all goes pear shaped will be implicated in the disaster.

It is quite dreadful

You can't pick and choose what is approved of and what isn't!!

I think you can!! Ok in one situation, but not in another?!! How can that possibly be correct? The rules must apply in all circumstances!

Blimey you can hardly compare the two. That is ridiculous.