Government watch

Parliament isn't just about Brexit; other important things have been sidelined or dropped altogether; this is why Jess Phillips is furious that the Domestic Violence Bill has now got to go back to square one.

A great deal of business could have proceded!
Important legislation - dealing with abortion law in NI or the domestic violence bill - could have continued.
Committees could have met and working parties could have continued.
There's a lot of business that would have been carried out behind the scenes and away from the cameras.

What is happening in Parliament, or rather what is not happening is far more important than any petty bickering about Brexit.

As in Venezuela, we are seeing democracy being manipulated by a legally elected leader to make it close to a dictatorship: withdrawing the whip from party members, many of them longstanding members who have a history of party loyalty, then closing the Parliament for prolonged periods.

More worrying in our case because it is clear that the Prime Minister is following the instructions of an unelected eminence gris, who is the real power behind the throne.

We have always prided ourselves on the independence of our judiciary and in a case as we have now they are our one protection from an elected dictatorship and while I can well understand the unwillingness of the English judiciary to act on this matter, they can be seen as too (physically) close to government, the Scottish judiciary have both a physical and psychological speration from the seat of government and can look at thins differently.

The best argument against Scottish independence yet!?!

Thanks humptydumpty for that fact check.

I agree with you on that NotSpaghetti.

I disagree Monica that the independence of the judiciary is any less in England than in Scotland.
Saying that they have a psychological separation from the seat of government, so will see things differently ( i.e.*correctly*) is just as bad as anyone saying ‘ they are Scottish, so what should we expect!’ Both views are wrong.
Judges look at things differently..... the Supreme Court will have the final say, and I do hope we won’t have any ‘ the judges are in the governments pockets’ comments if they do find no legal wrongdoing.
Interpretation of ‘intent’ is a very difficult matter.

I find it appalling and totally hypocritical that those Leavers who misled the country by bleating on about the sovereignty of Parliament are now defending closing it down so an unelected elite can force through an unwanted damaging Brexit. This is totalitarianism. If the left had done this, the squeals from the right would be heard in space.

Well prorogation didn’t last long did it? We are now into illegality territory.


Starmer
@Keir_Starmer
·

I welcome the Court's judgement.

No one in their right mind believed Boris Johnson's reason for shutting down Parliament.

I urge the Prime Minister to immediately recall Parliament so we can debate this judgement and decide what happens next.

Andrew Adonis
@Andrew_Adonis

Question for Johnson on his ‘people’s PMQs’: why did you lie to the Queen?

Yes, he did say that (Starmer) but nothing will happen until the final judgement takes place.

Hilary Benn
@hilarybennmp

This is unprecedented. Parliament must now be recalled.

Thank you Whitewave I have gone to the link and turned off my cookies. I am appalled that some people are so desperate for Brexit that they are prepared to throw democracy to the four winds and even more saddened by the members of the electorate who have accepted this. Irrespective of one's stand on Brexit, this surely should be a cause for concern.

Jo Maugham QC
@JolyonMaugham

We believe that the effect of the decision is that Parliament is no longer prorogued.

The independence itself is not less lemongrove , but the psychological independence is less. They are too close to the action. Until 2009 the House of Lords fulfilled the role of supreme court. and the Lords of Appeal automatically were in the House of Lords. 2009 is only 10 years ago.

All the main courts are in London and, for barristers, who until recently provided all our judges, the Inns of Court where they train are in London, as are many barristers.

When power in this country is so often accused of being London centric I can see that the London-based English judiciary, given their reputation for independence would be much more wary about being pulled into national governance disputes. The English judges decided that the case was not justiciable (capable of challenge) in the courts because to seek the prorogation of Parliament is political matter. They then granted a leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, which has yet to rule on the subject.

I think the way it is working out is the best way - that the challenge comes from the Scottish Courts not the English Courts.

Adrian Schiller
@Grumbletwat
·

My government commissioned it, my parliament has ordered its release, my taxes paid for it, it concerns my future and that of my family, friends, neighbours and compatriots.

So, I’d really like to read the Operation #Yellowhammer report.

Jenni Russell
@jennirsl
·
Terrifying. Scotland's court rules Johnson lied to Queen about real reason to prorogue Parliament. No 10 briefs: BJ may defy law to deliver Brexit. Johnson deliberately undermining faith in institutions that bind us. Easy to erode; tough to rebuild.

What really matters is the final say, by the Supreme Court,
And I don’t believe it is any less ‘anything’ than the Scottish Court.
Why should there be a challenge from the Scottish judges
( or that it’s seen as a good thing?)
Their interpretation of the law is one thing, the Judges in the Supreme Court may decide the same way, or not, but that doesn’t mean anything, other than it’s their judgement.

It couldn’t be made more clear that the judges consider that Johnson lied to the Queen.

The role of parliament to scrutinise government. Suspending parliament means government can't be scrutinise and is unlawful.

This is a finding of fact by the appeal court that Johnson has misused prorogation and lied to the Queen.

This is what the Supreme Court must judge on.

No sworn affidavit by any member of the government, suggesting that they knew they acted unlawfully.

Surely if this was a true democracy the UK would have already left the EU?
If I remember correctly the majority vote was to Leave!??

What on Earth has that got to do with this act of illegality heartbeat?

Whataboutery won’t wash I’m afraid

Suggestion by SNP deputy leader at Westminster, that No 10 have made statements that impugn the judiciary.

If this is true then are they suggesting that the courts can no longer be trusted.

The government is disgusting and dangerous.

Jess Phillips Esq., M.P.
@jessphillips

My name is Jess, my occupation is MP and my town is Birmingham. My question is "why have you failed domestic violence victims by cancelling the bill that would have helped them in order to get yourself out of the trouble of people like me asking you questions."

Good bye Johnson

BC Politics
@BBCPolitics
"If the government had misled the Queen about the reasons for suspending Parliament... it would then be the moment for Mr Johnson to resign"

Ex-Tory MP Dominic Grieve says PM's position may be "untenable", as court rules suspension of Parliament unlawful

I've only just seen his 'question time'; can't believe what I'm seeing. Illegally closes down parliament to do it. What has this country come to...