Gransnet forums

News & politics

Supreme court appeal today over proroguing of Parliament

(450 Posts)
Elegran Tue 17-Sep-19 10:26:23

Watch live on Youtube

growstuff Tue 17-Sep-19 10:31:08

I must admit I'm not expecting a lot. The judges will probably decide that it's political and they're not in a position to intervene.

Elegran Tue 17-Sep-19 11:22:10

At least it will air some facts and some expert opinions (not that experts are flavour of the month with those who don't want to be confused by facts)

Fennel Tue 17-Sep-19 11:28:42

It's expected to last about 3 days.
I agree with you growstuff.

JenniferEccles Tue 17-Sep-19 11:56:05

Well let’s hope they do decide it’s political and let the PM get on with delivering what the majority of us voted for.

newnanny Tue 17-Sep-19 12:49:21

I turned it on to see what it would be like but now but it is so boring I shall have to turn over. I can't follow it. I also too hope the court decide it is for PM to decide and not courts. As the party political conferences mean parliament would not be in session anyway it all seems blown out of proportion.

growstuff Tue 17-Sep-19 13:07:36

There is now talk of further prorogation and nobody will be able to do anything if a precedent has been set.

JenniferEccles Tue 17-Sep-19 13:15:40

Let's get something clear - Parliament has only been prorogued for an extra 4 or 5 days as the suspension was due to take place anyway.

Hardly a 'coup' is it?!

growstuff Tue 17-Sep-19 13:17:46

It's the precedent which has been set which is the issue.

trisher Tue 17-Sep-19 13:21:20

It is the longest proroguing of Parliament ever and the motives for doing it are not clear. Boris apparently doesn't think he should have to explain himself to the court or send anyone else to do it. He may be PM but like everyone else he has to obey the law.

Chucky Tue 17-Sep-19 13:22:41

I am more concerned with the precedent that Jo Swinson wishes to set.....that those in power can just ignore the results of an official referendum. Now that sounds more of a ‘coup’!

MaizieD Tue 17-Sep-19 13:22:43

Parliament goes into recess for the party conferences. This is a decision made by parliament. They don't have to go into recess and even if they do, they can be recalled at any time. This is completely different from the parliamentary session being ended.

growstuff Tue 17-Sep-19 13:24:23

Jo Swinson isn't Prime Minister.

MaizieD Tue 17-Sep-19 13:25:14

Swinson is not setting any precedent. There is absolutely no reason why the result of an advisory referendum has to be implemented.

growstuff Tue 17-Sep-19 13:27:37

The only way she would ever be in a position to revoke Article 50 would be if the people had voted the LibDems into office. The people would have been given that choice.

The prorogation of Parliament was an executive decision by the government. The people weren't given a voice. It sets a very dangerous precedent, especially at such an important time in the country's history.

humptydumpty Tue 17-Sep-19 13:50:39

Chucky as MaizieD points out, the referendum was not legally binding, it was advisory. Even if JS was PM she would not be legally required to proceed with implementing it.

Whitewavemark2 Tue 17-Sep-19 14:08:51

Agree with you grow

JenniferEccles Tue 17-Sep-19 14:31:15

I agree with Chucky

Smileless2012 Tue 17-Sep-19 14:40:33

I voted in the referendum because we were told by DC who called it that it was a once in a lifetime opportunity. There was no mention as far as I'm aware, that it was purely advisory.

If it was, surely it ceased to be advisory when parliament triggered Article 50.

janipat Tue 17-Sep-19 14:40:54

The House didn't have to go into recess for the party conferences, they could have been cancelled or MPs could have decided not to attend, or attend briefly and return to Westminster, an absolute host of alternatives. For those saying Parliament is only being prorogued for an extra few days, it's why those extra days that is the crux of the matter. Johnson, in my opinion, did it to avoid his minority government being called to account over Brexit. I wonder if you will be so in favour when a future PM, with whom you disagree, enjoys the precedent this will have set?

growstuff Tue 17-Sep-19 14:56:51

That's the point janipat. It sets a precedent which could be used by any political party for any reason.

Apparently Johnson has refused to produce a witness statement, explaining his reason for proroguing. Surely if he had a reason which would stand scrutiny, he would have had no difficulty in providing the court with a statement.

Whitewavemark2 Tue 17-Sep-19 15:17:37

It doesn’t bode well for our poor country if Johnson gets away with it.

Imagine Cummings? He will be very dangerous.

suziewoozie Tue 17-Sep-19 15:25:32

As some posters have said, there’s a difference between being prorogued and going into recess. This is the longest prorogation for 400 years. It normally lasts a few days with the rest of the time being recess during which for example, the committees can continue to sit (BJ was due to appear before one), the H of L may sit and as said above, the house could be recalled at any time if necessary. Those of you who agree with BJ proroguing shouldn’t insult the intelligence of those of us who don’t by pretending what he’s done is normal and usual - it’s simply not.

GracesGranMK3 Tue 17-Sep-19 16:07:56

This is all very fast fascinating. These judges seem to be questioning the reason for the length just as the Scottish courts did.

Barmeyoldbat Tue 17-Sep-19 16:41:49

We have a national emergency and Boris is behaving like a dictator and shutting down parliament to stop any debate. On top of this he is not taking the negotiations with the EU seriously and is planning on breaking the law by us just leaving. He is a disgrace.