On page 48 of the Conservative manifesto for the general election, “Get Brexit Done. Unleash Britain’s Potential”, there are the following seemingly fair-sounding and innocuous words:
“After Brexit we also need to look at the broader aspects of our constitution: the relationship between the government, parliament and the courts; the functioning of the Royal prerogative; the role of the House of Lords; and access to justice for ordinary people. The ability of our security services to defend us against terrorism and organised crime is critical. We will update the Human Rights Act and administrative law to ensure that there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government.”
Do you know what? I think they’re going to scrap the remaining practical rights and prerogatives of the House of Commons in an act of spite. It will be all the better to allow a government with the support of about 40 per cent of the electorate, and, say, the positive support of a quarter of the adult citizens of the country to do what the hell it wants for five years without pause or interruption. Landslide or not, they will be able to behave as if they have untrammelled power.
It’s no secret that Boris Johnson and his allies deeply resented the speakership of John Bercow, and the democratic reforms he made to parliament that made it once again able to exercise its role as the seat of sovereignty in our constitution. The rules of the Commons, albeit some archaic, were used to frustrate, as Johnson would see it, Brexit, though in reality they were only aimed at permitting the Commons to have its own final say on a Brexit deal, and rule out no deal, and nothing more than that.
There were manoeuvres, using emergency debates (Standing Order 24 of the House of Commons’ rulebook), the ancient right to send a Humble Address to the Queen, taking control of the order paper (parliamentary agenda), and urgent questions. All were exercised by the Commons taking back control over the order of business of the house and making ministers accountable for their actions.
It would have been more difficult for the backbenchers concerned, dedicated parliamentarians such as Dominic Grieve, Hilary Benn and Oliver Letwin, to have done so without the support of Speaker Bercow. But Bercow was acting purely in the interests of the Commons itself – he was partisan in favour of the institution, which it was his job to defend and champion.
Well, the Johnson administration station, if elected, is going to stop all that malarkey. They will also – it is more or less explicit – interfere in the judiciary and restrict the powers of the Supreme Court to rule on issues such as the prorogation of parliament. There has been talk – not in this manifesto admittedly – of making the judges politically accountable, by being ratified via hearings by parliament, in the way they are in the United States. They have not forgiven Lady Hale and her colleagues for their ruling that the suspension of parliament in the autumn was unlawful, null and void. Neither would I be surprised if they pack the Lords with new and obedient Tory peers.
...
