Forum Topic

So ..

Does Boris get put in the Tower now?

Michael Ixer ● 2605d82 Comments

Why not vice versa?

David Ainsworth ● 2605d

Does this mean John Major also guilty, and if not, can someone explain why not?

Barbara Shillabeer ● 2605d

Possibly, I can't remember the details concerning Major's prorogation but it would probably rest on how well he documented and justified his reasons for his action. Obviously a tool used by Conservative prime ministers to suppress democracy?

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-judgment.pdf

Sarah Roberts ● 2605d

Just to add, Major's government wasn't the subject of this action, so a separate court case looking at the documents  and circumstances would be necessary, unlikely to happen now?

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

"Does this mean John Major also guilty, and if not, can someone explain why not?"I think that the onus in on you to explain why he is guilty and of what?

David Ainsworth ● 2605d

Thanks, Sarah. I see in this case Major's evidence as a witness was accepted without challenge. Perhaps when Major prorogued parliament he made sure he'd documented everything in detail.  Johnson has a reputation as being sloppy on details, looks like that's caught up with him now ...

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

I'm hugely enjoying this: the last time it happened was in 1649, and look how that worked out for Charles I!

Richard Carter ● 2605d

My daughter has just pointed out that at least Charles I loved his children. And knew how many of them there were, too... ;)).

Richard Carter ● 2605d

Let us hope the repercussions will not be reflected on the Queen!I suppose it would be difficult for Johnson to prorogue again in view of the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court.  Also, how would this ruling have a baring on the discretion of the Queen if a second request is submitted by the Privy Council?

Ivonne Holliday ● 2605d

must be  furious. How will their working relationship proceed after she's been made to look a fool for signing an illegal document.

Lucille Grant ● 2605d

I think the Queen has no culpability in the this matter, she was given bad advice but couldn't really know or challenge that. It's a mess - its where arrogance and stupidity ... Kafka or Monty Python couldn't make this up, gotta laugh 😶https://m.youtube.com/watch?fbclid=IwAR0dEi4ZpJhaQ8E16MLFusyEVVr_rhC2v1Qsfg7685Q8sV0Buk8R1Rj0F2U&v=W0pTpwqkB48&feature=youtu.be

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

And speaking of Kafkaesque type situations ...https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/sep/22/the-cockroach-an-extract-from-ian-mcewans-brexit-inspired-novella

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

@Barbara 11.18Good point Barbara.The result was widely expected and somewhat inevitable.  Major got away with it but to let Boris get away with it now would make it look like a precedent had been set in 1997.  Maybe the judges declared the current prorogation unlawful to stop any future attempts.In Lady Haigh's summation I found the words "void and of no effect" quite interesting. Wiki says "In law, void means of no legal effect. An action, document, or transaction which is void is of no legal effect whatsoever: an absolute nullity — the law treats it as if it had never existed or happened." So, if 'it' didn't happen it cannot be punished. Therefore no reason for Boris to step down.  What will happen now?Bercow will sweep back into Parliament bristling with self importance and more shouty than ever. MPs will be now recalled and Parliament business can start again. Labour Conference will immediately stop and the Party will lose out on its annual fund raising event. Conservatives will not get a chance at Conference and will all blame each other for the mess they're in.  Smug Jo Swinson will be even more smug because the LibDems have had their Conference and she's convinced she will be in No.10 by Xmas.  Deluded.

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

"In a historic ruling, the judges said the prorogation was "unlawful, void and to no effect"". Unlawful."Lady Hale said: "This was not a normal prorogation."(From the Independent)"Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage described the prime minister's decision to suspend Parliament as "the worst political decision ever" following the Supreme Court defeat.He called for Mr Johnson's chief adviser, Dominic Cummings, to quit."" (BBC)Scapegoats must be found! But still not Teflon Johnson?

David Ainsworth ● 2605d

At least one big relief in the Brexit saga: the rule of law in the UK is alive & kicking. Parliaments should never be silenced in a real democracy.I never want to hear Boris Johnson or any other Brexiteer say again that the European Union is undemocratic.

Lucille Grant ● 2605d

Life goes on David. Tomorrow's chip paper.

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

I think the resulting action is void but not the decision to take that action?

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

This is an entirely self inflicted crisis brought on by arrogance and contempt not only by Johnson but also Cummings.  What happens next?  The backlash has already begun with some Uber-Brexiteers (in the Telegraph of course) talking about the Supreme Court having “sided with usurping Remainers over the people”.  That’ll calm everyone down!  In my view that sort of comment is a total and wilfully misleading take on a legal judgement of an illegal act.

Jonathan Callaway ● 2605d

Did Johnson prepare that in advance for the Telegraph, presumably alongside one for an alternative verdict?

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

But Lady Haigh, in effect said prorogation didn't happen.🤔You really couldn't make this stuff up!😸

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

Obviously this result was considered by Boris et al..  I await with great interest their next move.Have spoken to a couple of Brexit supporters.  They are even more entrenched and really angry, than before.  My remainer part of my family ,at work.  Richard.  Lovely to have you back.  Been very boring of late without your input

Barbara Shillabeer ● 2605d

Absolutely spot on, Lucille!  Thank you.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2605d

This is a legal judgement.  We are so divided as a nation that everything is seen through he prism of Brexit which in itself barely got a mention in the judgement. How long before some clown revives the infamous “Enemies of the People” slur?

Jonathan Callaway ● 2605d

Just listening to Boris speaking now. Water off a duck's back Still defiant! 👏🏻

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

Yes it is a legal judgement. So what? Parliament is back a bit sooner than expected and two Conferences have been cancelled. Big deal.

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

Still defiant??? What a joke, he just blethered inconsequentially as only he can, even suggesting (what incredible nerve!) that he knew the law better ("This was clearly wrong") than the 11 most senior judges in terms Supreme Court!

Richard Carter ● 2605d

A  rather arrogant Johnson response given the unanimous verdict by the Supreme Court. He wouldn't be the first person breaking the law to disagree with the court's verdict ... he can say what he likes (within reason) but acting against the verdict is likely to lead to a injunction against any such act and possibly a contempt of courts action ...  

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

Anyone know what happened to the other Scottish court case to force him to comply with the law to extend the A50 dealjne and if he failed to comply to submit the letter for him (which can be done under Scottish law)? Would aseem now the Supreme Court has ruled on his law breaking that should also succeed?

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

There is a difference between acting unlawfully and illegally.

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

Perhaps the solution for Johnson is to take an appeal to the European Court of Justice. How delicious the irony would be...

Richard Carter ● 2605d

Rishard. I think that's been ruled Luton another thread. 🙂 Perhaps he could find an argument to put to the ECHR court?

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

As the Parliament has lost a lot of days as a result of this unlawful prorogation, then the government should put in for an extension beyond October 31st, so that Parliament can regain the lost debating and legislating time, of which they have been unlawfully deprived.Otherwise, Johnson will have gained an advantage from an unlawful act. This sets a very bad example.And Johnson still intends to try and get his Brexit through against the will of the majority.

David Ainsworth ● 2605d

Sorry, "Richard"!

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

...  And "ruled Luton"? I know it's a legendarily horrible place, but is it now a metaphor? Not a bad one, at thst...

Richard Carter ● 2605d

Predictive rules OK! "ruled out". I must get a new pair of reading glasses. Haven't bothered replacing them as waiting for cataract ops - so using latest far vision glasses which are OK for most things, just not good for proof reading!

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

Illegal versus unlawful = Semantics Sue, semanticsBlack's Law Dictionary defines unlawful as "not authorized by law, illegal." Illegal is defined as "forbidden by law, unlawful." Semantically, there is a slight difference. It seems that something illegal is expressly proscribed by statute, and something unlawful is just not expressly authorized.

Lucille Grant ● 2605d

@MichaelPredictive text loves to sabotage us! In an earlier post I typed the word 'back' and my phone changed it to Bach but I just saw it in time to change it back.

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

It’s way too clever for itself. I tried typing government and got Gove.  Hang on, does predictive text know something I don’t?

Jonathan Callaway ● 2605d

Hello Barbara,Regarding you message at 13.14hs *in case this reply appears at the bottom of the post).You say you have spoken to a couple of Brexit supporters and they are even mor entrenched and really angry, than before.  Why?  The ruling had nothing to do with Brexit, it had to do with the prorogation of Parliament and whether this was lawful or not. Brexit was not considered by the Supreme Court.Also, the remainer part of your family is at work.Could I be rude and say your comments illustrate a great part of the problem? Thank you.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2605d

Jonathan - it's really Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple who rule the world - they've got a secret council setting policy, strategy and leaders somewhere in an offshore tax haven 🙂

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

"Could I be rude and say your comments illustrate a great part of the problem?"Can I butt in and ask what the "problem" is? Thankyou,

Sue Hammond ● 2605d

You can butt in Sue.The  problem?  Brexiteers fuming while remainers are at work?

Ivonne Holliday ● 2605d

Will Johnson arrive back in the UK tomorrow morning and announce "Crisis? What crisis?" ...

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

Ha ha ha!!  That is very funny Michael.However, if he does, you know it would not surprise me in the least!

Ivonne Holliday ● 2605d

And maybe those folk in the Bilderberg club who secretly rule the world?  Uncannily, when I type in Bilderberg it offers no alternative!

Jonathan Callaway ● 2605d

Thank you, Barbara, that's very kind. I know it's on another thread somewhere, but I was a bit mystified by your choice of Jeffrey Archer: for me almost as bad as Dan Brown (of whose stuff, I've never got further than the first page - the first sentence, even - it's so abominably written).

Richard Carter ● 2605d

Yes.  I most definitely do have a problem.  Along with all other Brexit supporters.  The DEMOCRATIC referendum result was trashed by remainers.  I also don't really follow your reasoning as to what you mean by my remainer family being at work and my being at home being angry.  Maybe I'm being ultra dense but could you enlighten me please before I comment on something you may not have meant

Barbara Shillabeer ● 2605d

As has been pointed out on Twitter, it's  simply incredible to hear Tory MPs and Johnson say this is about frustrating Brexit when their entire argument was that the prorogation was nothing to do with Brexit. It is pure, undistilled, triple strength, stick-it-your-veins double-think. Or, in plain language, lying.

Richard Carter ● 2605d

Yes, Barbara, the referendum result was to Leave.  This result was then submitted to Parliament where the MPs needed to find an appropriate way to implement it.  As we know, this has not been the case.We live in Parliamentary democracy and this is how it all happens.  We do not live in a direct democracy, as Switzerland for example, where the result of a referendum is law.  In the UK we have a Parliamentary democracy and Parliament is sovereign, not the people.  The PM is accountable to Parliament and he/she is not above the law.Today's ruling was not about Brexit; it was about the prorogation of Parliament which was found to be unlawful as well as the advice given to the Queen by the Privy Council (and PM I assume).As for my comment in response to your post, it seemed to me that all the Brexiteer supporters you had spoken to were not at work at all while your remainer family were.  This seems to be supported by statistics that most (not all) people who voted for Brexit are retired while most (not all) people who voted for Remain are either at work or young.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2605d

Back to the opening question and it seems he will attempt to plough on regardless.  He was today still insisting that a no-deal exit is the legal default option on Oct 31st but it isn’t any more thanks to the Benn Act which explicitly outlaws a no deal exit unless parliament votes for it. We can still exit if there’s a deal which gets parliament’s support, but that can only be an amended version of Theresa May’s deal given the limited time involved. Even then getting a majority for what those amendments might be looks difficult to achieve. We are where we were before - deadlocked. Parliament is right to block a no deal exit as it would do significant damage to our economy and put many thousands out of work. In my view this is nothing to do with denying the Will of the People because even Brexiteers cannot agree exactly what that Will is.  Betrayal of the People?  Of course not, this is MPs doing what they are paid to do. Holding the government to account and acting in the country’s best interests. Unfortunately seen through the Brexit looking glass all we hear about is Betrayal. Please show me a sensible way forward that does not involve a second referendum and/or an equally divisive general election.  After a further extension of the deadline of course.  What an awful mess!!

Jonathan Callaway ● 2605d

It seems to me that the undemocratic remainers in parliament will stop at nothing to prevent the legitimate vote made by the country 3 years ago.  They want to overrule and ignore a perfectly lawful vote, I find it really awful.

Bunny Payne ● 2605d

Thank you for your considered reply.  I did not mean to give the impression that the Brexit people I spoke to were not working.  Apart from myself they all work. I rarely discuss politics now, except with like minded people as everyone is rather short fused and not really up to offering any workable solutions.I just hope and pray that a credible solution is found without too much acrimony as soon as possible

Barbara Shillabeer ● 2605d

Hello Bunny,Please bear in mind we live in a Parliamentary democracy and the vote of the people marks their wish; it is up to the MPs to implement it.  Parliament is sovereign and not the people.Remain MPs have expressed their opinion on proposals submitted by the Government.  I think it would be better if Parliament asked the Government to produce a road map (which they never had in the first place) on how to leave the EU.Theresa May tried her best and her "enemies" were the ERG group.  Boris, regrettably, has proved to be an unreliable PM. We need somebody who has strong convictions as Maggie Thatcher did (like her or not).  Sadly, I cannot see anybody at the moment who has these qualities.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2605d

Richard.  I re-read my post to you and it actually sounded sarcastic.  I'm so glad you took it as I had intended.  As you know there is a great deal we don't see eye to eye on, but occasionally you come out with a real gem which I find quite hilarious. ( no sarcasm intended ) Also, I do actually read some of the articles you put up, not too many as not keen on the Guardian..  I have learned quite a lot I was not aware of.My choice of books I expanded a bit more on the thread re Greta Thunberg. 24-09-19  13.02.00 As far as Jeffrey Archer is concerned I learnt a great deal re criminality and insurance and justice.

Barbara Shillabeer ● 2605d

Barbara, Don't worry, I hadn't seen your comment as sarcastic at all. And yes, we do disagree on some things, but at least we can have a civilised disagreement. One thing, though: out of concern for the extreme sensitivity of some here when confronted with facts or opinions they don't agree with, I haven't posted anything from the Guardian for ages! On Jeffrey Archer, I'm sure he's very well informed on criminality and justice, after all, as David Ainsworth intimated elsewhere, Archer has had experience of the legal system from the inside lol.

Richard Carter ● 2605d

Jeffrey Archer in the New Statesman Sept 4th 2019:When asked "What’s currently bugging you?", he says"People saying that we can solve the Brexit problem by 31 October, when I think it’s insoluble and irresponsible to say it can be solved by that time."

David Ainsworth ● 2605d

Was discussing this over dinner and, when a friend expressed expressed sympathy for the Queen, it occurred to me that if I was a monarch in my 90s I'd say "b****r this, I'm going to abdicate and let Charles worry out this mess" ... now that would be "interesting"? 

Michael Ixer ● 2605d

'There is a difference between acting unlawfully and illegally'.Ms Justice HammondPlease explain your ruling on this point to those of us not so intellectually privileged.

John Hawkes ● 2604d

Taken from the Times.What is the key point of law that the Supreme Court has ruled on?The first question was whether prorogation was “justiciable”, ie whether judges had a right to step in or whether this was a purely political matter. The court unanimously ruled that it was, saying that this has been established “for centuries” and citing a ruling from 1611: “The king hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him.”OK, but why was this decision unlawful?The court said that the prorogation affected “two fundamental principles of our constitution”, parliamentary sovereignty and government accountability. It was therefore “unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing parliament from carrying out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification”.Did the court rule that Boris Johnson lied?No. It ruled that the government’s motive was irrelevant if the suspension prevented parliament from doing its job “without reasonable justification”. Baroness Hale of Richmond, the president of the Supreme Court, said that it had. Key to the lack of such justification was the length of the prorogation and the looming Brexit deadline, with Lady Hale saying that “this was not a normal prorogation” and “the effect on the functioning of our democracy was extreme”. She said that the court had heard “no explanation why it was necessary” to shut down parliament for so long.This is an interesting point -'the court had heard “no explanation why it was necessary” to shut down parliament for so long'.Perhaps of course Johnson could not find time to fit in negotiating an EU withdrawal agreement with his pole dancing and 'IT for dummies' lessons with Jennifer Arcuri the model-turned-tech entrepreneur.

John Hawkes ● 2604d

"This is an interesting point -'the court had heard “no explanation why it was necessary” to shut down parliament for so long'."And Parliament has had 10 days of possible debate or legislation stolen from it, at a time of unprecedented national conflict, and Johnson could not even be bothered to justify or explain his reasons for this act which has been found unlawful. No restitution has been demanded nor offered. This seems like at least a partial victory for Johnson.

David Ainsworth ● 2604d

Terribly depressing yet so typical of the man that someone who is our Prime Minister might see this as a victory.

John Hawkes ● 2604d

And Johnson still manages to find new depths to plumb. Johnson said in the Commons that the best way of honouring the memory of Jo Cox and of bringing this country together is to get Brexit done. He knows just what he is doing with his crass insolence. Is this the sort of behaviour which we want? Uncultured appropriation.

David Ainsworth ● 2604d

David I agree with you. I think we will see far more of this as we head towards the Brexit deadline and the general election that is likely to follow. Just imagine how fevered the debate will become if we have a second referendum. One hates to think how users of social media will respond to this.

Jonathan Callaway ● 2603d

I don't think that Johnson has a clever plan. Meanwhile he is using probing fire to try to find any weakness or fissure in the Opposition, which is disunited. Surely he needs to get some support from the Commons in order to even get a general election, but he seems to be stiffening the resistance against him. He hopes that this will help him portray himself as a "man of the people" (!) fighting against a Parliamentary elite. He believes that something will turn up. But it may be like Billy Bunter's postal order.

David Ainsworth ● 2603d

For the Prime Minister to say the best way to honour the murdered MP Jo Cox is to secure Brexit has to be the most disgraceful thing he said in 3-plus hours of parliamentary discourse.  A sad, sad day for the Mother of Parliaments when a British leader seeks to make political capital out of a human tragedy. Bercow is right to demand that toxic statements should cease – from both sides of the Commons.

Alexander MacLeod ● 2603d

Perhaps Johnson should stop listening to Trump? He's just got back from NY and probably has t readjusted. He should realise shout loud and try bullying and threagteing isn't going to work as well in Parliament as it does in Congress ... and the UK's courts are independent. He also shouldn't forget, whatever we think of him, Corbyn's been dealing with this situation longer ... he got it right on apartheid and some other things?

Michael Ixer ● 2603d

the frustration levels for some pro-leavers are sky high, obviously threats against MPs or anyone else are unacceptable and should be dealt with accordingly (i.e., prosecution and imprisonment) but parliament has spent 3 years debating and thwarting our exit from the EU so is it any wonder that many people are frustrated and a few very angry? If by some miracle Boris negotiates a new deal and then gets it through parliament, the anger and frustration would evaporate, so although his response was clumsy, he wasn't wrong in his logic.

Adam Tripp ● 2603d

Not sure I believe in miracles!

Caroline Whitehead ● 2603d

"Not sure I believe in miracles!"It would take 3 miracles."If by some miracle Boris negotiates a new deal [miracle no. 1] and then gets it through parliament [miracle no. 2], the anger and frustration would evaporate [[miracle no. 3, I'd say]"

David Ainsworth ● 2603d

After his behaviour last night, I do hope so.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2603d

"(after a we leave)the anger and frustration would evaporate"In your dreams.

Freddie Francis ● 2603d

Sadly the nation is now deeply divided and Johnson's deeds and words are turning the gap between people into a chasm. I don't believe in miracles,  we just need a sensible, intelligent leader who can calm things down ... not sure there is anyone at the moment?

Michael Ixer ● 2603d

I agree with you Michael, it is absolutely horrible.I cannot think of anyone either, which is very sad indeed.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2603d

"I agree with you Michael, it is absolutely horrible.I cannot think of anyone either, which is very sad indeed."Well, as Stephen Stills said:-"And if you can't be with the one you love, honeyLove the one you're with"

David Ainsworth ● 2603d

"we just need a sensible, intelligent leader who can calm things down"I'm not sure that calming is possible at the moment:-"Far-right extremists are celebrating Boris Johnson’s “brilliant” comments in parliament amid mounting condemnation over his rhetoric.Britain First, Tommy Robinson and Katie Hopkins are throwing their weight behind the prime minister after he dismissed an emotional plea from a friend of the murdered MP Jo Cox as “humbug”.Their supporters have previously called for riots at demonstrations supporting Mr Johnson, amid warning that his language was “calling to” nationalists."https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-parliament-debate-jo-cox-death-brexit-tommy-robinson-a9121201.html"Labour MP Paula Sherriff called on Mr Johnson to stop using pejorative language to describe a law passed by the majority of MPs.“Many of us in this place are subject to death threats and abuse every single day,” she added, reminding MPs that they sat under the shield of murdered MP Ms Cox.“Let me tell the prime minister that they often quote his words—surrender act, betrayal, traitor—and I, for one, am sick of it. We must moderate our language.”Mr Johnson replied: “I have to say that I have never heard such humbug in all my life.” Ms Cox was murdered days before the EU referendum by a white supremacist, who saw her as a “traitor” because of her support for the Remain campaign and refugees."

David Ainsworth ● 2603d

Calming down is within the power of each individual person.  Don't buy in to the hysteria, mostly fire up by the newspapers, TV and social media.Reminds me of Diana's death and funeral, which would have passed off relatively quietly if not for the media hype.Looking again at the faces of the people screaming in Parliament, that's the only scarey thing.

Bunny Payne ● 2603d

I think Johnson’s incendiary strategy will backfire. For every non-Tory Brexiteer he wins over he will lose two moderate centrist “One Nation” Tories. Result, another hung parliament probably with the Tories still the largest party but the smaller opposition parties such as the LibDems and the SNP somewhat stronger.  Meanwhile the nation has become even more divided and whether we ever leave the EU or not there will be lingering open wounds in our society that may never heal. Not much of a legacy is it?

Jonathan Callaway ● 2603d

@David. I think Lennon's "Gimme Some Truth" or "Image" might be more appropriate?

Michael Ixer ● 2603d

"there will be lingering open wounds in our society that may never heal."You can see where Johnson gets it from:-"Dominic Cummings Told Labour MP Who Complained About Death Threat To Vote For Brexit".https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/dominic-cummings-brexit-death-threats-karl-turner_uk_5d8ce7ace4b0019647a51241

David Ainsworth ● 2603d

David, your message at 19:08hs??????????????

Ivonne Holliday ● 2603d

OK, not very well done. What I meant was that, if our theoretical ideal option is not available, then we just have to choose the least worst option. (I don't think that neutrality is an option here). Trite, I know.

David Ainsworth ● 2603d