Prorogation and humble addresses

The former Black Rod with his rod

In the early hours of this morning (10 September) an official read to the leader of the House of Lords the following words: “My Lords, it not being convenient for Her Majesty personally to be present here this day, she has been pleased to cause a Commission under the Great Seal to be prepared for proroguing this present Parliament.” 

The current Black Rod

An official called Black Rod is then despatched to summon the members of the House of Commons to the House of Lords. There, representatives of the Lords greet the members of the House by doffing their caps (or in the case of female Lords, nodding). A list of bills that are to receive the Royal Assent before Parliament is prorogued is read out, and after each bill the Clerk of Parliament declares in Norman French “La Reyne le veult”. (Remember that the Normans invaded us in 1066).

 

Lords doffing

Many opposition MPs remained in the House of Commons singing The Red Flag and other songs. A small group of MPs tried to prevent the Speaker of the House leaving to go to the House of Lords, but were unsuccessful.

Yesterday was a busy day. The House passed a bill that requires the Prime Minister to request an extension of EU membership if he is unable to negotiate an exit agreement by 19 October. This is designed to prevent a “no deal” Brexit, in preparation for which the government has spent billions of pounds, and almost all its time in recent weeks. The Prime Minister has declared that he will not request an extension. There are apparently 20 or more ways that he could achieve this. The most obvious, is to reach an agreement with the EU. Another proposed plan is to threaten to disrupt EU business so severely that the EU cannot tolerate our membership any longer. A drastic alternative would be to resign, in which case the opposition might form a government and be blamed (or congratulated, depending on your view) for not leaving the EU on 31 October. A radical alternative would be to send two letters to the EU on 19 October: one requesting an extension and one declaring that the government does not really want one. This is probably illegal. A still more radical procedure would be simply to ignore the law. It is possible that the EU will refuse an extension on the grounds that the UK is a thorough nuisance. The French President is known to have lost patience with us. I cannot criticize him for feeling so. In sum, nobody knows what will happen.

There were two humble addresses. These are non-government motions, formally structured as a request to the monarch, used by the opposition to propose motions without government approval. The Speaker has to allow such addresses. Speaker Bercow did just this and also announced his resignation by 31 October, timed to ensure that the current Parliament elects his successor. Given the Parliamentary arithmetic, this means that the Conservative Party cannot choose its favoured candidate for Speaker. The Conservative Party loathes the current Speaker because he has made several important rulings that the government does not like.

Dominic Grieve, MP (left), giving the first humble address

The first humble address, requires the government to deliver to the Commons all communications made by a list of named government advisers concerning prorogation and planning for a “no deal” Brexit. In addition, it requires the government to disclose its assessment (a document known as Yellowhammer) of the effects of a “no deal” Brexit. This motion was passed.

The second, moved by the leader of the opposition, prohibits the government from ignoring an Act of Parliament (in particular the bill concerning extension of EU membership mentioned above). The motion passed.

Before the end of business yesterday the government made one final attempt to call an election on 14 October. However, the motion failed to receive the necessary majority.

Parliament is now prorogued from 10 September until 14 October. Except for the option of reaching an agreement with the EU, the government’s room for manoeuvre appears to be severely limited, unless somebody has a very cunning plan indeed. It is now too late to hold an election before the end of October. The big question for the moment, therefore, is whether or not the government reaches an agreement with the EU, and if not whether it agrees to request an extension of membership.

NOTE: because I did not post them on my blog previously, I am copying below two notes I sent earlier this month concerning the current political embroglio.

WRITTEN 5 September 2019:

First of all, the basic facts. The House of Commons passed both the first reading and the second reading of a bill that obliges the Prime Minister to seek a delay of Brexit in order to avoid a non-deal exit. The combined opposition had a majority of 28 out of 627 MPs who voted. As these things go that is a large margin by which to lose. The second reading means that the bill now goes to the House of Lords.

The government then moved a motion to call a general election under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act. This was lost by 298 for to 56 against (the Labour Party abstained). The government needed 424 votes to carry the motion. You can do the math.

In theory, therefore, the government is legally obliged to do something it has vowed not to do (delay Brexit beyond 31 October) and cannot call a general election, which is the usual way the government would escape from this trap, because it cannot get enough votes to call one. The government has these remaining options:

·      To instruct its peers in the House of Lords to filibuster the bill obliging the government to seek a delay. At 01:30 this morning the government decided not to do this. Thus, the bill will pass. There must have been an undeclared motive for failing to obstruct the bill’s progress.

·      Pass a new bill designed solely to call a general election. This would override the Fixed Term Parliament Act and would require a majority of one vote. The government now has fewer MPs than it did on Monday because of defections and withdrawing the whip from 21 Conservatives who voted against the government, and one defection. Thus, the Conservatives have 289 MPs. They can count on 10 DUP MPs from Northern Ireland: total 299. If my maths are right, the Labour Party plus other parties absolutely opposed to the government have 273 votes. If the MPs expelled from the Conservative Party vote with the opposition, the total would be 294. Leaving aside a few odds and ends (Sinn Fein who do not attend the House of Commons and a few others). This means that the Scottish National Party has the votes to decide the matter: 289 Conservatives + 35 SNP = 324, a majority of perhaps 25. The government may now try to split the SNP from the rest of the opposition.

·      Resign, in which case the Labour Party might try to form a coalition government. This would end Mr Johnson’s career

·      Act on the instructions of the bill currently before Parliament and seek an extension to Brexit. This would wreak great damage on the Conservative Party and would likewise probably end Mr Johnson’s career.

I have been considering whether Mr Johnson has miscalculated, or whether all of these events are going to plan. His behaviour indicates that from the beginning his plan was to have a general election, in which Brexit would be the key issue so that he could portray his opponents as surrendering to Brussels. Conservatives now include the work “surrender” in every utterance. He prorogued Parliament in order to reduce the time available to Parliament to challenge his plans. He then deployed a mixture of aggression (threats to end the careers of opponents in his own party) and cajoling (trying to persuade pliable MPs to wait until 17 October to debate a new arrangement that he claims he can negotiate). If he had succeeded in achieving Brexit on 31 October he could have campaigned in an election as the hero who rescued us from Brussels. If he were to be frustrated by the opposition, he could call an election and campaign to save us from the “chickens”, or “great girls’ blouses”, who passed the “Brussels surrender bill” (all these insults have been used in the last day or two).

The Prime minister’s problem is that his own actions have deprived him of a majority in Parliament. His other problem, is that Mr Corbyn, the Labour Leader has not been goaded into an election until he is ready (i.e. until a no-deal Brexit has been prevented and possibly until after 31 October). To call an election by passing a new law through Parliament he needs the support of a party big enough to give him a majority. The only option is the SNP. Now, the SNP oppose Brexit entirely and loathe Mr Johnson. However, the party exists to call a referendum on Scottish Independence, and its leaders may calculate that Mr Johnson is so unpopular in Scotland, that in an early election they can win more seats in parliament and achieve their referendum.

Finally, the Prime Minister’s behaviour has appalled a large element of his party and there have been protests about his handling of the government’s business this week. Indeed, Jo Johnson, the Prime Minister’s brother and a cabinet minister, has resigned from the government and will not stand for election again because he disapproves of Mr Johnson’s behaviour. He will have to work very hard to avoid more defections.

WRITTEN 4 September 2019:

Parliament returned from its summer recess yesterday at 2:30pm. A lot happened that afternoon.

As you will recall, the Prime Minister had already asked for the Queen’s consent to prorogue Parliament at the end of this week, so time for those opposed to his Brexit plans was very short indeed.

In order to get his way, Mr Johnson did the following before Parliament resumed:

·      He claimed that negotiations with the EU are progressing well and that to vote against him would undermine those negotiations and make a no-deal Brexit more likely. MPs should therefore do nothing to obstruct his negotiations, and in any case would be able to debate the results of negotiations after the meeting of EU heads of government on 17 October. The problems with this line of argument were:

o   His opponents do not believe that Mr Johnson is negotiating at all and is preparing for a no-deal Brexit while pretending the opposite. In sum, their argument is that he cannot be trusted. There is plenty in Mr Johnson’s past to support that judgement of his character and veracity.

o   The EU is not aware that Mr Johnson is negotiating with them and has said so publicly.

o   A debate on 17 October is too late to take an effective action.

·      The government “whips” (who instruct MPs how to vote) told Conservative MPs opposed to the Prime Minister’s strategy that if they vote against the government they would have the “whip withdrawn” (i.e. be expelled from the party) and be “deselected” (not chosen as a candidate) at the next election. In effect, this is a threat to end the political career of the rebels, including those who a few weeks ago were government ministers and Winston Churchill’s grandson, Nicholas Soames.

·      He met many of the “rebels” for an hour yesterday morning to press them to vote for him. The meeting was by all accounts rancorous and a failure.

·      Declared that a vote against him would be considered  a vote of no confidence and that he would move a motion to dissolve Parliament and call a general election. However, under the Fixed Term Parliament Act two thirds of MPs must vote to call an election. The question is whether the other parties will decide to fight an election on a date and on terms decided by Mr Johnson.

In short, the Prime Minister used all the tools at his disposal to prevent defeat in Parliament.

The government lost the vote 328-301. During the debate one Conservative MP theatrically crossed the chamber to join the Liberal Democrat Party as Mr Johnson was speaking. A further 21 voted against him. Mr Johnson then declared his intention to call an election. The leader of the opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, who alone has enough MPs to provide the necessary majority, stated that he would not agree to an election until legislation is passed to rule out a no-deal Brexit and instruct the government to seek further time to negotiate with the EU.

Parliament will debate a bill to prevent a no-deal Brexit today.

I suspect that Mr Johnson began the day thinking he had all, or almost all, of the cards in his hand. This morning he has few cards left unless the opposition gives him an electoral card. He does have one card left. The legislation must pass the House of Lords. In theory, Conservative peers could filibuster to talk the bill out of time, but I understand that the leader of the Lords intends to try to prevent this.