I'm dumbstruck. Just dumbstruck.
Well, we live in a democracy ruled by law and the judgement was delivered by our own highest court. It was unanimous. Therefore Boris screwed up.
I think I may have just seen the death of the Conservative Party - I can't imagine us even getting the 9% we sunk to in the EP elections. I can also understand if the entire Conservative vote goes to TBP in the inevitable GE.
However, before this is all final, we must wait and see what the Prime Minister has to say.
But let's be clear what the judgement was about - it was about the legality of the government's action. The Brexit vote, and the need for us to leave the EU still stands.
And By God when we've got a majority in both houses, there will be a tsunami of legislation to come to ensure that this can never happen again..
Addendum
========
I've just put my finger on the moment in the past I felt exactly like this - it was the announcement that HMS Sheffield had been sunk.
All that did was to fill us with a terrible resolve that we must win.
56 comments:
I last voted tory in 1992, never voted liberal or labour.
Wonder if Boris will now start hinting at a pact with Nige?
Can't wait to see the various manifestos
Not sure that it the right reaction. If you are in uncharted territory then you don't know what the law is, so it is not clear why he would have any duty to resign.
What did you expect from a 100% Remain bunch of judges?
Though in this case it doesn't make a great deal of difference. Yes, if they'd ruled the Government has the power to prorogue regardless, then Boris could have prorogued Parliament again until after the 31st. But other than that nothing much has changed. By proroguing and precipitating all this legal shenanigans Parliaments hand was forced and they passed the A50 Extension Bill. Which still stands, and they can't exactly change that now, and Parliament cant reconvene until after all the party conferences anyway, so they'll have to wait and see what Boris does with it, like the rest of us.
What it has done is stick the Courts slap bang into the middle of politics, because now anyone can go to court to stop the Government of the day proroguing Parliament. And they'll have to rule on any particularly contentious ones.
To ensure that what can never happen again?
An unlawful suspension of Parliament, or the having of the power by the Courts, to hold the Government to account to the Rule Of Law?
Now Legislature trumps Executive, Judiciary trumps both. Judges rule, OK?
(O Chaos!)
Rule of Law.
Though here they are making up the Law so it is not quite so grand as the caps would suggest.
I think the bit they have made up is not very balanced (see all other comments)
We are in uncharted territory that's for sure.
Wonder if we will start hearing calls to elect judges?
Surely if the Lib Dem’s get into power we can take them to court to challenge their decision to cancel Art 50.
It's all over, we are never leaving the EU. The fix was in as soon as we won the referendum. No way were the ruling elite going to allow the plebs to go against their wishes.
Goodbye to democracy.
Jaded
No, Sackerson.
Parliament could overturn even this ruling by an Act, if there were the will amongst MPs.
It remains supreme.
Well let's see what the next parliament looks like, although this one is clearly going to last past 31st october.
You were over ambitious.
You tried to smuggle in a whole right-wing elected dictatorship, supported by only a few dozen MPs, under cover of an advisory, single-issue little vote.
You were rumbled.
You'll just have to content yourselves with merely leaving the European Union on sensible terms, which is exactly what ALL the Leave campaigns promised.
On the other hand... if prorogueing is justiciable then the decisions of the Speaker could also be justiciable, including the permission of the Benn Bill to proceed when that was contrary to constitutional tradition.
Clutching at straws perhaps, but I don't see that this impacts Brexit much. Constitutional balance of powers is another matter.
Am I alone in having the feeling that this isn't the end but the first step on a path to somewhere not terribly pleasant.
We had a chance to detach ourselves from from the toytown empire but the political class have decided we can't.
I don't think they understand what they have done. I'm not sure they care. I don't know who they think will reward them.
Boris position will depend on the public's interpretation, and hence the Tory party's. I would not be very confident that the public will simply accept the.judges' ruling.
Assuming the polls stand up Boris just toughs it out until eventually there is a vote of no confidence. If the people perceive Boris as being blocked by The establishment they will continue to back him.
The establishment has bet that we would all forget about independence in a year or two. They were wrong. Now they are doubling down. They will be proved wrong again.
Unless they plan abandoning elections altogether, they will lose. If they do that there will be blood.
Radders-time to ban Cheesy for good. From now on it will be war.
It all now depends on Johnson. If he takes these Judgeboy scum's edict then it is ta ta Tories. If he defies and tells them to fuck off then we can still win. A GE must be forced. Between ZaNu, the Limp Dicks and the scummy Cheese of remain they have shit their holes full. We will wipe the floor with the bastards.
If Dominic Cummings and his team are as clever as I'm hoping they are, then they should have game planned for this eventuality. Assuming the goal is really Leave the EU at the end of October.
I also hope they are planning to use these same courts against the traitors in all three main parties. But I suppose that's never going to happen and if it did these lefty UK hating judge would decide in favour of the traitors.
There's always Robin Tillbrook's case, of course; he hasn't gone away.
Domestic Violence Bill should be going through then.
Not so clever to sit on that girl's laptop.
@Raedwald - you must be gullible to have thought that Boris (and Dom) had not screwed up. Don't you bother with evidence or facts?
Or, like the Conservative Party, is it a case of following the rules that suit your world view?
A new parliment passes legislation that impacts the judges. Judges say "Oh no you don't!" and reverses it.
@JPM: And absent a willingness by the Opposition to force a General Election, what is the potential for the use of prerogative power to override this Blairite invention?
@Cheerful
What are you drivelling on about?
"There's always Robin Tillbrook's case, of course; he hasn't gone away."
I thought that had been thrown out, didn't even meet the criteria for a case, apparently. A decision that pretty much showed where todays decision would go - the courts have decided they want to play politics - to throw out any pro-Brexit cases without even considering them, and accept and find in favour of any anti-Brexit ones.
I suppose the main sensation is a feeling of deflation, of being let down.
However, already more or less knowing what the court’s decision was beforehand, as we did, didn’t make the announcement any easier.
The thing is… I don’t know why?
I really don’t have much time for Boris, so it can’t be that.
Like Mark I haven’t voted for his bunch since the last one that Thatcher won. The Major bastard proved to be the first of a stream of what are effectively EU appointees as leader, and many Tory voters could see that quite quickly…
… and then Maastricht, which led me to UKIP in 1995.
No… I reckon that with today’s bit of negativity, it has finally sunk in, that my kind are not wanted ‘round these parts, we are a bit old fashioned for believing that we lived in a democracy.
I feel dispossessed somehow.
Sobers, have a look at this from two days ago. It's an interview with Robin Tillbrook, about 20 minutes long but worth the time. He's working on three lines of attack:
https://youtu.be/QvjwrPHTkck
It just occurred to me that Doris could appeal to the ECJ?
I cannot see this Parliament voting for an early GE as it will use all the time and powers at its disposal to take over Parliamentary business and cancel Brexit before another GE has to take place.
This Parliament knows that it is unrepresentative of the country which voted 64:36 by constituency to leave and that this may be their only chance.
BTW, could this Parliament cancel any further GEs ?
The involvement of the judiciary will I hope mean that leave supporters will also be using the courts to contest decisions made by an unrepresentative Parliament, the funding of which will need to be via crowd funding.
Talking of taking to the courts, I would like to see our government take the EU to an international court for non-compliance with its own Article 50 Paragraph 2.
"an interview with Robin Tillbrook, about 20 minutes long but worth the time. He's working on three lines of attack"
I think the problem is that the courts are not dealing with law any more and instead dealing with politics. What we are coming up against is the realisation that the courts are now an unelected dictatorship - they can determine what is and is what isn't law entirely of their own volition, and there's nothing we masses can do about it if we disagree. They can decree black is white and vice versa, and while our eyes can see the truth, the legal effect is the opposite. Ergo arguing points of law regarding something as politically significant as Brexit to a court that doesn't agree with the outcome of your arguments is futile now, because they will just blank you.
As has happened with Tilbrook. He can continue his legal case, with appeals and whatnot, and I'm sure that honest legal minds will concur with his assessment that there is a significant legal case to be considered, and the courts will continue to refuse to accept them as valid. Because they are not assessing the arguments on legal validity any more, rather their political significance. And there is no one in a position to gainsay them. They are the final arbiters, who have been corrupted.
Gina Miller et al are given every chance to make their cases and the judges find unanimously in their favour, while Tilbrook is given the bums rush. They're not even hiding the bias any more.
The ECJ, quite rightly, has no jurisdiction in such matters, just as it does not in all but a few areas of English or Scottish law.
But I think that you were serious. r-w, and so clearly lack any self-awareness as to irony.
"The ECJ, quite rightly, has no jurisdiction in such matters,"
Neither do the UK courts, as the High Court recently ruled. But in the age of the ECJ and the Supreme Court who's role is to rule which ever way the establishment wants, its all fair game.
And JPM, gloating when the bent establishment goes your way doesn't make you right; it makes you a cunt.
JPM said @ 11:59
'You tried to smuggle in a whole right-wing elected dictatorship..'
An example of why people on here can't take you seriously is the language you use. In this case your description of what is a minority government led by an embattled conviction politician - or at least he still is at the time of writing. You don't want the UK to leave the EU, which is fine by the way. Your opinion is equally important to mine. The problem comes from not implementing the decision of the majority 39 months ago. Where's the justice in that?
Those justices today had their say and their decision enacted: Parliament will resume tomorrow. No dictatorship. And as things stand we could still be in the EU next year. A majority in Parliament wants us to stay in the EU and they'll fight tooth and nail to make sure those 17.4 million people never get the justice they deserve.
"The Saxon is not like us Normans. His manners are not so polite.
But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice and right.
When he stands like an ox in the furrow – with his sullen set eyes on your own,
And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
Steve
How many times must it be repeated?
Parliament's expressed will - and that of Johnson - is to leave the European Union, and on a sensible deal. That is what ALL the Leave campaigns promised.
It is the extremists, who try to rewrite history, and falsely claim that the "will of the people" is a whole list of things that aren't even true for most Leave voters.
Change the record.
The Saxons never successfully overthrew the Normans, and many still grovel to their successors-in-title to this day. Look at the crawling to Rees-Mogg, for instance.
Boris might be begging Nigel for a pact.
Really, Dee Dee?
Farage seem s to have more respect for the UK Constitution and for the Separation Of Powers than does Johnson.
Condemnation of the Government also came from him, the Brexit party leader, who stopped short of calling for Johnson to resign but urged the prime minister to sack Dominic Cummings, his most senior aide who is thought to have been behind the prorogation plan. “The calling of a Queen’s speech and prorogation is the worst political decision ever. Dominic Cummings must go,” he said.
Are you sure?
@Cheerful
The referendum was a simple question: stay or leave.
No deal was mentioned. As a leave voter, I am a moron, I know this. However, I could not help but notice project fear. I don't think there was a catastrophe we weren't promised, simply for voting leave. What was this project fear premised on (not an unreasonable question for a remainiac as project fears was yours - the generic you before you kick off) a deal or no deal?
I assumed no deal. Was I wrong to do so?
So sure was remain, that they probably didn't think this petty distinction was important. As far as I could tell at the time, benefits from leaving were based on deals we would be free to make with third parties.
The two year period of article 50 was to put in place transitory arrangements to ensure no unnecessary disruption, after which we would be out (and we could then negotiate a proper deal with the EU). I'm not aware that a "deal" (which I took to mean a longer term arrangement) was needed within this two year period. Nice of course but not necessary and certainly not compulsory.
There was a "deal", but one so bad that this parliament rejected (the same one that pointedly refuses to let Boris resign by calling an election rejected it three times. Why am I and other leavers responsible for the farce wrought by a remainer parliament?
BTW the saxons of Germany handed the Norman's of france their arses three times in less than a hundred years.
@JPM: "Parliament's expressed will - and that of Johnson - is to leave the European Union, and on a sensible deal."
I stand open to correction, but the decision to leave was unqualified as to "deal" in the Referendum and the Act reversing ECA1972; the "meaningful vote" stuff was merely a Parliamentary motion.
It's all getting reminiscent of the Democrats in the USA - malicious disruption born out of pique. And the implications of this strategy are dangerous for future administrations of whatever colour.
What an unholy mess.
JPM said @ 15:31
'It is the extremists, who try to rewrite history, and falsely claim that the "will of the people" is a whole list of things that aren't even true for most Leave voters.'
The 'will of the people' can only be known by the binary decision put before them in the referendum. The result is set in stone and as we all know you cannot extract water from a stone - which is what you're trying to do. It doesn't matter what reason drove people to vote a certain way the fact is Leave or Remain was all that was on offer that day. So I'm left arguing with a twat like you over a decision made 39 months ago and the political class can't see the damage they're doing to our democracy? - I include the farce at the Supreme Court because it shouldn't have got this far.
Do me a fucking favour and read the poem, the Saxons lost - and through my father I'm a descendent of the West Saxons.
Steve
Where is the LAW which says that there must be no deal?
Where was the ballot paper, asking the electorate whether they wanted one or not?
You've got brexit.
It's the WA.
A load of steaming, isn't it?
You voted for it, because it is the only practicable thing possible unless the Tories drop their red lines.
11-nil.
Did not expect Manchester City's weekend efforts to be surpassed quite so soon.
1689 Bill of Rights, part of our English Constitution:
"...freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament;"
The Judges are acting directly against our Constitution and asserting rights they do not have.
I would be perfectly content if they were all arrested and tried for Treason.
Bill of Rights 1689
I suppose if people can self-identify as lamp posts (JPM for example) the Courts can rule on matters Political with impunity.... /sarc
My impression is that Boris couldn't care less, win or lose - his stance in refusing assistance from TBP is indicative of his full intention to 'throw' any GE and, in particular, keep the country in a position whereby it can never resolve the Brexit issue - all to the benefit of the EU.
I'd dearly like to know what excuse our Government uses to keep paying into the EU coffers. At the very least they could simply withhold payments pending a satisfactory resolution of matters and we all know that 'money talks'.
..and yes JPM, resolution of the issue is as simple as making a sensible deal and leaving. If only you fuckwit remainers would give our leaders the necessary negotiating powers to do so - such as being able to threaten a no deal Brexit.......
I hope Sturgeon is paying close attention to all this - if she thinks an Independent Scotland can break away 'with impunity' she should note the obstacles people (and Government/Courts) can put in her way to delay - indefinitely - any such proposal.
The deadlock we are heading for cannot be broken - as planned. Question now is how long do .gov/EU reckon it will take for the Brexit voters to give up their opposition? And what will those same Brexit voters resort to, to defend democracy?
@Cheerful
Simple question. If you manage to keep us in what then?
What law was broken? All I read was a load of wibble and advice taken from John Major about how long it takes to draft a Queen's Speech. But in what world is John Major an authority on any subject?
I think this is a sideshow. I always thought that the game was to negotiate a terrible deal to present to Parliament on 31st October and then whip Tory MPs to vote against it. So we leave without a deal, oh dear, what a shame, never mind. A kind of Emily Thornberry manoeuvre.
The UK should Leave the European Union with as little mutual damage as possible.
I'm not sorry that that does not further the US supremacists' aims of destroying the European Union, irrespective of the possibly catastrophic damage that might do to the UK and still fail, but it meets the referendum result's requirement.
The position that the UK finds itself in afterwards will be one of those, exactly as the Remain campaigns repeatedly advised, I fully expect.
@Cheerful
Not answering as usual but ho hum.
By "US supremacists" I assume you mean the Trump who was put in place by Putin. You know, the guy who could turn off the EUs gas in five minutes.
What I cannot get my old grey head around, is that if Boy Bercow has shrieked at all the MPs out and about, annoying people in places like Brighton, to 'come back this instance, I say', what's going to happen to all those empty hotel rooms, the champagne on order (eu sourced of course), and all those spare bits of crumpet left behind with nobody to take them to the flicks'?
Maybe a prolonged session of 'I spy strangers' played every few minutes could make them all a bit irritable, but that's politics for you - ask an MP to 'negotiate and make a deal', and he/she'll think of all sorts of lists, post-it notes in big books and a large bubble over their heads saying 'thinks...'.
While feeling badly let down like many here, I really don't care a monkey's at the moment, because as far as I'm concerned, nothing has changed, and we're out at the end of next month, exactly ten days after our forty-seventh wedding anniversary! Now that's another date worth remembering don't you think?
Another Blair bastardisation comes to the fore. Supreme Court my arse. if ever there was a reason to scrap it and go back to the Law Lords, this is it. It wa sonly created as a stop gap to full-on cancelling Common Law and welcoming in Euro fuck you Law.
Still, no need to panic, someone else mentioned side-show, this ruling is one and isn't even as bad as many are making out. BoJo didn't lie an dhe has done nothing illegal (can anyone point to a David Lammy - he of the accusations I have just written - tweet where he says anything correct?)
Government Attorney General said it was legal so Boris did nothing wrong. Just means another branch of action to be taken.
A possible outcome is that this Parliament refuses to dissolve for a GE until the existing WA is signed, believing they will be able to fool the electorate that the WA is Brexit and they will have respected the referendum result.
But the signing of this WA, the one where we accept EU laws, budgets, taxes, fines and policies (trade, energy, environment, foreign, immigration etc) but without representation or veto and with no lawful means of exit – the one described by Mr. Verhofstadt’s staff as reducing the UK to EU colony status – is unlikely to be in time acceptable to a majority of the UK electorate.
There will be social and political turmoil and I cannot see a Conservative Party, with its pro-EU elites, surviving. Leavers will be wanting to vote for a party that defends the UK’s interests in the continuing negotiations with the EU.
If necessary I can see England seeking independence from the UK as a way out of the EU, which for once should make the SNP happy to assist.
@JPM: " the US supremacists' aims of destroying the European Union."
Could you explain that, please? It seems like the precise opposite of what the US has wanted since the end of WW2 and even now I see the EU as willingly being used as an increasingly provocative buffer against Russia.
I mean the Robert Mercer, Steve Bannon, etc. axis, and their toadies like Farage and Banks, not general US public figures.
Farage said that after UK exit he would continue to work for the destruction of the European Union. The domino effect failed to materialise however, and Five Star applied to desert Farage and to join Verhofstadt's group in response to the comic disgrace this country has made of itself.
You know what happened in Austria etc.
Supreme court rules ConMen are incompetent managers, maybe even liars, yUK shrugs it shoulders and says-we knew that.
Meanwhile in Canaduh the PM decides his best chance for election is to not appear in election debates!!! In yUK the liebour party allows a view of its membership-it is neither pretty nor inspiring, and a teenager lectures world leaders about a non-problem at the UN.
......"whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should."
The political class are in their end days, they have been exposed.
Well look on the bright side. As parliament was not suspended the May agreement cannot be brought back again. If it comes back with lipstick on it we can go to court and say this is unconstitutional, even if the speaker says it’s ok. Oh what fun.
I think Major and the speaker could become Lib Dem peers...
Of course this all useful if the jocks vote to leave, they have got no chance after what we have learned so far.
I believe that after HMS Sheffield was destroyed, we went on and kicked seven kinds of shit out of the Argentinan army and navy.
Is anyone really surprised that the remainers pet court gave the remainers desired outcome?
Boris' future is in Boris' hands
True to convention, Dom and Nikki will be getting their gongs by the year's end. Sunderland's Brexiters will meanwhile be relearning history (coal mining industry style).
Post a Comment