BORIS Johnson was accused of staging a “coup” yesterday after he suspended Parliament for five weeks ahead of the October 31 Brexit deadline.
Opposition politicians described him as a “tin-pot dictator”. The European Parliament’s chief Brexit negotiator called it “sinister”. Nicola Sturgeon said the decision made independence “inevitable”.
Protesters took to the streets outside Westminster, and almost 800,000 people had signed a petition last night which called for the suspension to be halted “until the Article 50 period has been sufficiently extended”.
A group of 70 parliamentarians announced plans to try and overturn the order to suspend by suing the Government through the Scottish courts.
The first casualty of the decision is seemingly Ruth Davidson, who is expected to announce today that she is quitting the party she had led for the last five years.
It is believed that only a few of Johnson’s ministers knew that he was writing to the Queen to request the prorogation. He insisted it was business as usual and all about “getting on” with his “very exciting agenda”. It was not, he said, about preventing MPs stopping Brexit.
“There will be ample time on both sides of the crucial October 17 [European Council] summit, ample time in Parliament for MPs to debate the EU, to debate Brexit and all the other issues, ample time,” he told Sky News.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: This was the day independence became inevitable
But the Prime Minister faces the political fight of his life when Parliament returns next week.
Speaker John Bercow called it a constitutional outrage. He said: “However it is dressed up, it is blindingly obvious that the purpose of prorogation now would be to stop Parliament debating Brexit and performing its duty in shaping a course for the country.
“At this time, one of the most challenging periods in our nation’s history, it is vital that our elected parliament has its say. After all, we live in a parliamentary democracy.
“Shutting down Parliament would be an offence against the democratic process and the rights of parliamentarians as the people’s elected representatives. Surely at this early stage in his premiership, the prime minister should be seeking to establish rather than undermine his democratic credentials and indeed his commitment to parliamentary democracy.”
Former chancellor Philip Hammond tweeted: “It would be a constitutional outrage if Parliament were prevented from holding the Government to account at a time of national crisis. Profoundly undemocratic.”
He later said MPs would “have to do something” when Parliament returns next week. Asked if it would involve trying to bring the Government down, he replied: “I have always made clear that I am not interested in bringing down the Government. I simply want the Government to recognise that the majority is opposed to a no-deal Brexit.”
However, his Tory backbench colleague Dominic Grieve suggested he could now vote against the Government in a no-confidence motion.
“If it is impossible to prevent prorogation then I think it is going to be very difficult for people like myself to keep confidence in the Government,” he said.
Labour’s shadow chancellor John McDonnell joined the backlash against the Prime Minister, saying: “Make no mistake, this is a very British coup.” LibDem MP Chuka Umunna added: “The Prime Minister is behaving like a tin-pot dictator, pure and simple.”
It all adds pressure on Jeremy Corbyn to table that vote of no confidence on Monday. He wrote to the monarch, warning her that her royal prerogative “is being set directly against the wishes of a majority of the House of Commons”.
“In the circumstances, as the leader of the official opposition, on behalf of all my party members and many other members of parliament, I request you to grant me a meeting along with other privy counsellors, as a matter of urgency, and before any final decision is taken.”
READ MORE: Brexit: MPs launch legal bid to reverse Parliament shutdown
However, the decision was taken at around 3pm yesterday.
The Queen, currently in Balmoral, agreed that “the Parliament be prorogued on a day no earlier than Monday the 9th day of September and no later than Thursday the 12th day of September 2019 to Monday 14th day of October 2019”.
The monarch may have to involve herself in the murky waters of the constitution again if Johnson loses a no-confidence vote.
There would then be a 14-day period in which the Labour party leader, or an alternative candidate, could seek to assemble a majority. If no new government emerges, a general election would have to be held.
Downing Street sources believe Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers to form an alternative government.
If there was to be a general election, though, the date of the vote will lie with Johnson, One source told the Times: “We have been very clear that if there’s a no-confidence vote, he won’t resign. We get to set an election date. We don’t want an election, but if we have to set a date, it’s going to be after 31 October.”
Opposition MPs met on Tuesday and agreed to prioritise legislative efforts to stop a No-Deal Brexit. But Johnson’s decision will curtail what little time they had.
Asked if that was why he had suspended Parliament, the Prime Minister told Sky News: “No, that is completely untrue. We are bringing forward a new legislative programme on crime, hospitals, making sure we have the education funding we need.”
In the letter to MPs, Johnson insisted there would be a debate on his approach to the EU negotiations before the European Council meets on October 17, at which any new deal would have to be agreed by the EU27.
The Prime Minister also called for unity among MPs while warning the UK could soon crash out without a deal.
He stated: “I want to reiterate to colleagues that these weeks leading up to the European Council on 17/18 October are vitally important for the sake of my negotiations with the EU.
“Member states are watching what Parliament does with great interest and it is only by showing unity and resolve that we stand a chance of securing a new deal that can be passed by Parliament.
“In the meantime, the Government will take the responsible approach of continuing its preparations for leaving the EU, with or without a deal.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel