Reflections on the Revolution in England

Why did the British Government not prorogue Parliament with immediate effect until 1 November, thus showing the EU leaders that the Government would not be defeated in Parliament despite what Tony Blair and Dominic Grieve are telling them?

Possibly Boris did not want to do so, but certainly he could not do so because of an amendment inserted into the Northern Ireland Executive Formation Act 2019 by a motion set down by Dominic Grieve. It is necessary for Parliament to be sitting at a date no later than 14 October.

In any case a defeat in the House next week would enable Boris to go to the country calling a 'People versus Politicians' election. Nigel Farage would be on his side, not syphoning Tory votes. 

It’s reminiscent of the populist Liberal election campaign of January 1910 on the theme of Peers versus People (which they sort of lost). In that case the peers were acting reasonably and constitutionally in rejecting the 1909 Finance Bill and this time the Remainers are playing fast and loose with the constitution.

The Lord President of the Council, Jacob Rees-Mogg, dashed yesterday morning to Balmoral, the royal castle in the north of Scotland and got H.M. the Queen to prorogue parliament for a month, leading up to the Queen’s speech on October 14. (His journey was intended to be secret but was leaked by civil servants to the press.) 

This means MPs have less than a week to legislate to delay our leaving (but this requires the EU to agree, which is something backbench MPs and the Speaker cannot arrange), or vote no confidence in the government.

If a vote of confidence succeeds the Prime Minister will go to the country and call an election for Thursday November 1st, the day after Brexit.

I cannot imagine the Queen not allowing him to do so – though Remainers will try to get her to refuse.

Nothing about the prorogation is unconstitutional and much less illegal, but the behaviour of the Speaker in trying to help MPs take over the order paper drives a coach and horses through out unwritten constitution.  He is, by convention (a convention going back to long before the Civil War), politically impartial but has not been, on innumerable issues, and has openly expressed his support for remaining in the European Union.

Mr Rees-Mogg quite correctly said today:

"There is a constitutional problem with what Mr Speaker said. Speaker Lenthall said that he had ‘no eyes to see, no tongue to speak unless directed by the House. It is not constitutional for the Speaker to express his opinion without direction of the House. He has had no such direction and therefore his comments were in a private capacity, they cannot be as Mr Speaker."

Last month’s Chancellor of the Exchequer (Minister of Finance) Philip Hammond said yesterday that a move against no deal would have to come next week. “A number of my colleagues would have preferred to wait … and move in late September. That will now not be possible,” he said. Tory Remain leader Sir Oliver Letwin said he expects parliament to legislate next week.

The plan is for an emergency motion will allow MPs to take control of the order paper, something they have done only once in history, a few months ago, and then to pass a bill to delay leaving the EU.

Is there a sustainable majority in the Commons for such a bill to pass?

And can Leave peers filibuster in the House of Lords long enough to cause the bill to fall when Parliament is prorogued?

Why not?

Can the Prime Minister create enough peers in time to give the strong Remain-dominated upper house a Leave majority? Possibly. What larks! This is what King William IV was prepared to do to enable the Whigs to pass the Reform Act 1832 and what George V would have done to pass the Parliament Act 1911. 

Both of those crises were as big as Brexit. 1832 could have led to bloodshed.

If the bill does pass both houses the Prime Minister can always recommend HM the Queen to veto it or simply do nothing about it. Queen Anne was the last monarch to veto a bill, as every schoolboy used to know, before history lessons came to concentrate mostly on the Nazis.

It is the Remainers who are playing fast and loose with the British constitution, not the Government. The incomparable Robert Tombs, who taught me European history when the world was young, explained exactly why in the Times on Saturday in an article I highly recommend you read.