News Reader.info

When it comes to the UK leaving the EU, this Parliament has clearly demonstrated it cannot agree on any solution, ranging from a second referendum through to a hard Brexit and everything in

between. In the absence of a parliamentary resolution, the only course of action has been to kick the Brexit issue down the road for more than three years. For Boris Johnson this cannot

continue: the premise of his premiership is to deliver the referendum result for which a clear majority voted in 2016. The status quo is, however, exactly what Brussels wants: a UK still in

the EU, but with little or no power, trapped in perpetual political purgatory for having the temerity to vote leave. The EU’s solution to find a way out? A second referendum, for which there

is no majority, either in Parliament or in the country. The EU is good at getting its own way or, if that doesn’t happen, pushing issues into the long grass for others to resolve at some

unspecified point in the future. This is effectively what it did with Theresa May’s deal, using Westminster as a body to obstruct progress, safe in the knowledge that MPs would never allow a

 no-deal Brexit to go through, but unable to agree on any other positive way forward. If Boris wants to succeed in negotiations with the EU, he needs to nullify the Commons and make no-deal

a real prospect. No matter how you dress it up, Johnson has effectively suspended Parliament. Now MPs have a limited period for their “meaningful say”. He will also crystallise this say into

a binary decision: back the soon-to-come “Boris deal”, or take the plunge with no-deal. Johnson has managed to take all other options off the House of Commons table; inaction is no longer

an option. So the EU has lost the Westminster deadlock — its greatest ally. By severely limiting MPs’ room for manoeuvre, Boris may be able to force the EU into meaningful renegotiation.

This, in turn, may create a deal which Parliament can vote through. If MPs shout “We’ll bring down the Government”, the Government shouts back “Bring it on”. The Boris boys and girls know

that they’re the only gang in the UK playground with a unified plan and the ability to see it through. It is verging on genius . . . but it’s also utter madness. The European Parliament’s

lack of clout when trying to hold the EU executive to account is the antithesis of our parliamentary model and the root cause of the “democratic deficit” that has dogged the European

project. It cannot be right that the only way we can leave one democratically dysfunctional system is by suspending our own Parliament, thereby rendering our own system dysfunctional, too.

We also must ask if the suspension of Parliament for this purpose is the thin end of a wedge.  For example, a Prime Minister Corbyn would love to suspend Parliament in a similar context,

using any number of other systems to claim democratic authority — such as the Labour Party’s membership, the unions, various kinds of plebiscites and even some kind of rival assembly or

“Soviet”. Parliament has to be the preeminent democratic force in this country if we want our state and the rest of our system to function properly. This is why the 2016 referendum should be

the last. The Queen has now been pulled into the eye of the Brexit storm. Only she can suspend Parliament and asking her to do anything other than the norm is putting constitutional

monarchy under undue stress. No matter how you spin it, what Boris has asked the Queen to do is not the norm. Our constitutional settlement means that The Queen can’t be partisan, and the

governing classes can’t pull her into the political cesspit. Johnson is failing, clearly, here. Lastly, what is commonly called the 1707 Act of Union was actually a “Union of the

Parliaments” between England and Scotland. Key to the Union was parliamentary authority over the executive. There is a Scottish case that any act by the executive in Westminster that is not

countenanced by Parliament runs counter to the Act of Union and is therefore a pretext for a second Scottish referendum. This could be the final nail in the coffin of Unionism. Ruth Davidson

has taken her stand on this and her resignation as Scottish Conservative leader is testament to the disastrous impact the suspension of Parliament will have north of the border. Boris’s

scheme, on the face of it, is brilliant. However, the suspension of Parliament for a few days may seem small and inconsequential, but even the minutest challenge to our unwritten

constitution could unravel state institutions in unforeseen ways. To play with it, is to play with fire and could put the Union, the Monarchy and Parliament at risk. Indeed, at its heart,

Conservativism should be about the protection of these ancient institutions. This whole constitutional crisis demonstrates that the Boris administration is a Government for Brexit — but not

for Conservativism.