The resumption of the parliamentary session is, insofar as Brexit is concerned, pointlessby Jason Reed / September 26, 2019 / Leave a comment
Contrary to widespread expectations and the opinions of some of the finest legal minds in the country, the Supreme Court has ruled that the prorogation of Parliament is void. As a result, the Palace of Westminster was yesterday morning once again flooded with MPs, more furious about Brexit than ever and ready to execute the important business of holding the government to account—which we have been repeatedly assured is a democratic catastrophe if set aside for even a few weeks. Over the next month, then, we can expect Parliament to be functioning at the peak of its democratic capabilities.
Now that the Lib Dem and Labour party conferences are under their respective parties’ belts, MPs have gone as far as blocking a three-day recess that would have allowed Conservative MPs to attend their conference. This is political in the extreme. Since no material reason why the Commons must sit for those extra few days has been produced, it is nothing less than outrageous for Tory MPs to be made to waste their time in Parliament rather than attending their own party conference, not least because an election is imminent and party conferences are vital vehicles of grassroots management and rallying.
If Gina Miller and her motley crew of courtroom activists are to be believed, the government is desperate for MPs not to sit because it is petrified of what they might do to its Brexit policy. Since we have also been informed, sternly and repeatedly, that the prorogation was wholly about Brexit and absolutely nothing else, we can also expect MPs to use this hard-won parliamentary time to focus on Brexit, doing everything within their power to derail the government’s ostensibly apocalyptic approach.
The premise of this position is blatantly fallacious. If the prorogation really were a poorly-rebranded attempt to force through a No Deal Brexit, as prominent Remainers claim to believe, the prorogation period would surely have extended up to and beyond the Brexit date. It would also, as the Attorney General pointed out in the Commons this morning, have begun earlier than it did in order to prevent the passage of the anti-No Deal Benn Act.
Even so, in direct contravention to the strident rhetoric churned out in front of TV…