WensleyMU
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2018
- Messages
- 1,664
Tomorrow I think.So when should be the result on this?
Tomorrow I think.So when should be the result on this?
May not be until Friday. Tomorrow is John Major and I think he will blow the doors off!Tomorrow I think.
May not be until Friday. Tomorrow is John Major and I think he will blow the doors off!
If prorogation is not covered by enough legal precedents and actual law then maybe they will have to fall back on a degree of natural justice and accepted norms. Major will tell them just how outrageous boris and Cummings have been and he also will be able to share his experiences as a privy councillor to the Queen.
It should be very interesting!
Whatever floats your boat man!Will be difficult to not think of him spaffing all over Edwina's tits though.
Immigrants took their jobs
Majors experience of proroguing parliament may benefit and hinder him. I expect the government will at least highlight this.May not be until Friday. Tomorrow is John Major and I think he will blow the doors off!
If prorogation is not covered by enough legal precedents and actual law then maybe they will have to fall back on a degree of natural justice and accepted norms. Major will tell them just how outrageous boris and Cummings have been and he also will be able to share his experiences as a privy councillor to the Queen.
It should be very interesting!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You have a good memory.I'd like to watch that. Got a link to live feed?
Will be difficult to not think of him spaffing all over Edwina's tits though.
If the court rules against the Government, what's to stop Johnson immediately proroguing Parliament again?
Guardian said:PM floats possibility parliament could remain suspended until 14 October even if government loses case
On Monday Lord Keen, who was representing the government, told the supreme court that if it found against the government, Boris Johnson would “take all necessary steps to comply with any declaration made by the court”.
But it has now emerged that, even if he loses, Johnson does now want to recall parliament before 14 October - the day it is due to come back.
According to the government’s remedy document published by the lawyer Jolyon Maugham (see 12.04pm), the government is saying that, if the court declares prorogation unlawful, it cannot at this point say what it will do without knowing what the court will advise.
It says that, if the court just says prorogation was unlawful, it could be open to Johnson to request another prorogation, lawfully, for the same period of time.
The document says the court could also require Johnson to request a recall of parliament from the Queen. But the document also says this would have “very serious practical consequences” because the timing of the Queen’s speech would have to be brought forward. “Extensive arrangements” have to be made, it says, implying that this would be undesirable.
But in that case they would be lying again wouldn't they.If they find against the government then they’re likely saying (like the Scottish court did) that the PM lied to the Queen to gain royal assent. That has to carry more consequences than just ‘ah well, we’ll ask again without lying’.
And what is to stop yet another court case being brought against him.If the court rules against the Government, what's to stop Johnson immediately proroguing Parliament again?
Not really when that possibility of control existed beforehand and was chosen to not be exercised.Lord Garnier's summary is spot on:
"One of the central points of the present case - and the reason why these proceedings are necessary at all - is that the power of prorogation subverts the possibility of control by political means.
Its effect is to deprive parliament of a voice throughout the period of the prorogation.
There is no possibility of political control except in the limited sense that a prime minister who exercises the power in a damaging way might face political consequences at some later date, when parliament is permitted to reconvene.
But where the effect of the prorogation is to prevent parliament from discharging its role during a time-critical period, there is no possibility of meaningful political control of that decision until after the damage has been done."
Its a moot point in the context of a leave no deal outcome on October 31st. I imagine they’d announce with no times left for SC to sit.And what is to stop yet another court case being brought against him.
How could it be though? They could have taken control of the order paper and tabled bills to block it but it would still need to get through the lords before Boris went to the queen and prorogued immediately. There's no notice period required. Then there's the fact that such a bill would require royal ascent which Boris could advise the queen not to give.Not really when that possibility of control existed beforehand and was chosen to not be exercised.
What market/ticker are you trading this on? I assume not forex but can't think what the alternative is. Risky trade imho.I stand to make around £60k tax free from this, so feeling pretty smug but still nervous. I have hedged a little this morning and sold off some of my position just to be responsible as the tide of opinion now seems to have turned and people realise that a judgement against is a real proposition.
Yes and no. Hard to say these things with confidence.This lengthy conversation about Remedy seems to suggest which way this will go, Govt. looks to have lost.
A divisional court can make an order inside a day. That order would stand until appealed successfully.Its a moot point in the context of a leave no deal outcome on October 31st. I imagine they’d announce with no times left for SC to sit.
Royal Assent denial is complicated, but even BJ didn't fancy going that route, so you can assume it's off the table.How could it be though? They could have taken control of the order paper and tabled bills to block it but it would still need to get through the lords before Boris went to the queen and prorogued immediately. There's no notice period required. Then there's the fact that such a bill would require royal ascent which Boris could advise the queen not to give.
The argument is that they handled the most urgent business ie. Avoiding no deal brexit first and simply ran out of time. The case is all about time; and how it was used to stomp on scrutiny and further bills.Not really when that possibility of control existed beforehand and was chosen to not be exercised.
I think he'll resign fairly soon and be allowed to walk free. Impeachment would be political dynamite, especially if they ordered remand.If they find against the government then they’re likely saying (like the Scottish court did) that the PM lied to the Queen to gain royal assent. That has to carry more consequences than just ‘ah well, we’ll ask again without lying’.
Kinda off topic, but an amalgamation of commodities/forex pairs. Some riskier than others, which are less directly affected. It's risky aye, but you have to make a living somehow! (Most appeal cases are way less high profile but predictive methodology and risk assessment remains the same.)What market/ticker are you trading this on? I assume not forex but can't think what the alternative is. Risky trade imho.
But. If the UK government decided to ignore a SC ruling then it would not have to go back to the SC. It could be done by a lower court and at speed.Its a moot point in the context of a leave no deal outcome on October 31st. I imagine they’d announce with no times left for SC to sit.
The absolute gammon wailing outside of court right now.
EDIT - They were just screaming "TRAITOR!" at Gina Miller
That snark from the Downing Street source definitely sounds like they’re expecting to lose. And take their loss very badly.It seems likely that the Court is going to rule against the government, according to experts.