[TobyD]

...
Not an unusual position I suspect.... from all sides of politics.

Yup. There are many principled, talented Labour MPs with whom I agree and would like to vote for, as there are many Labour principles that I totally agree with and think would improve the country. Sadly, at the moment the leadership seems to have subordinated principle to dogma.
To be honest I'd almost say the same thing about the conservative party, except that I live in Sheffield so voting Conservative  would be a totally wasted vote under Fptp, even if I did want to.

[Somebody's Fool]

The journalists on PM sounded gutted at the result of today’s vote, so the outcome probably bodes well for Labour’s chance at GE.

The raising of this motion to back remain in any future referendum - and its vote - has created a situation whereby the issue can be settled democratically in leadership’s favour, and there’s very little the media can do to then criticise Corbyn’s position, without twisting themselves into all sorts of knots.

[teestub]

Sounds like they could have done with an actual vote on it rather than a show of hands as it was close... probably 52:48!

[galpinos]

Emails from my Labour MP this weekend suggest that many of them in what should be safe seats are bricking it..

My MP called me yesterday afternoon hoping to secure my support in an upcoming selection ballot.

Deleted as I thought you'd have Jeff Smith as MP, didn't realise you were still clinging to an identity in Hull.....

[TobyD]

The journalists on PM sounded gutted at the result of today’s vote, so the outcome probably bodes well for Labour’s chance at GE.

The raising of this motion to back remain in any future referendum - and its vote - has created a situation whereby the issue can be settled democratically in leadership’s favour, and there’s very little the media can do to then criticise Corbyn’s position, without twisting themselves into all sorts of knots.

However, all the Labour party activists and MPs who say it won't fly with voters and they'll get panned, as politically unengaged voters will just conclude that Corbyn is a fence-sitter and they'd better vote brexit party or LD or conservative as at least they know where they stand, must be wrong?

[mrjonathanr]

The idea has some merit - hear all views and put it to a final referendum when the form of exit becomes concrete. However, to many, me included, it will just look political opportunism.

ie a policy of '' let's keep our heads down and appear to be all things to all people, we can show our hand once we are in finally in power.''

It's a Brexit leadership leading a Remain membership. It won't end well

[TobyD]

Bloody hell. The supreme court decision was pretty unequivocal. What happens now?

[mrjonathanr]

They reconvene at Bercow's request. Everyone tells Boris to resign. Boris ignores them. Chaos +/- a GE ensues.

[SA Chris]

Impeachment.

If only..

[TobyD]

They reconvene at Bercow's request. Everyone tells Boris to resign. Boris ignores them. Chaos +/- a GE ensues.

Yeah, I'm sure you're right, although at this stage I'd hardly be surprised whatever happens...

[Oldmanmatt]

[Oldmanmatt]

I’m hazy on the position now, anyone know if this is correct:

The government was found to act unlawfully, therefore has committed a crime?
Therefore, their Chief exec, is principally liable?
If this was a private corporate entity, the Chief exec would be criminally liable, no? As in liable to condign punishment?

Ain’t life weird when one arm of the Government finds another to have acted unlawfully.

There is no remedy though is there? He/they will just ignore the ruling, won’t they?

 

[Oldmanmatt]

Ffs!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-news-resign-nigel-farage-parliament-brexit-supreme-court-dominic-cummings-a9117986.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1569321079

[teestub]

Are you angry because you agree with Farage?

[mrjonathanr]

The lawyers will clarify, but I think unlawful means not authorised by law, illegal is in contravention of a specific statute and criminal if illegal and punishable.

So unlawful is not necessarily criminal.

I'd expect to be told an unauthorised extension to my house should be taken down if it were not authorised and therefore unlawful; I wouldn't expect to find myself being prosecuted, for example.

[Oldmanmatt]

Are you angry because you agree with Farage?

Extremely! 

No.

I am laughing at the blatant hypocrisy and how it won’t dent his support one iota.

[Oldmanmatt]

The lawyers will clarify, but I think unlawful means not authorised by law, illegal is in contravention of a specific statute and criminal if illegal and punishable.

So unlawful is not necessarily criminal.

I'd expect to be told an unauthorised extension to my house should be taken down if it were not authorised and therefore unlawful; I wouldn't expect to find myself being prosecuted, for example.

Good example (and I assume correct).
To extend the analogy, now that a ruling has been made, you must remove the extension or be prosecuted, correct?

If, say, you did so, and then rebuilt the extension in gingerbread (ie. a wholly novel extension), you would still be prosecuted under the original order, no?

[mrjonathanr]

Prosecuted for a crime against good taste maybe.

[Will Hunt]

I’m hazy on the position now, anyone know if this is correct:

The government was found to act unlawfully, therefore has committed a crime?
Therefore, their Chief exec, is principally liable?
If this was a private corporate entity, the Chief exec would be criminally liable, no? As in liable to condign punishment?

Ain’t life weird when one arm of the Government finds another to have acted unlawfully.

There is no remedy though is there? He/they will just ignore the ruling, won’t they?

 

I think Mr JR is right. It's worth reading the judgement before rushing to judgement and speculating on what might happen next.

It is not clear to us that any step is needed from the Prime Minister, but if it is, the court is pleased that his counsel have told the court that he will take all necessary steps to comply with the terms of any declaration made by this court.

And:

This Court has already concluded that the Prime Minister’s advice to Her Majesty was unlawful, void and of no effect. This means that the Order in Council to which it led was also unlawful, void and of no effect and should be quashed. This means that when the Royal Commissioners walked into the House of Lords it was as if they walked in with a blank sheet of paper. The prorogation was also void and of no effect. Parliament has not been prorogued. This is the unanimous judgment of all 11 Justices.

and:

It is for Parliament, and in particular the Speaker and the Lord Speaker to decide what to do next. Unless there is some Parliamentary rule of which we are unaware, they can take immediate steps to enable each House to meet as soon as possible.

So Parliament has not been progrogued and the Court has advised that it is up to the speakers of both houses to decide what to do next. Given that Bercow is the speaker of the commons I would expect that bums will be on seats tomorrow.

[Will Hunt]

Some more key bits from the judgement:

For present purposes, the relevant limit on the power to prorogue is this: that a decision  to prorogue (or advise the monarch to prorogue) will be unlawful if the prorogation has the effect of frustrating or preventing, without reasonable justification, the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions as a legislature and as the body responsible for the supervision of the executive. In judging any justification which might be put forward, the court must of course be sensitive to the responsibilities and experience of the Prime Minister and proceed with appropriate caution.

So, Johnson could move to prorogue parliament again, but I believe they would have to do it for a much shorter period and for the decision to stand he would need to be able to provide reasonable justification for preventing Parliament from scrutinising the executive.

[SamT]

So, Johnson could move to prorogue parliament again

I assume he'd have to ask Queeny again.  Given her current mood with PM's, reckon she might think long and hard about saying yes, non?

[SA Chris]

One would tell him to Foxtrot Oscar I expect.

[andy popp]

Are you angry because you agree with Farage?

Extremely! 

No.

I am laughing at the blatant hypocrisy and how it won’t dent his support one iota.

In some ways not hypocrisy at all - if anything it seems consistent with his position. He wants Brexit as soon as possible and in any form. He (probably rightly) judges that this decision imperils Brexit, at least in the short-term. Cummings has thus badly overplayed his hand in a serious tactical error, endangering what both he and Farage want.

However, I presume he previously fully supported prorogation, in which case, yes, hypocrisy.

[mrjonathanr]

Agreed Andy, it'll be strategic.

Bet there's an interesting atmosphere in No.10 right now!

[tomtom]

Bet there's an interesting atmosphere in No.10 right now!

More of an atmosphere in BJ's hotel room in New York - where some aide has had to go in - trying to ignore the bodily smells left by a hungover jetlagged late middle aged man sprawled on a bed - and break the bad news to him.

Whether or not he abandons his meeting with Trump and heads back to parliament we wait to see.

Also - what will parliament decide to do! No government orders of business - Bercow has said he's open to more emergency motions etc... I wonder how long before a vote of no confidence comes in... or if they want to play that card now.

Tory party conference will be interesting.