According to the Times
Mr Grieve said that he was “absolutely delighted”, adding: “It is essential that parliament expresses its outright opposition to prorogation, which would be unconstitutional. I’m so pleased it has the chance to do that.”
Then a legal version of a coup is reported/anticipated/encouraged:
Brexit: John Major threatens court action to stop Boris Johnson proroguing parliament – live news
Citing a Times article:
David Pannick QC. Pannick represented Gina Millar in the article 50 case and he explains why he thinks the JR [judicial review] route might work:
First, the prime minister would be seeking to prorogue parliament for the purpose of avoiding parliamentary sovereignty on an issue of significant constitutional importance...Second, he would be seeking to stop parliament sitting when time would be of the essence, given the deadline of the end of October...And third, he would be seeking to evade parliament because it has previously made clear its wish to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
A May aide has provided an interesting comment, invariably in a tweet:
Feel the need to point out that the last tactical prorogation of Parliament, for political means and to avoid Commons looking at something in more depth was by John Major to avoid the publication of a Cash for Access report when the House was sitting, leaving to [sic] long gap till GE [general election]
John Major was asked about this in his Today interview. He did not specifically deny calling the 1997 election a bit early to avoid the publication of a cash for questions report, but he said that by the time he did call that election, the parliament had already more or less run its full course.
Meanwhile, there is even an attempt to revive the Remainer Big Lie that was so discredited by the campaign slogan on the bus that so pisses them off. D Conn [sic] writes:
European funding has supported Britain for decades. Yet few people seem to know how much it has benefited their local area
Benefits, especially for the North East, include:
The Angel of the North...Gateshead council’s difficulties in raising the £800,000 needed for its monument to regeneration [are noted] , and in the bottom lefthand corner of the board is a tiny blue and yellow symbol of one organisation that came up with the cash: the European Union....Nissan alone...[benefitted]...from huge European regional development fund (ERDF) grants and, in just the eight years before the referendum, £450m in loans from the European Investment Bank (EIB).... the EU’s funding of regeneration landmarks, including the Sage music venue and Baltic art gallery on the Gateshead side of the Tyne, and the Millennium Bridge over to the Newcastle side....g 17 transformative developments, including of formerly derelict land around Lime Street station, major improvements to Liverpool John Lennon airport, and the arena and convention centre on the waterfront. Merseyside qualified for £1.6bn “Objective One” EU funding between 1994 and 2013 to try to haul it out of decline.... EU “structural funding” – from the ERDF and European Social Fund – was worth approximately £10bn to the UK between 2007 and 2013, and approximately £11bn is allocated from 2014 to 2020, with a further £25bn available for rural development and agriculture.
The bus lie issue is glossed:
an imaginary £350m weekly contribution to the EU without acknowledging the £5.6bn rebate or the annual £4bn invested back into the UK illustrated the general lack of knowledge about the basics of membership. ..[er...]...It is true of course that the UK – along with France, Germany and six other wealthier EU countries – is a net contributor to the EU, according to the long-agreed aim of raising living standards across the continent to help build peace, stability and a more prosperous single market that benefits all countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment