This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/28/world/europe/boris-johnson-brexit-parliament.html

The article has changed 21 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 14 Version 15
Boris Johnson’s Surprise Brexit Ploy: Delay Parliament Boris Johnson’s ‘Explosive’ Move to Get His Way on Brexit: Suspend Parliament
(about 2 hours later)
LONDON — Normally, in times of national crisis, British leaders convene Parliament. But as the country confronts its biggest crisis in many decades, Prime Minister Boris Johnson seems intent on doing the opposite. LONDON — Prime Minister Boris Johnson turned to Britain’s queen on Wednesday to help limit Parliament’s ability to challenge his intention to take the country out of the European Union with or without any deal.
On Wednesday, Mr. Johnson threw the Brexit debate into new turmoil by shortening the already dwindling time Parliament has left to try to prevent a potentially chaotic no-deal departure from the European Union. Opposition politicians denounced the move to limit the time for debate as undemocratic and possibly unconstitutional. Mr. Johnson asked Queen Elizabeth II to suspend Parliament in September, a move that will cut the already dwindling number of days lawmakers have to find an alternative path ahead of the looming Brexit deadline on Oct. 31.
Mr. Johnson’s startling maneuver to tighten Parliament’s schedule in October set the stage for a compressed, heated showdown with Parliament as the Oct. 31 deadline for Brexit bears down. The startling maneuver, Mr. Johnson’s boldest move since taking office a month ago, was immediately denounced by the opposition as undemocratic and possibly unconstitutional, and even a former prime minister in Mr. Johnson’s own Conservative party said the decision could be challenged in the courts.
[With Brexit gambit, Boris Johnson reveals a ruthless side.]
The speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, called Mr. Johnson’s decision a “constitutional outrage.” Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition Labour Party, denounced it as “reckless,” while the party’s finance policy spokesman, John McDonnell, called it a “very British coup.”The speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, called Mr. Johnson’s decision a “constitutional outrage.” Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition Labour Party, denounced it as “reckless,” while the party’s finance policy spokesman, John McDonnell, called it a “very British coup.”
“Whatever one’s views on Brexit, once you allow a Prime Minister to prevent the full and free operation of our democratic institutions you are on a very precarious path,” Mr. McDonnell wrote on Twitter. The British pound fell on the news, and a “#StoptheCoup” hashtag began trending on Twitter as protesters gathered outside 10 Downing Street, the prime minister’s residence in London.
Parliament was scheduled to meet during the first two weeks of September and then to be suspended for annual political party conferences. It was scheduled to reconvene around Oct. 9. [With Brexit gambit, Boris Johnson reveals a ruthless side.]
But in a letter sent Wednesday to all members of Parliament, Mr. Johnson said he intended to ask Queen Elizabeth II to “prorogue,” or suspend, Parliament for around a further week and to have it resume on Oct. 14 with the “Queen’s speech,” in which the monarch traditionally lays out the government’s agenda. Normally, in times of national crisis, British leaders have convened Parliament. But as the country confronts its biggest crisis in many decades, Mr. Johnson’s decision to do the opposite and initiate a confrontation with lawmakers follows a long standoff over Brexit between the Conservative government and a divided Parliament.
Three times Mr. Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, brought a deal to Parliament she had negotiated with the European Union over the terms of Britain’s withdrawal, which the country’s voters had called for in a 2016 referendum. Three times the deal was rejected, leading Mrs. May to resign and Mr. Johnson to replace her.
Even before Mr. Johnson’s controversial step, Parliament was facing a constricted schedule in any effort to prevent Britain from leaving the bloc without a deal, which economists say would be economically damaging.
Parliament had been scheduled to meet during the first two weeks of September and then to take a three-week break for annual political party conferences. It was scheduled to reconvene around Oct. 9.
But in a letter sent Wednesday to all members of Parliament, Mr. Johnson said he intended to ask Queen Elizabeth II to “prorogue,” or suspend, Parliament for a further week and to have it resume on Oct. 14 with the “Queen’s speech,” in which the monarch traditionally lays out the government’s agenda.
The monarch’s approval is considered a formality, and hours after the announcement, the government said that the queen had approved the request.The monarch’s approval is considered a formality, and hours after the announcement, the government said that the queen had approved the request.
The formal suspension of Parliament poses a number of significant challenges to the opposition. For one, any legislation developed in the first two weeks in September when Parliament will still meet does not carry over to the new parliamentary session if not passed, meaning lawmakers will have to start from scratch.
Wednesday’s move also forecloses any attempt by the opposition to shorten the three-week break to allow for more time to address Brexit — something lawmakers were considering. On top of that, the period of the queen’s speech is likely to take up several critical days, as Parliament debates the slate of proposals put forth.
All those obstacles reinforce Mr. Johnson’s core goal with Wednesday’s maneuver: making sure Parliament has as little time as possible to mount an effective challenge to his commitment to leave the European Union on Oct. 31, without a deal if necessary.
[What a no-deal Brexit might mean, and why it matters.]
In a video interview on Wednesday morning, Mr. Johnson said he had made his decision in order to progress with “our plans to take this country forward” and to “get on with our domestic agenda.”In a video interview on Wednesday morning, Mr. Johnson said he had made his decision in order to progress with “our plans to take this country forward” and to “get on with our domestic agenda.”
But his ploy is risky. Just how risky became clear Tuesday evening with reports that the widely admired Conservative leader in Scotland, Ruth Davidson, unable to defend Mr. Johnson’s Brexit policies, was on the verge of resigning.But his ploy is risky. Just how risky became clear Tuesday evening with reports that the widely admired Conservative leader in Scotland, Ruth Davidson, unable to defend Mr. Johnson’s Brexit policies, was on the verge of resigning.
[What a no-deal Brexit might mean, and why it matters.] John Major, the Conservative prime minister who succeeded Margaret Thatcher in 1990, said in a statement to the BBC on Wednesday that he was seeking legal advice.
“I have no doubt that the prime minister’s motive in seeking prorogation is to bypass a sovereign Parliament that opposes his policy,” he said. “As events unfold I will continue to seek advice on the legality of this and other matters.”
While Mr. Johnson’s maneuver seemed like a bolt out of the blue, it was telegraphed weeks ago by his chief strategist, Dominic Cummings. It also seemed timed to inflict maximum damage on the efforts of opponents of a no-deal Brexit, who had agreed just the day before to coordinate a legislative assault on a no-deal Brexit.While Mr. Johnson’s maneuver seemed like a bolt out of the blue, it was telegraphed weeks ago by his chief strategist, Dominic Cummings. It also seemed timed to inflict maximum damage on the efforts of opponents of a no-deal Brexit, who had agreed just the day before to coordinate a legislative assault on a no-deal Brexit.
Their time for maneuver was already limited, and Wednesday’s move will further restrict it by eliminating the option of shortening the scheduled break in September for party conferences — something lawmakers were considering. On top of that, the period of a Queen’s speech is likely to take up several critical days, as Parliament debates the proposals.
The prime minister’s strike against the anti-Brexit forces conforms to a strategy he developed during the campaign for the Conservative Party leadership earlier in the summer, when he promised to withdraw Britain from the European Union by Oct. 31, “do or die.”The prime minister’s strike against the anti-Brexit forces conforms to a strategy he developed during the campaign for the Conservative Party leadership earlier in the summer, when he promised to withdraw Britain from the European Union by Oct. 31, “do or die.”
He has maintained that stance ever since, and some analysts see it as a tactic leading up to a general election that many consider inevitable.He has maintained that stance ever since, and some analysts see it as a tactic leading up to a general election that many consider inevitable.
Keeping open the possibility of a no-deal exit is the only source of leverage Mr. Johnson has as he tries to persuade the European Union to accept changes in the withdrawal deal that will make it acceptable to a Parliament that has already voted it down three times.Keeping open the possibility of a no-deal exit is the only source of leverage Mr. Johnson has as he tries to persuade the European Union to accept changes in the withdrawal deal that will make it acceptable to a Parliament that has already voted it down three times.
His hard-line stance also guards against the electoral threat of the Brexit Party of Nigel Farage, whose raison d’être is Brexit at any cost.His hard-line stance also guards against the electoral threat of the Brexit Party of Nigel Farage, whose raison d’être is Brexit at any cost.
In the event of an election, Mr. Johnson’s adamantly pro-Brexit stance will enable him to present himself as the champion of the people against a Parliament that has betrayed voters’ desire to leave the bloc.In the event of an election, Mr. Johnson’s adamantly pro-Brexit stance will enable him to present himself as the champion of the people against a Parliament that has betrayed voters’ desire to leave the bloc.
“I suspect Number 10 believes it has created a win win scenario with this explosive announcement,” Craig Oliver, who was director of communications for Prime Minister David Cameron, wrote on Twitter. “Yes — and they get Brexit by October 31st; No — and they get to fight a ‘people versus parliament’ general election.” “I suspect Number 10 believes it has created a win-win scenario with this explosive announcement,” Craig Oliver, who was director of communications for Prime Minister David Cameron, wrote on Twitter. “Yes — and they get Brexit by October 31st; No — and they get to fight a ‘people versus parliament’ general election.”
There is one potential drawback to Mr. Johnson’s maneuver. Some Conservative lawmakers in the rebel ranks had been pulling back from the prospect of voting against the government in the next two weeks because of speculation that the prime minister was making progress in negotiations with the European Union. There is at least one intraparty potential drawback to Mr. Johnson’s maneuver.
Some Conservative lawmakers in the rebel ranks had been pulling back from the prospect of voting against the government in the next two weeks because of speculation that the prime minister was making progress in negotiations with the European Union.
They now may believe they can no longer afford to wait and see. One of the leading Tory rebels, the former Attorney General Dominic Grieve, told Sky News that Mr. Johnson was behaving more “like a revolutionary than a Conservative prime minister — this is tantamount to a coup really against Parliament.”They now may believe they can no longer afford to wait and see. One of the leading Tory rebels, the former Attorney General Dominic Grieve, told Sky News that Mr. Johnson was behaving more “like a revolutionary than a Conservative prime minister — this is tantamount to a coup really against Parliament.”
“He will not find it easy to get his way and disregard the House of Commons and Parliament generally in this fashion,” Mr. Grieve added.“He will not find it easy to get his way and disregard the House of Commons and Parliament generally in this fashion,” Mr. Grieve added.
But Mr. Johnson’s allies welcomed his gambit. “In 400 years we haven’t had a session of Parliament that’s lasted as long as this,” Simon Clarke, the Exchequer secretary to the Treasury, wrote on Twitter. “We need a Queen’s Speech to set out a bold agenda for after we leave the E.U.”But Mr. Johnson’s allies welcomed his gambit. “In 400 years we haven’t had a session of Parliament that’s lasted as long as this,” Simon Clarke, the Exchequer secretary to the Treasury, wrote on Twitter. “We need a Queen’s Speech to set out a bold agenda for after we leave the E.U.”
The current session of Parliament is the longest since the English civil war of 1642-51.The current session of Parliament is the longest since the English civil war of 1642-51.
Eddie Hughes, a Conservative member of Parliament, in a post on Twitter praised Mr. Johnson’s “strong leadership” and urged Britons to give Mr. Johnson the opportunity to withdraw the country from the European Union.
Legal experts said the move appeared to fall within the bounds of Britain’s unwritten constitution, but many saw it as a step on the path to a full-blown constitutional crisis as the fight over Brexit grinds on toward the deadline.Legal experts said the move appeared to fall within the bounds of Britain’s unwritten constitution, but many saw it as a step on the path to a full-blown constitutional crisis as the fight over Brexit grinds on toward the deadline.
Yvette Cooper, an opposition Labour lawmaker strongly opposed to a no-deal Brexit, wrote on Twitter: “Boris Johnson is trying to use the Queen to concentrate power in his own hands — this is a deeply dangerous and irresponsible way to govern.”Yvette Cooper, an opposition Labour lawmaker strongly opposed to a no-deal Brexit, wrote on Twitter: “Boris Johnson is trying to use the Queen to concentrate power in his own hands — this is a deeply dangerous and irresponsible way to govern.”
His move has already provoked one legal challenge, as a court in Edinburgh agreed to take up an appeal by dozens of members of Parliament to block it.His move has already provoked one legal challenge, as a court in Edinburgh agreed to take up an appeal by dozens of members of Parliament to block it.
An online petition on a government website, demanding that Parliament not be suspended while a Brexit deadline looms, had collected more than 550,000 signatures by Wednesday evening — far more than the 100,000 needed to require Parliament to consider holding a debate on the issue. While some social media users expressed disappointment in the queen’s acceding to Mr. Johnson’s request, observers noted that, in modern times, the reigning monarch has always obliged such a request from the government. The situation is a reflection of an unwritten rule of Britain’s political system: The throne remains removed from politics.
A Brexit deal with the European Union would be highly complicated, covering tariffs, product standards, fisheries, immigration, financial services, the border with Ireland and other issues. Mr. Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, negotiated a withdrawal agreement that was nearly 600 pages long, just to secure a transition period while long-term arrangements were made. An online petition on a government website, demanding that Parliament not be suspended while a Brexit deadline looms, had collected more than one million signatures by Wednesday evening — far more than the 100,000 needed to require Parliament to consider holding a debate on the issue.
Mujtaba Rahman, the managing director for Europe for the Eurasia Group, a consultancy, said that even with the latest twist it was still possible that Mr. Johnson could strike an agreement with the European Union and secure Parliament’s approval. A Brexit deal with the European Union would be highly complicated, covering tariffs, product standards, fisheries, immigration, financial services, the border with Ireland and other issues. Mrs. May, negotiated a withdrawal agreement that was nearly 600 pages long, just to secure a transition period while long-term arrangements were made. But Parliament consistently rejected it.
Another possibility, one that raises grave constitutional questions, is that Mr. Johnson could lose a vote of confidence in Parliament but try to hold an election after Britain leaves the European Union without an agreement. Mujtaba Rahman, the managing director for Europe for the Eurasia Group, a consultancy, said that even with the latest twist it was still possible that Mr. Johnson could strike an agreement with the European Union. A meeting of the European Council — set for Oct. 17 and 18 — seems to be the one window of opportunity in this new timeline for Mr. Johnson to secure a deal and win Parliament’s approval.
“The idea of a government implementing a no-deal Brexit then holding a general election — if the political action took place while Britain was a member of the E.U. — is concerning to a number of members of Parliament,” Mr. Rahman said. Regardless of the outcome on Brexit as a result of Mr. Johnson’s move, some thought he had set a dangerous precedent for Britain.
“Whatever one’s views on Brexit, once you allow a prime minister to prevent the full and free operation of our democratic institutions you are on a very precarious path,” said Mr. McDonnell, Labour’s finance spokesman.