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 7 Version 8
Boris Johnson Seeks to Stifle Brexit Opposition With Surprise Parliamentary Delay Boris Johnson Seeks to Stifle Brexit Opposition With Surprise Parliamentary Delay
(32 minutes later)
LONDON — Normally in times of national crisis, British leaders convene Parliament. But as the country confronts its biggest decision in many decades, Prime Minister Boris Johnson seems intent on doing the opposite. LONDON — Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain scrambled the nation’s already chaotic politics on Wednesday by shortening the time Parliament has left to debate Brexit, potentially increasing the likelihood of a no-deal withdrawal on Oct. 31 and eliciting furious cries of outrage from opposition politicians, who denounced it as undemocratic and possibly unconstitutional.
On Wednesday he announced plans that would shorten the time Parliament has to debate Brexit, potentially increasing the likelihood of a no-deal Brexit. Mr. Johnson’s startling move set the stage for a heated showdown with Parliament next week, when it returns from summer recess, and possibly again in October, as the Halloween deadline for Brexit bears down.
The move elicited furious cries of outrage from opposition politicians, who denounced it as undemocratic and possibly unconstitutional. And it set the stage for a heated showdown with Parliament next week, when it returns from summer recess, and possibly again in October, as the Halloween deadline for Brexit bears down.
[What is Brexit? Read an explanation here.]
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.“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.
[What a no-deal Brexit might mean, and why it matters.][What a no-deal Brexit might mean, and why it matters.]
Mr. Johnson’s plan also threatens to drag Queen Elizabeth II into the political arena, as she must approve the suspension of Parliament. At least one Brexit opponent, Jo Swinson, the leader of the staunchly anti-Brexit Liberal Democrats, said she had written a letter to the queen asking her to reject it.
Parliament was scheduled to meet during the first two weeks of September and then to be suspended for annual political party conferences. It was then scheduled to reconvene around Oct. 9.Parliament was scheduled to meet during the first two weeks of September and then to be suspended for annual political party conferences. It was then scheduled to reconvene around Oct. 9.
But in a letter sent Wednesday to all members of Parliament, Mr. Johnson said he intended to ask the queen 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. But in a letter sent Wednesday to all members of Parliament, Mr. Johnson said he intended to ask the 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.
The monarch’s approval is considered a formality, and hours after the announcement, the government said that the queen had approved the request. Mr. Johnson’s plan threatened to drag the queen into the political arena, as some opposition politicians, including Jo Swinson, the leader of the staunchly anti-Brexit Liberal Democrats, suggested that the queen should reject the prime minister’s request.
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.
And it 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 the move.And it 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 the move.
An online petition on a government website, demanding that Parliament not be suspended while a Brexit deadline looms, collected more than 250,000 signatures by early Wednesday afternoon — far more than the 100,000 needed to require Parliament to debate the issue. An online petition on a government website, demanding that Parliament not be suspended while a Brexit deadline looms, collected more than 340,000 signatures by Wednesday afternoon — far more than the 100,000 needed to require Parliament to consider holding a debate the issue.
Normally in times of national crisis, British leaders convene Parliament. But as the country confronts its biggest decision in many decades, Prime Minister Boris Johnson seems intent on doing the opposite.
In a video interview on Wednesday morning, Mr. Johnson said he had made the 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 the decision in order to progress with “our plans to take this country forward” and to “get on with our domestic agenda.”
“To do that we need legislation, we’ve got to be bringing forward new and important bills and that’s why we are going to have a queen’s speech and we’re going to do it on Oct. 14,” he said. “We’ve got to move ahead now with a new legislative program.”“To do that we need legislation, we’ve got to be bringing forward new and important bills and that’s why we are going to have a queen’s speech and we’re going to do it on Oct. 14,” he said. “We’ve got to move ahead now with a new legislative program.”
A majority in Parliament is on record opposing a no-deal Brexit, and many of those lawmakers hope to organize a vote that would prohibit the government from going through with it. On Tuesday, a group of opposition lawmakers agreed to coordinate toward that end.A majority in Parliament is on record opposing a no-deal Brexit, and many of those lawmakers hope to organize a vote that would prohibit the government from going through with it. On Tuesday, a group of opposition lawmakers agreed to coordinate toward that end.
Their time and room for maneuver were already limited, and a longer suspension would restrict them further, forcing rebel lawmakers to accelerate their efforts.Their time and room for maneuver were already limited, and a longer suspension would restrict them further, forcing rebel lawmakers to accelerate their efforts.
Yvette Cooper, an opposition Labour lawmaker strongly opposed to a no-deal Brexit, wrote on Twitter on Wednesday: “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.” 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 Mr. Johnson was making progress in negotiations with the European Union.
Philip Hammond, a senior Conservative lawmaker, tweeted, “It would be a constitutional outrage if Parliament were prevented from holding the government to account at a time of national crisis.” 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.”
Dick Newby, leader of the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords, wrote: “Suspending Parliament to stop debate and possible defeat is what dictators do. It must be resisted by every possible means.” “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.
A Brexit deal with the European Union would be 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. 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. We need a Queen’s Speech to set out a bold agenda for after we leave the E.U.,” wrote Simon Clarke, exchequer secretary to the Treasury. The current session of Parliament is the longest since the English civil war of 1642-51.
Parliament rejected Mrs. May’s deal three times this year, and nonbinding votes on a range of alternatives suggested that no particular approach had majority support. While Mr. Johnson’s gambit seemed like a bolt out of the blue, it is was telegraphed weeks ago by his chief strategist, Dominick Cummings. It also 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 October 31, “do or die.”
He has maintained that stance ever since, and some analysts see that as a canny tactical strategy leading up to a general election that many see as inevitable.
The prime minister has been trying to convince the European Union to soften its position on Brexit, to convince Parliament to back a revised withdrawal plan, and the threat of a no-deal Brexit is the only leverage he can bring to bear.
The Conservative Party is also worried about the threat posed by the Brexit Party of Nigel Farage, which calls for a clean break from the bloc. But its appeal would be blunted by Mr. Johnson’s full-throated call for Brexit at any cost.
Having a precarious majority of one in Parliament, Mr. Johnson is highly vulnerable to a no confidence vote by his opponents, which would trigger an election. Once again, analysts say, his adamantly pro-Brexit stance would serve him well, allowing him to present himself as the champion of the people against a Parliament that has betrayed the voters’ desire to leave the bloc.
“I suspect Number 10 believes it has created a win win scenario with this explosive announcement,” wrote Craig Oliver, the director of communications for the former Tory prime ministger, David Cameron. “Yes - and they get Brexit by October 31st; No - and they get to fight a ‘people versus parliament’ general election.”
In the short term, the effect of Mr. Johnson’s tactic is to concentrate and accelerate a clash with opposition and rebel Conservative lawmakers who agreed on Tuesday to coordinate their efforts to try to prevent a “no deal” Brexit that could, according to government leaks, lead to jammed ports and shortages of some medicines and fuel.
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.”
A Brexit deal with the European Union would be exceedingly 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.
Parliament rejected Mrs. May’s deal three times this year, and nonbinding votes on a range of alternatives made it appear that in fact, no particular approach had majority support.
Mujtaba Rahman, managing director for Europe for the Eurasia Group, said that, notwithstanding the latest twist, it was still possible that Mr. Johnson could strike an agreement with the European Union and secure Parliament’s approval.
Another possibility, one with grave constitutional questions, is that Mr. Johnson loses a vote of confidence in Parliament but tries to hold an election after leaving the European Union without an agreement. “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.