The Crown in Parliament system

This week is going to test the British constitution to the limits. Last week remainers were exploding in (ridiculous?)  Outrage over the proroguing of Parliament.  I don't doubt remainers sincerity. I doubt their sanity sometimes [ As an aside I recommend this piece on radicalized remainers , for greater clarity].

Once proroguing was signed by the Queen , remainers started to suggest we were in a dictatorship, fascism, right wing coup etc. Then there was the inevitable legal move. The matter for me and Hannah is that this is over the top rhetoric at best and dangerous at worse ( for if a real fascist government took hold, would it not be like that boy who cried wolf?). Britain is not in the middle of a right wing coup. It is not in a fascist dictatorship.  We know because as Jews our grandparents fled fascism in both Czechoslovakia and Iraq.  We know exactly what a fascist regime looks like.  In any case a dictatorship doesn't allow a Parliament to sit freely as it is today  and it doesn't allow credible and real opposition. The proroguing is for five days. It is constitutional and legal. Other governments in the Commonwealth have done the same in similar controversial circumstances ;  Stephen Harper in Canada in 2008 and no other than John Major (who supports the law suit against this decision) way back in 1997. In Australia the Governor General once sacked a government and dissolved the Aussie parliament , using the royal prerogative and that was as late as the 1970s.

 In fact if there is any coup going on , it is a coup against the current government and an attempt to reverse Parliament's previous decision to pass article 50 legislation.

The talk of preventing no deal Brexit is in reality an excuse for those who want no Brexit at all. This is quite clear from the people involved. It is also clear that when people were suggesting replacing Boris with a government of national unity , it in reality meant a remain government of unity.  Until Corbyn wondered in and demanded to be made PM , it was a serious possibility. Yet even Conservative rebels balked at letting a Socialist Marxist into power. For now.

An example of this coup attempt can be seen today , wherein remain MPs are going to , with the aid of the Speaker , take control of the businesses of the House of Commons.

This is a real constitutional outrage, because :

1. Any Speaker (unlike the US House) is supposed to give up their partisanship and become a neutral referee of the House as a whole. When seeking re-election , the Speaker does so as " the Speaker seeking re-election", not under their previous party allegiance.  He or she is supposed to be neither a government toadie nor a help for the opposition. The Speaker is or should be bound by convention and precedent. The current Speaker is going way beyond this and is acting in a partisan fashion.

2. The British constitution is that of the Crown In Parliament (being the Monarch, the House of commons and House of Lords)  :  the government is formed  or appointed by the Crown from MPs who can command a majority in the house of Commons for its legislation, especially budgets and the Queen's speech. In turn this executive is accountable to Parliament as a whole , via questions in the house, written questions  and standing committees. When Speaker Bercow gives the control of the order paper to Hillary Benn , Philip Hammond etc, he is breaking out of constitutional convention . First these MPs will not be accountable or under scrutiny as a government minister would be. Secondly it goes against what I've already said. We don't have shadow governments only one government that needs to be appointed by the Crown will a clear majority of the house  in favour.

3.  To pass no deal legislation will take time under normal parliamentary procedure. It needs to clear both houses. It also needs Royal Assent to become law (as I have written Crown In Parliament) . Hold that thought as it is important for later.

4.  This is more a political view than a constitutional one, but 3 years ago Parliament asked the people and the then Prime Minister said the result would be honoured.  Parliament has already passed the article 50 legislation . By going against a largely participated in  democratic vote ,  Parliament is risking the old rule of law premise that if a party looses or wins an election they then have every right to govern until the next election.

So what exactly can Boris and his government do in reaction?

There are four possibilities :

1. Get defeated and call for a general election. This would be the conventional thing to do , as any government that gets legislation passed that it doesn't want clearly doesn't command the confidence of the House. Except it is no longer that easy thanks to the conservative / liberal coalition years wherein we have the fixed term parliament act. Either Labour have to agree to an election (to get the two thirds majority required to trigger an early election)  or a formal vote of no confidence has to be put forward by Labour . If won there's 14 days of shenanigans whilst alternative governments are explored.

2). Boris can use the prerogative powers of the Monarch , to deny Queen's consent. This is once again an example of the Crown in Parliament ( Westminster is called a palace because it is one , just like Buckingham Palace). This is a little known power that means debates in the two houses have to have the Queen's  consent to go ahead. This has been used many more a time by previous governments than you might think  ( e.g. by Tony Blair in 1999) .

3). Boris can allow the whole charade to continue and then use the prerogative powers to withhold Royal Assent. This is basically the Queen's power of veto (again Crown in Parliament ) . The Queen is a constitutional monarch and thus never uses this power of veto . In fact the last time it was done was in 1708 and that was Queen Anne . But what people don't realise is that this veto was used by Anne on the "advise " of her government.  In fact it is perfectly constitutional for the Monarch to veto a bill on the advise of her Ministers.

4) Boris accepts the rebellion and caves in like Theresa May. We then have a permanent situation of stalemate , where we are destined to leave , but never can, constantly seeking constant extensions.

What do people here think?