The coming weeks and days will, without doubt, prove to be crucial in the unfolding Brexit drama gripping the UK. At stake, as many protesters across the UK have noted on countless placards, is democracy itself. Also at stake now, because of statements made by the UK’s current political leadership in recent days as they have continued to double down on their already tenuous positions, is the rule of law.
This is not hyperbole. This is the reality of the situation that those who have attempted to extract the UK from the European Union have caused by their recklessness, incompetence, bluster, duplicity, and dishonesty.
Brexit is a fast moving and ever changing debate. Because of each new outrage, it is easy to lose sight of the last outrage. This is the standard M.O. of a conman, Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme where each new chapter must be more audacious than the last to keep the illusion that everything is fine alive. So, a reminder, the outrage from as long ago as last week was the suspension, by Prime Minister Boris Johnson, of parliament. We’ll return to that, but first, the new outrage this week is the suggestion, from Cabinet Minister Michael Gove, that the government might choose to ignore a law passed by parliament to stop the most damaging form of Brexit, which is crashing out of the EU with no deal on Oct. 31.
Appearing on Andrew Marr’s political talk show on Sept. 1, Gove was asked whether the government he is a part of would abide by any new law that may pass in the now shortened time parliamentarians have available to them. Three times Gove refused to say the only acceptable answer to this question, which is, “yes, of course the government will obey the law.”
Instead, Gove, a man whose reputation for either being right or being honest is patchy at best, refused to agree. The minister resorted instead claiming that the UK already has legislation, passed by an overwhelming majority of MPs. With this comment he was referring to the vote in the House of Commons to trigger notification of Article 50, which began the formal process of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. This argument demonstrates the weakness of the position of those still trying to make Brexit happen, because while it is technically correct it is, at the same time, entirely fallacious.
When Article 50 was triggered (via a vote in parliament that only happened because of a successful legal challenge to the intention of the previous government, led by Theresa May, to take this step without parliamentary approval) this motion was passed by a majority of 498 votes for vs. 114 against. Following the “logic” being now spouted by Gove, this would mean that the mandate for leaving the EU had grown from 52% of the general public in June 2016, to 81% of elected members of parliament. That, to be blunt, is ridiculous.
The triggering of Article 50 was an instruction from parliament to see what Brexit would look like, to find out what the final destination of the journey would be. It was not a blanket condoning of any particular kind of Brexit, let alone the most extreme form of Brexit. Gove’s interpretation of this vote is an attempt to rewrite history as a matter of political expediency, and it is thoroughly dishonest as well as disingenuous. Yet, some people, those still unaware of what the effects of Brexit will be because they think an expert was wrong once = all experts are wrong all the time, think this is sound logic.
Back, now, to the prorogation of parliament and the threat to democracy that is inherent in this (almost) unprecedented move. The liars and spivs that are at the forefront of this crusade to leave the EU are trying to pretend that this is normal, and that the suspension of parliament at the end of one term and prior to the commencement of another is standard practice. Again, technically true. But this is the longest prorogation of parliament in decades, at a time of national crisis. Publicly, ministers (including the prime minster) have stated that this is nothing to do with Brexit. That is a blatant lie, and an insult to the collective intelligence of the British public. Of course, some people don’t mind this lie, they see it as a white lie, a jape that is justifiable so that Brexit can be “delivered,” whatever that means. Here’s the thing, if you’re OK with lies, that says a lot about you.
At the time when the prime minister asked Her Majesty The Queen to grant his application for this extended closure of the seat of democracy in the UK, some speculated whether Her Majesty might refuse to grant permission for this. However, the last time a monarch refused royal assent was in 1708.
Back, now, to whether the government might chose to refuse to abide by any new legislation passed by parliament in the coming days, that would involve not seeking the same royal assent, essentially, the politicizing of the monarchy. That is an aberration of the unwritten constitution of the UK, and even considering such a move is the gravest threat to the state of democracy, and the rule of law, that the UK has faced in modern times.
It is not only the perpetually wrong Gove who is openly discussing, from the position of Cabinet minister, whether or not to disregard parliament and trample on the rule of law.
Gavin Williamson (secretary of state for education) has said the same too. In his “logic” the government would look at any legislation to see “what the impact of the legislation would be on the government’s negotiating position.” To be clear, the government has no negotiating position and the dangerous precedent of ignoring Parliament would not strengthen it even if they did have one.
From the suspension of parliament, a move only deemed necessary by the government because they, at this point, cannot stand their arguments up against the slightest scrutiny (Johnson has had one single day in front of the House of Commons so far), to the very idea that the government can be selective about which laws they follow and/or ask the Queen to give her assent to, there is now a new dangerous escalation of the situation in the UK. In a move which can be described as nothing better than playground bullying, there is now too the threat from the government to members of their own party that they will be deselected at the next general election if they vote against whatever the government wants them to do.
MPs often do vote their conscience (those who have one anyway) and vote against a party whip. They are free to do so. Threatening to end the parliamentary careers of anyone who rebels is the latest outrageous stunt that is considered by the occupants of 10 Downing Street, I use that word in the plural, because this is not just the machinations of the prime minster, much of what is happening is down to the behind the schemes scheming of Johnson’s most senior advisor, the unelected Dominic Cummings.
I remember when the Brexit debate was (allegedly) about not being beholden to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. I remember when the Brexit debate was (allegedly) about the UK making their own laws, not choosing which laws to abide by. I remember when the fight to make Brexit happen was (allegedly) about upholding democracy. I remember when the Brexit debate was (allegedly) about improving the lives of people in the UK. The current situation, in fact, is the opposite of all of these things.
Watching the scale of protests across the UK over this past weekend has been awe inspiring. Keep it up good people. Fight to take back control of your democracy, and laws, from the liars and conmen who sold Brexit.
