,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Does a Bill requiring an extension of Article 50 need a money resolution? @sc_laws (in a piece retweeted by @Jesse_Norman) argued that it does. This piece, in my view convincingly, argues that it doesn’t. ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/01/28/and…
The point is rather important, because House of Commons Standing Orders require the Crown (the Government) to agree to a money resolution.
So if a money resolution is needed, the Government could block the @YvetteCooperMP Bill by the device of refusing to move a money resolution.
But if Andrew Denny is right - and I think he is - all that @YvetteCooperMP’s Bill needs is majority support and support for a resolution giving it time.
Since the Lords are bound to agree the Bill, the Government could only then stop the Bill by advising the Queen to refuse Royal Assent: advice that would cause a spectacular constitutional crisis by forcing the Queen to make a highly charged political decision.
(Which, in my view, means that such advice would not be given.)
