Thread by @JolyonMaugham

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner The answer to this conundrum - and in my view the real difficulty with this plan - is how an alternative Government indicates to HM that it is better placed to command the confidence of the House. If it can then (I think) the Charlatan would have no choice but to resign. 1/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner If it can't then the Charlatan would be entitled to remain in Government. I am not aware of any convention (still less a justiciable one) surviving the FTPA that would require the Charlatan to resign absent another Government being in a better position. 2/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner Indeed, I think the absence of any such statement in the FTPA might be thought implicitly to rule out such a convention.

So how does an alternative Government indicate it is better placed? I spent some time in July looking at this and there is no obvious mechanic in... 3/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner ... the Standing Orders of the House. But the FTPA (which takes precedence over those Standing Orders) obviously anticipates the existence of such a mechanic and so I think the Speaker would (rightly) feel bound to create one. 4/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner Alternatively, MPs might just add their signatures to an online list and when that list reached a majority, bingo.

I am aware Cummings is saying the Charlatan would not resign in that situation but the fact that the FTPA legislates in that space might (cf the Inner House... 5/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner ... in Wightman in relation to section 13 of the Withdrawal Act) mean the Courts treated the question as justiciable. @GoodLawProject would certainly litigate with MPs for his removal and we would find out.

So my view is that Cummings' threat is characteristic misinfomation. 6/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner @GoodLawProject I also think Cummings is wrong to say it would threaten the Corbyn Project. Corbyn has said he will do whatever it takes to stop No Deal and the alternative Government (which could in practice not have him as PM) could only form for a temporary purpose. 7/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner @GoodLawProject After that temporary purpose - perhaps a mandate to seek an extension and referendum - was served the Government would dissolve and the Charlatan would once again become PM and Corbyn titular leader of the Opposition. 8/x

@BaronVonDuncs @sundersays @StevePeers @ianpacemain @julia_politics @stephen_rth @carlgardner @GoodLawProject Standing back, imo, the real difficulties are difficulties of coordination but if MPs can agree a stable majority against No Deal over the Summer, No Deal can (imo, clearly) be stopped. x/x