,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Gove's message was nuanced. Here's my take.
Govt:
- "respects" judgment in simple sense of understanding Supreme Court is the highest court and decides the law
- doesn't *agree* with judgment, because they believe, but won't explicitly say, they should make law not courts /1
Govt:
- "respects" judgment in simple sense of understanding Supreme Court is the highest court and decides the law
- doesn't *agree* with judgment, because they believe, but won't explicitly say, they should make law not courts /1
But this misses a crucial aspect of the Supreme Court's decision, as expressed @AileenMcHarg and others yesterday.
SC's decision was constitutionally conservative in that it maintained Parliament is the key player in our system. /2
SC's decision was constitutionally conservative in that it maintained Parliament is the key player in our system. /2
And that means that notwithstanding yesterday's judgment, it is open to Parliament to legislate to control power of the PM to prorogue parliament, or any other aspect of the prerogative. As it did with Fixed Term Parliament Act, which removed power from PM to call election /3
What lies behind Gove's polite but constitutionally dangerous position (supported by not-so-polite leaks from JRM etc) that the Executive should continue to have power to take the UK on whatever path it wants *despite* lack of parliamentary majority support /4
That is a radical, unprecedented and unstable position to take. That is how they got into this trouble in the first place and it does not appear, from Gove's interview, that they have learned their lesson. A dangerous road. /5
I do think there is a legitimate question over balance of power within our constitution, and my view is that in the long term we should work towards a written constitution. But, that would probably reduce not increase executive power. So this isn't Gove's position /6
