Boris Johnson told cabinet ministers yesterday that Brussels was more likely to offer Britain a deal if it thought that parliament could no longer “frustrate” Brexit.
The prime minister insisted that his decision to prorogue parliament was “emphatically not” about bypassing MPs. He said, however, that it would make a “huge difference” in negotiations with Brussels once the threat of MPs stopping Brexit was removed.
He added that the fact Britain could leave without a deal was making them think “these guys really are serious”.
Mr Johnson said he thought there was a “good chance” that Britain would leave with a deal and also a “good chance” it would leave without one.
A cabinet minister warned Mr Johnson, however, that Downing Street was risking a “nasty” general election by pitting the government against MPs trying to stop a no-deal Brexit.
Amber Rudd, the work and pensions secretary, is understood to have told No 10 to tone down its language during a cabinet conference call. The prime minister held the call to explain his decision to prorogue parliament before a Queen’s Speech on October 14.
Mr Johnson is said to have told ministers that the “moment of reconciliation” will come once Britain has left the European Union on October 31.
A source said that the prime minister insisted that proroguing parliament was about implementing the government’s legislative programme rather than delaying Brexit.
He added, however, that events in parliament had a “direct impact” on Brexit negotiations. After recent meetings with European leaders, Mr Johnson suggested that they were preparing to move. He said “we have got to stick our foot in that door”.
Julian Smith, the Northern Ireland secretary, is understood to have raised concerns that the decision to prorogue parliament could leave the government unable to pass a Northern Ireland budget in the event of no-deal.
Geoffrey Cox, the attorney-general, assured ministers, however, that there was nothing illegal or unconstitutional about the decision, dismissing concerns as political rhetoric.
Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, is said to have been strongly supportive of Mr Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament. He said that the government had to position itself against the “rebel alliance” that was “holding Britain back”.
Sajid Javid, the chancellor, said that the spending review next week would give the public a “taster” of a Johnson administration. Andrea Leadsom, the business secretary, hailed Mr Johnson’s move as decisive and “brilliant”. She said that it contrasted with “years of pain” under Theresa May.
Robert Buckland, the justice secretary, pointed out that the prorogation was significantly longer than normal and said that the government would have to explain the reasons.
Sources said that most of the Cabinet ministers involved in the conference call supported Mr Johnson’s position.
At least one minister, however, raised concerns about the reaction of Tory MPs on a WhatsApp group in response to the announcement.
In a letter to MPs outlining his government’s plans, Mr Johnson said that he was bringing forward a “bold and ambitious domestic legislative agenda” that MPs could vote on in October.
He wrote: “This morning I spoke to Her Majesty the Queen to request an end to the current parliamentary session in the second sitting week in September, before commencing the second session of this parliament with a Queen’s speech on Monday, 14 October.
“A central feature of the legislative programme will be the government’s number one legislative priority, if a new deal is forthcoming at EU Council, to introduce a Withdrawal Agreement Bill and move at pace to secure its passage before 31 October.
“I also believe it is vitally important that the key votes associated with the Queen’s Speech and any deal with the EU fall at a time when parliamentarians are best placed to judge the government’s programme.
“Parliament will have the opportunity to debate the government’s overall programme and approach to Brexit, in the run up to EU Council, and then vote on this on October 21 and 22, once we know the outcome of the Council.
“Should I succeed in agreeing a deal with the EU, parliament will then have the opportunity to pass the bill required for ratification of the deal ahead of 31 October. Finally, I want to reiterate to colleagues that these weeks leading up to the European Council on 17/18 October are vitally important for the sake of my negotiations with the EU.”
What they said before
The issue of whether to prorogue parliament was raised during the Conservative Party leadership race when Dominic Raab declined to rule it out over October 31 to force through a no-deal Brexit. His comments provoked rebuttals from Boris Johnson’s leadership rivals, most of whom are now in the cabinet. This is what they said then:
Matt Hancock, the health secretary “There’s this idea that to deliver Brexit we should suspend our parliamentary democracy, that we should prorogue parliament. But that goes against everything that those men who waded on to those beaches fought and died for [on D-Day] and I will not have it.”
Amber Rudd, the work and pensions secretary “I think it’s outrageous to consider [it].”
Sajid Javid, the chancellor “You don’t deliver on democracy by trashing democracy.”
Michael Gove, chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster “It would not be true to the best traditions of British democracy.”
Nicky Morgan, the culture secretary “Proroguing parliament is clearly a mad suggestion. You cannot say you are going to take back control . . . and then go, ‘Oh, by the way, we are just going to shut parliament down for a couple of months, so we are just going to drift out on a no-deal.’ ”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/now-brussels-knows-we-mean-business-johnson-tells-cabinet-tg7xlkrz7
No comments:
Post a Comment