Boris has lost control of parliament, but it’s not game over yet | thearticle

The Opposition has done its worst. They have defeated the Government in the Commons three times in two days. They have denied Boris Johnson a dissolution. They are now threatening to add

insult to injury.  Assuming that the Benn Bill now being debated in both Houses passes by Monday, the new Act will inflict an unprecedented humiliation on the Prime Minister, first by ruling

out the no-deal Brexit that gives him leverage in negotiations, then by sending him “naked into the conference chamber” (Edward Leigh, quoting Aneurin Bevan) to plead with the EU for an

extension to Article 50 that neither he nor the public wants. It may look as if the Boris Johnson administration is destined to end in tears, to be remembered (if at all) as nasty, brutish

and short. No British Government can last long if it loses control of Parliament. But there are two things that the Opposition cannot control: Europe and the Queen. The spectacle that

Westminster has made of itself has not gone unnoticed in the capitals of the EU. Their reaction is one of alarm and dismay, less _Schadenfreude_ than _tant pis. _A predicament that was

already bad is now seen as irretrievable. Unpalatable as it may be for Remainers to admit it, until this week, the European leaders who matter entertained high hopes of Boris Johnson. They

have no interest in destroying another Prime Minister. For some Eurocrats, Boris is a bogeyman, but Angela Merkel was impressed by him on his visit to Berlin and at the Biarritz G7 summit

last month. She was reported to have found him “professional”. Emmanuel Macron disagrees with him profoundly, but he too appreciated dealing with a British leader who seemed to know what he

wanted. Now the British Opposition parties, allied with Tory rebels, are proposing to take Boris hostage and send him back to Brussels, trussed up in legislative bondage, to beg for another

delay. He calls their instrument of torture the “surrender Bill” and that is indeed how it would appear to the EU heads of government on October 17. But the EU does not want the British to

surrender. It wants Brexit to be over and done with. October 31 is the date in EU diaries and they would prefer us to stick to it. So the answer to any evidently insincere request for a

further postponement is likely to be a firm _ “Non, Monsieur, ce n’est pas possible.” _At most, the EU might countenance a “technical” delay of a few weeks — a “managed” scenario, but a

no-deal Brexit nonetheless. The whole idea of forcing Boris Johnson to negotiate in bad faith is in any case absurd. One Whitehall source is quoted asking about the Opposition tactics in

case Boris should defy them: “What are they going to do? Get the Supreme Court to send the Cabinet Secretary to Brussels to sign off the extension?”  It is far more likely that Boris would

resign rather than obey his enemies, forcing Jeremy Corbyn to drink his own poisoned chalice. In a subsequent election, the “surrender Bill” could well result in the Opposition parties being

hoist by their own petard. This brings us to the second power in the land that is outside Parliament’s control: the Queen. The possibility that the Queen’s Consent could be refused in the

case of a Bill that affects the prerogative powers has already been mooted here. There has been no suggestion so far that such consent to the Benn Bill is in question, but it would be

perfectly lawful for the Prime Minister to advise the Queen that her consent might properly be denied. Such an imposition of direct control over the executive by the legislature in the field

of foreign policy would potentially disturb the delicate balance of the constitution. We are governed by the Crown in Parliament and lawgiving requires both organs to agree.  The Queen

could also be forced to play an unwelcome part in the event that the Opposition refuses to allow an election, even if the Prime Minister is determined to resign. The Fixed-term Parliament

Act 2011 was intended to prevent the arbitrary use of the prerogative to gain electoral advantage for the governing party. But the situation in which we now find ourselves was not foreseen

by those who framed this ill-starred legislation. There is no majority for any resolution of the Brexit conundrum, while the Government is being allowed neither to govern nor to make way for

a successor. Parliament is reducing itself to an echo-chamber, as has been suggested here. A dissolution, followed by the election of a new Parliament, is the normal, the natural and the

right way to restore sanity. Yet precisely that outcome has been thrown into doubt this week. The Labour Party is deeply divided over when and whether to allow an election. The other

Opposition parties and the Tory rebels also disagree — doubtless fearing that if they go to the country, the country may tell them where to go.  Boris Johnson himself insists that he does

not want an election, but merely to be allowed to do a deal with the EU. Almost nobody believes him. Yet no meaningful negotiations can take place if he has no authority to deliver whatever

is agreed. If the Opposition has its way, Britain would be back to the nightmare predicament that broke Theresa May’s administration. No wonder the Government is refusing to go down without

a fight. There is still everything to play for. This crisis may have begun in the Palace of Westminster, but it may end in Le Berlaymont, Brussels — or even in Buckingham Palace.