Parliament Cannot Bind Future ParliamentsIf the EU does not offer an extension to UK's Article 50 invocation, is the Benn Bill irrelevant?Can the UK Parliament introduce a constitution that would be legally binding to future parliaments?Will member state parliaments have the opportunity to ratify the UK/EU deal before exit day?Would a Government who lose the confidence of the House really delay an election until after the event over which that confidence was lost transpires?What will happen if Parliament votes “no” on each of the Brexit-related votes to be held on the 12th, 13th and 14th of March?Does Parliament need to approve the new Brexit delay to 31 October 2019?Is it necessary to hold a Queen’s Speech, and prorogue parliament, to propose new bills?Can Boris Johnson request a Brexit extension to November 1st?What happens to the Queens Speech now?What power does the UK parliament hold over a Prime Minister whom they refuse to remove from power?How can the British government both obey the Benn Act and still leave without a Brexit deal?
Is one spouse responsible if other failed to file taxes
Why can't I shoot with a fast shutter speed?
How to understand "No she bludgering well won't!"
what is the essential difference between human languages to other earthly animalia languages?
How bad is 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. a3?
How did 36-bit computers format ARPANET packets?
What game has this black main menu?
Should I sign a NDA that holds me liable for legal fees even if I am in the right?
What would be the effect(s) of this asteroid?
Creating 123456 in the fewest number of steps
Why was LEGO reluctant to use additional colours for regular bricks in former times?
"Government transplant" been tried? At what scale, and what were the results?
How can there exist a profession consisting of investing others' money?
Can I rescind my offer of working on weekends after last day?
Forgot item in a hotel in Spain; hotel says I have to send a courier myself because they don't handle international shipments
Postdoc Fellowships Collision
How can I create a n way Cartesian product of type lists in C++?
Expressing the Riemann Zeta function in terms of GCD and LCM
What is the relative return point (i.e. the "space it left") of a creature banished by the Banishment spell?
Moving into check for a draw as black, why is it illegal? Comparison to Racing Kings
Java OOP Temperature Converter
Why is an unbiased random walk non-ergodic?
find ".ts" but not ".d.ts"
What does it mean to play "positionally", and how do you train that?
Parliament Cannot Bind Future Parliaments
If the EU does not offer an extension to UK's Article 50 invocation, is the Benn Bill irrelevant?Can the UK Parliament introduce a constitution that would be legally binding to future parliaments?Will member state parliaments have the opportunity to ratify the UK/EU deal before exit day?Would a Government who lose the confidence of the House really delay an election until after the event over which that confidence was lost transpires?What will happen if Parliament votes “no” on each of the Brexit-related votes to be held on the 12th, 13th and 14th of March?Does Parliament need to approve the new Brexit delay to 31 October 2019?Is it necessary to hold a Queen’s Speech, and prorogue parliament, to propose new bills?Can Boris Johnson request a Brexit extension to November 1st?What happens to the Queens Speech now?What power does the UK parliament hold over a Prime Minister whom they refuse to remove from power?How can the British government both obey the Benn Act and still leave without a Brexit deal?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
The recent act passed in by the UK Parliament EU Withdrawal No.2 Act, that forces the Prime Minister to seek an extension if no deal is agreed or parliament does not agree to no deal, is said by the Prime Minister to bind his hands when negotiating with the European Union.
If Parliament is prorogued (legally for a few days) in order for a Queens Speech and creating a new Parliamentary Session, would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
united-kingdom brexit parliament
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
add a comment
|
The recent act passed in by the UK Parliament EU Withdrawal No.2 Act, that forces the Prime Minister to seek an extension if no deal is agreed or parliament does not agree to no deal, is said by the Prime Minister to bind his hands when negotiating with the European Union.
If Parliament is prorogued (legally for a few days) in order for a Queens Speech and creating a new Parliamentary Session, would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
united-kingdom brexit parliament
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
6
The key point is that you can't write a law that says "PS This law cannot be changed." Any future parliament can change any law given a majority in favour of that change.
– Jontia
Oct 2 at 15:25
1
This phrase is much misunderstood. As Jontia says above, and JJJ in their answer below, all it means is that any Act of Parliament can be repealed and amended by any other Act of Parliament. That's it.
– Steve Melnikoff
Oct 2 at 15:56
add a comment
|
The recent act passed in by the UK Parliament EU Withdrawal No.2 Act, that forces the Prime Minister to seek an extension if no deal is agreed or parliament does not agree to no deal, is said by the Prime Minister to bind his hands when negotiating with the European Union.
If Parliament is prorogued (legally for a few days) in order for a Queens Speech and creating a new Parliamentary Session, would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
united-kingdom brexit parliament
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
The recent act passed in by the UK Parliament EU Withdrawal No.2 Act, that forces the Prime Minister to seek an extension if no deal is agreed or parliament does not agree to no deal, is said by the Prime Minister to bind his hands when negotiating with the European Union.
If Parliament is prorogued (legally for a few days) in order for a Queens Speech and creating a new Parliamentary Session, would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
united-kingdom brexit parliament
united-kingdom brexit parliament
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
edited Oct 2 at 19:59
JJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
asked Oct 2 at 15:14
PandaPopsPandaPops
65613 bronze badges
65613 bronze badges
6
The key point is that you can't write a law that says "PS This law cannot be changed." Any future parliament can change any law given a majority in favour of that change.
– Jontia
Oct 2 at 15:25
1
This phrase is much misunderstood. As Jontia says above, and JJJ in their answer below, all it means is that any Act of Parliament can be repealed and amended by any other Act of Parliament. That's it.
– Steve Melnikoff
Oct 2 at 15:56
add a comment
|
6
The key point is that you can't write a law that says "PS This law cannot be changed." Any future parliament can change any law given a majority in favour of that change.
– Jontia
Oct 2 at 15:25
1
This phrase is much misunderstood. As Jontia says above, and JJJ in their answer below, all it means is that any Act of Parliament can be repealed and amended by any other Act of Parliament. That's it.
– Steve Melnikoff
Oct 2 at 15:56
6
6
The key point is that you can't write a law that says "PS This law cannot be changed." Any future parliament can change any law given a majority in favour of that change.
– Jontia
Oct 2 at 15:25
The key point is that you can't write a law that says "PS This law cannot be changed." Any future parliament can change any law given a majority in favour of that change.
– Jontia
Oct 2 at 15:25
1
1
This phrase is much misunderstood. As Jontia says above, and JJJ in their answer below, all it means is that any Act of Parliament can be repealed and amended by any other Act of Parliament. That's it.
– Steve Melnikoff
Oct 2 at 15:56
This phrase is much misunderstood. As Jontia says above, and JJJ in their answer below, all it means is that any Act of Parliament can be repealed and amended by any other Act of Parliament. That's it.
– Steve Melnikoff
Oct 2 at 15:56
add a comment
|
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
No, because it does not bind that parliament. Parliament can simply pass new legislation to nullify what's required from the PM in that act. That's unlikely to happen because parliament still supports it (given that they're the same people), but nothing prevents them from changing the law other than the will of parliament itself.
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
2
@KDog that's a good question, but in practice it's not that interesting. If parliament supports no deal then they can easily deal with this too in whatever way is legally required. The problem is that there's no majority for any deal or no deal that's also acceptable to the EU. There was a majority for not having no deal and that's where this law comes from.
– JJ for Transparency and Monica
Oct 2 at 15:45
1
@KDog: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/45662/…
– Fizz
Oct 2 at 15:45
3
A good example is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass the resolution: "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". That's perfectly lawful. If it also said, this Bill can only be superseded or repealed with a 2/3 majority, that would be unlawful.
– richardb
Oct 2 at 16:23
3
@KDog There is a legal principle whereby if two Acts are incompatible with one another, then the later one impliedly repeals the earlier one to the extent of the incompatibility, even if it does not expressly do so. However note that in the case of the Act in question, ss 1(2) and 1(3) provide that the PM does not need to ask for an extension if Parliament has agreed to a no-deal Brexit by the 19th October.
– JBentley
Oct 2 at 23:33
1
.. however, implicit repeal does not apply to certain laws, and especially not to law created by EU competences - this is subtle but very important, see Factortame en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– pjc50
Oct 3 at 9:45
|
show 8 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
No, because it does not bind that parliament. Parliament can simply pass new legislation to nullify what's required from the PM in that act. That's unlikely to happen because parliament still supports it (given that they're the same people), but nothing prevents them from changing the law other than the will of parliament itself.
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
2
@KDog that's a good question, but in practice it's not that interesting. If parliament supports no deal then they can easily deal with this too in whatever way is legally required. The problem is that there's no majority for any deal or no deal that's also acceptable to the EU. There was a majority for not having no deal and that's where this law comes from.
– JJ for Transparency and Monica
Oct 2 at 15:45
1
@KDog: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/45662/…
– Fizz
Oct 2 at 15:45
3
A good example is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass the resolution: "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". That's perfectly lawful. If it also said, this Bill can only be superseded or repealed with a 2/3 majority, that would be unlawful.
– richardb
Oct 2 at 16:23
3
@KDog There is a legal principle whereby if two Acts are incompatible with one another, then the later one impliedly repeals the earlier one to the extent of the incompatibility, even if it does not expressly do so. However note that in the case of the Act in question, ss 1(2) and 1(3) provide that the PM does not need to ask for an extension if Parliament has agreed to a no-deal Brexit by the 19th October.
– JBentley
Oct 2 at 23:33
1
.. however, implicit repeal does not apply to certain laws, and especially not to law created by EU competences - this is subtle but very important, see Factortame en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– pjc50
Oct 3 at 9:45
|
show 8 more comments
would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
No, because it does not bind that parliament. Parliament can simply pass new legislation to nullify what's required from the PM in that act. That's unlikely to happen because parliament still supports it (given that they're the same people), but nothing prevents them from changing the law other than the will of parliament itself.
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
2
@KDog that's a good question, but in practice it's not that interesting. If parliament supports no deal then they can easily deal with this too in whatever way is legally required. The problem is that there's no majority for any deal or no deal that's also acceptable to the EU. There was a majority for not having no deal and that's where this law comes from.
– JJ for Transparency and Monica
Oct 2 at 15:45
1
@KDog: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/45662/…
– Fizz
Oct 2 at 15:45
3
A good example is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass the resolution: "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". That's perfectly lawful. If it also said, this Bill can only be superseded or repealed with a 2/3 majority, that would be unlawful.
– richardb
Oct 2 at 16:23
3
@KDog There is a legal principle whereby if two Acts are incompatible with one another, then the later one impliedly repeals the earlier one to the extent of the incompatibility, even if it does not expressly do so. However note that in the case of the Act in question, ss 1(2) and 1(3) provide that the PM does not need to ask for an extension if Parliament has agreed to a no-deal Brexit by the 19th October.
– JBentley
Oct 2 at 23:33
1
.. however, implicit repeal does not apply to certain laws, and especially not to law created by EU competences - this is subtle but very important, see Factortame en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– pjc50
Oct 3 at 9:45
|
show 8 more comments
would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
No, because it does not bind that parliament. Parliament can simply pass new legislation to nullify what's required from the PM in that act. That's unlikely to happen because parliament still supports it (given that they're the same people), but nothing prevents them from changing the law other than the will of parliament itself.
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
would the bill mentioned above be an example of a bill that binds the future Parliament which is shown in this answer to not be allowed by the UK's uncodified constitution?
No, because it does not bind that parliament. Parliament can simply pass new legislation to nullify what's required from the PM in that act. That's unlikely to happen because parliament still supports it (given that they're the same people), but nothing prevents them from changing the law other than the will of parliament itself.
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
answered Oct 2 at 15:24
JJ for Transparency and MonicaJJ for Transparency and Monica
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
21.7k5 gold badges65 silver badges109 bronze badges
2
@KDog that's a good question, but in practice it's not that interesting. If parliament supports no deal then they can easily deal with this too in whatever way is legally required. The problem is that there's no majority for any deal or no deal that's also acceptable to the EU. There was a majority for not having no deal and that's where this law comes from.
– JJ for Transparency and Monica
Oct 2 at 15:45
1
@KDog: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/45662/…
– Fizz
Oct 2 at 15:45
3
A good example is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass the resolution: "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". That's perfectly lawful. If it also said, this Bill can only be superseded or repealed with a 2/3 majority, that would be unlawful.
– richardb
Oct 2 at 16:23
3
@KDog There is a legal principle whereby if two Acts are incompatible with one another, then the later one impliedly repeals the earlier one to the extent of the incompatibility, even if it does not expressly do so. However note that in the case of the Act in question, ss 1(2) and 1(3) provide that the PM does not need to ask for an extension if Parliament has agreed to a no-deal Brexit by the 19th October.
– JBentley
Oct 2 at 23:33
1
.. however, implicit repeal does not apply to certain laws, and especially not to law created by EU competences - this is subtle but very important, see Factortame en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– pjc50
Oct 3 at 9:45
|
show 8 more comments
2
@KDog that's a good question, but in practice it's not that interesting. If parliament supports no deal then they can easily deal with this too in whatever way is legally required. The problem is that there's no majority for any deal or no deal that's also acceptable to the EU. There was a majority for not having no deal and that's where this law comes from.
– JJ for Transparency and Monica
Oct 2 at 15:45
1
@KDog: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/45662/…
– Fizz
Oct 2 at 15:45
3
A good example is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass the resolution: "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". That's perfectly lawful. If it also said, this Bill can only be superseded or repealed with a 2/3 majority, that would be unlawful.
– richardb
Oct 2 at 16:23
3
@KDog There is a legal principle whereby if two Acts are incompatible with one another, then the later one impliedly repeals the earlier one to the extent of the incompatibility, even if it does not expressly do so. However note that in the case of the Act in question, ss 1(2) and 1(3) provide that the PM does not need to ask for an extension if Parliament has agreed to a no-deal Brexit by the 19th October.
– JBentley
Oct 2 at 23:33
1
.. however, implicit repeal does not apply to certain laws, and especially not to law created by EU competences - this is subtle but very important, see Factortame en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– pjc50
Oct 3 at 9:45
2
2
@KDog that's a good question, but in practice it's not that interesting. If parliament supports no deal then they can easily deal with this too in whatever way is legally required. The problem is that there's no majority for any deal or no deal that's also acceptable to the EU. There was a majority for not having no deal and that's where this law comes from.
– JJ for Transparency and Monica
Oct 2 at 15:45
@KDog that's a good question, but in practice it's not that interesting. If parliament supports no deal then they can easily deal with this too in whatever way is legally required. The problem is that there's no majority for any deal or no deal that's also acceptable to the EU. There was a majority for not having no deal and that's where this law comes from.
– JJ for Transparency and Monica
Oct 2 at 15:45
1
1
@KDog: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/45662/…
– Fizz
Oct 2 at 15:45
@KDog: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/45662/…
– Fizz
Oct 2 at 15:45
3
3
A good example is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass the resolution: "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". That's perfectly lawful. If it also said, this Bill can only be superseded or repealed with a 2/3 majority, that would be unlawful.
– richardb
Oct 2 at 16:23
A good example is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass the resolution: "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". That's perfectly lawful. If it also said, this Bill can only be superseded or repealed with a 2/3 majority, that would be unlawful.
– richardb
Oct 2 at 16:23
3
3
@KDog There is a legal principle whereby if two Acts are incompatible with one another, then the later one impliedly repeals the earlier one to the extent of the incompatibility, even if it does not expressly do so. However note that in the case of the Act in question, ss 1(2) and 1(3) provide that the PM does not need to ask for an extension if Parliament has agreed to a no-deal Brexit by the 19th October.
– JBentley
Oct 2 at 23:33
@KDog There is a legal principle whereby if two Acts are incompatible with one another, then the later one impliedly repeals the earlier one to the extent of the incompatibility, even if it does not expressly do so. However note that in the case of the Act in question, ss 1(2) and 1(3) provide that the PM does not need to ask for an extension if Parliament has agreed to a no-deal Brexit by the 19th October.
– JBentley
Oct 2 at 23:33
1
1
.. however, implicit repeal does not apply to certain laws, and especially not to law created by EU competences - this is subtle but very important, see Factortame en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– pjc50
Oct 3 at 9:45
.. however, implicit repeal does not apply to certain laws, and especially not to law created by EU competences - this is subtle but very important, see Factortame en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– pjc50
Oct 3 at 9:45
|
show 8 more comments
6
The key point is that you can't write a law that says "PS This law cannot be changed." Any future parliament can change any law given a majority in favour of that change.
– Jontia
Oct 2 at 15:25
1
This phrase is much misunderstood. As Jontia says above, and JJJ in their answer below, all it means is that any Act of Parliament can be repealed and amended by any other Act of Parliament. That's it.
– Steve Melnikoff
Oct 2 at 15:56