Duchy of Lancaster and a former justice secretary said the Government “respected” the decision made by the Supreme Court – but highlighted how senior judges had disagreed with their unanimous verdict. In a fiery clash with BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme host Justin Webb, the Cabinet minister said: “We respect the judgment of the Supreme Court and will comply with that judgment. It is absolutely right that the Supreme Court should take a view on a matter of this kind. It was done in the proper way.”

Asked by the BBC host on whether the Government intended to ask the Queen for a second prorogation of Parliaement in order to push forward its legislative agenda, Mr Gove said: “We want to ensure that we bring forward a Queen’s speech and we’re seeking to ensure that people’s priorities in the areas that truly matter to them on the health service, on education, and on crime, are implemented.”

Pushed to clarify whether a Queen’s speech would be forced by a second attempt to suspend Parliament, he replied: “We will in due course bring forward our proposals.

“Later today the leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg will outline our approach in order to ensure that we can concentrate on that domestic agenda.”

The Cabinet minister then clashed with the BBC host on a matter of “dishonesty” shown by Boris Johnson in his decision to prorogue Parliament. 

We respect the judgment of the Supreme Court and will comply with that judgment

Michael Gove

Mr Webb asked: “You’re intending to have a Queen’s speech and that would then require you to go back to the Queen in what one can imagine a difficult conversation and say to her ‘this time we’re doing it for this reason, honestly’.”

To which Mr Gove blasted: “There are several things to be unpacked in that question.

“There are a number of assumptions there that require interrogation. The first thing is that you used the word ‘honesty’.

“There is no question in this judgment of impugning the Prime Minister’s or anyone else’s motive, that’s the first thing to say.

“So I think the question of honesty is mistaken.”

In defence of the Government’s decision to prorogue Parliament, Mr Gove added that “senior figures both in England and Scotland took the view that this was legal”.

He said: “I think it’s important to stress that while the Supreme Court was clear, there is a respectable legal opinion that disagrees with that view.

“It’s perfectly possible in a democracy to say you respect a judgment and will comply with the judgment, but you also note that there are a range of views about the appropriateness of a particular course of action.

“I’m not criticising the Supreme Court – I would not criticise the Supreme Court, even though I disagree with that position – I’m simply pointing out that both in England and in Scotland, very senior judges took the view that this was lawful.”

He said the Government would not apologise and if Opposition parties objected, they should call a general election.

DON’T MISS: 

Brexit Party MEP delivers brilliant point savaging Remainers [VIDEO]
Boris Johnson vows to push ahead with Brexit [ANALYSIS]
Triumphant Remainers – be ashamed, says PATRICK O’FLYNN [COMMENT]

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled Boris Johnson’s suspension of Parliament was unlawful, and “the effect on the fundamentals of democracy was extreme”.

The ruling stated that not only was it unlawful, but it also had “no effect”, meaning prorogation had in fact never happened, and MPs could return to the House of Commons and carry on the session.

Mr Johnson said he “profoundly disagreed” with the ruling but would “respect” it.

Mr Johnson said his attempts to get a fresh Brexit deal was “not made much easier with these sort of things in Parliament or the courts.”

However, he has insisted the UK would still leave the EU on October 31 as planned, and Tuesday’s ruling would not deter him from that goal.

Source: Read Full Article