Quote:
Originally Posted by 57 On Red
Basically, prorogation is permitted to allow for a Queen's Speech followed by a State Opening of the new Parliamentary session, or else for a General Election. [...]
If it's just for a Queen's Speech, prorogation is only for a few days -- to prepare the Lords' chamber to receive both Houses and the Sovereign -- and there's no dissolution.
The difference to a dissolution is clear to me, of course the house has to stop sitting at some point before a GE. So the only other use is basically to set the beginning of the obligatory parliament "vacation" before the new session. So essentially Johnson just tried to start it earlier than the usual ~1 week before?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 57 On Red
Prorogation is simply an order, short of outright dissolution, that 'Parliament doesn't need to sit for the time being.' (And a date of resumption must always be given in the prorogation order.) Since the Civil War, Parliament cannot be prorogued to prevent actions by the executive, but only for the purposes stated above.
So once prorogation could be used to pause a parliamentary session whenever for whatever reason, until that was stopped (by a court rule or a law btw?). It is a general tool in in principle, but it's only allowed to be used for two specific reasons now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 57 On Red
Yeah, thanks, mostly. Johnson tried and was caught. Isn't the Queen (I assume she has some legal council) obliged to check that stuff somewhat? I mean it's the law since the 17th century, they do it every year, and didn't it raise eyebrows already when the plan was announced? Could the Queen involve the High Court right from the start?