Austin Mitchell writes
“I don’t worry all that much about the rampant Remainers trying to get the courts to become political. They might regret it if the election result is a Labour government with no majority, but at the moment the legal profession is pleading poverty because of the legal aid cuts, so a new job on the side getting the courts to play politics will be very welcome and give the Supreme Court a lot of lucrative work to do, imposing their political views on the politicians.
“Yet I do worry about how little the courts and the Remainers seem to understand about what’s going on. Their aim is to stop Brexit under the guise of stopping a no-deal Brexit. What they don’t realise is that even if Britain comes out at the end of October without a divorce deal, we still won’t have Brexit because the alimony and the arrangements for access, child custody and visiting rights won’t have been agreed. Nothing can be agreed until all of it is agreed, as the EU tells us.
“This arises because although Article 50 requires the divorce and the subsequent relationship to be agreed together in the two years of negotiation, the Commission illegally claimed that only the first could be agreed with the terms of future trade relationships and co-existence could only be settled after Britain had left.
“Britain could (and should) have contested this illegal interpretation before the European Court. Instead the Government weakly decided to walk into the trap which then forced it to accept Theresa May’s pathetic agreement to become Europe’s colony “quamdiu se bene gesserint” [A clause found in grants of certain offices (as that of judge or recorder) to secure the office holders in their posts so long as they shall not be guilty of abusing them] as they used to say when appointing judges.
“It follows therefore that leaving because they’re so obdurate and inflexible that they won’t change May’s agreement obviates it. That leaves everything else to be negotiated, as the EU insisted, after we’re out. So coming out on October 31st is neither “No Deal” nor crashing out. It’s the start of the more important negotiation which the EU claimed could only begin once we’d left. Boris has no need to either negotiate on his knees or to write to ask for an extension. The EU will have to give us extra time for the real deal.
“Perhaps the Remoaners should have taken their protests to the European Court rather than shovelling even more money into British legal pockets and trying to turn our Supreme Court into a political body like the European Court (and my fees for this legal opinion will be donated to the John Bercow Home for Distressed Remainers, c/o Parliament)”.
Austin also tweets that “Parliament represents wealth and the middle class well, the rest less well and the underclass not at all”, that “The Benn Act authorises the EU to refuse Boris’s plan and forces him to ask for an extension if they do. It’s aim is to empower the EU and hog tie Boris in order to stop Brexit. Your dad would be proud of you Hilary”, that “Since the EU is now praising Boris’s proposals with not too faint damns as a prelude to rejection put them first to Parliament as a question of confidence. If they’re rejected we have an election. If they pass he’s strengthened.. Either way f***s Benn”, and “Don’t think the case before the Scottish courts to require Boris to obey a law he’s not even read is over the top. Still to come: cases to require him to kiss Junker’s arse, restore the Euro passport, sing the Ode to Joy, wear a chastity belt and cut spending”.