hello. you're watching afternoon live. i'm simon mccoy at westminster. today at 2pm. a constitutional row over government plans to suspend parliament ahead of the brexit deadline. there will be ample time on both sides of that crucial october 17th summit, ample time in parliament for mps to debate the eu, to debate brexit, and all the other issues. it reduces the time mps have to pass laws to stop a no—deal brexit, but the prime minister insists it will not prevent them playing their role in the process. suspending parliament, what the prime minister is doing is a sort of smash and grab on our democracy in order to force through a no—deal exit from the european union. what is he so afraid of?

the house of commons speaker is joined by senior mps, including jeremy corbyn, in saying that the move is a "constitutional outrage". the queen is expected to give her formal permission to the move today at balmoral. coming up on afternoon live, all the sport. bury expelled from the football league. steps will be taken to stop this happening again. and the latest weather forecast. we will get at least five days of much cooler, more unsettled weather. hello, everyone.

this is afternoon live. the queen is to be asked by the government to suspend parliament days after mps return to work and a matter of weeks before the brexit deadline. parliament will return from recess on the 3rd of september and could be prorogued, or suspended, only a week later on the 10th. that's expected to make way for boris johnson's new administration to hold a queen's speech, laying out the government's future plans on october 14th. but it means mps are unlikely to have time to pass any laws that could stop the prime minister taking the uk out of the eu without a deal on october 31st. labour leaderjeremy corbyn called it a smash and grab on our democracy. commons speakerjohn bercow branded the move a constitutional outrage, saying it was ‘blindingly obvious' it was intended to stop mps debating brexit. and scotland's first minister nicola sturgeon urged mps to come together to stop the prorogation or said ‘today would go down as a dark day for uk democracy‘. but the prime minister insisted the plan wouldn't stop mps playing a role in the brexit process.

our political correspondent tom barton reports. this is how the house of commons could look for nearly five weeks in september and october. as the brexit deadline approaches, mps won't be sitting on the green benches. parliament, suspended. boris johnson today speaking to the queen to ask her to bring the current sitting of parliament to a close. but, says the prime minister, this has nothing to do with brexit. if you look at what we are doing, we are bringing forward a new legislative programme on crime, on hospitals. making sure that we have the education funding that we need. and there will be ample time on both sides of that crucial october the 17th summit, ample time in parliament for mps to debate the eu, to debate brexit, and all the other issues. ample time. but mps who want to stop a no—deal brexit smell a rat. calling the decision a declaration

of war and a constitutional outrage. he is acting like some kind of tinpot dictator. it frankly is not acceptable and if mps don't stop it then it is no exaggeration, it is not hyperbole, to say this is the day any semblance of uk parliamentary democracy absolutely dies. it is an absolute disgrace and it is completely unconstitutional. and in a way even more outrageously, it has put our queen in a very difficult situation. but brexiteers say mps opposed to a no—deal brexit are themselves trying to overturn the constitution

by planning to take control of the parliamentary agenda. what they are trying to do is some fantasyland of tearing up our order paper, tearing up our standing orders and having an alternative government. you know, having, you know, boris johnson in government on one issue but then in government on brexit. it's not how it works. it is pure fantasy. order! the speaker of the commons today described the plan as a constitutional outrage and an offence against the democratic process. but the government says it is completely normal for a new prime minister to hold a queen's speech in order to set out their programme for government. parliament will return from recess on the 3rd of september and could be prorogued, or suspended, just a week later on the tenth. that is expected to make way for a queen's speech, laying out the government's future plans, on the 14th of october.

but it means mps are unlikely to have time to pass any laws to stop a no—deal brexit at the end of the month. from the prime minister's point of view this is part of his powers. he has the right to ask for parliament, the parliamentary session to finish and for a new one to start. but it's the way he's using it that will cause such controversy whatever the constitutional implications, there is no doubt that kicking mps out of here for a month is going to cause an almighty political row. our political correspondentjoins me 110w our political correspondentjoins me now in westminster. mps are not even back and there is a political hurricane tearing through westminster today. brexiteers think this is absolutely right. parliament can't decide on its next steps, they

believe it is acceptable for the prime minister to do this and close down any option for parliament throwing a roadblock in the way of a no—deal brexit. they say the prime minister is completely within his rights to prorogue parliament. howls of outrage from cross—party mps on the other side who say this is extraordinary in modern times, it is unprecedented, and to do this in the middle of a political crisis is just unacceptable and you are hearing voices from philip hammond, jeremy corbyn, nicola sturgeon, all saying this is an outrage. the question is, what can they do about it, beyond saying it is an appalling thing to do. realistically, parliament would go into recess anyway. we are losing seven working days here. it is not very much. but it is because of brexit that people are saying we need every second. we were already

looking at a very small number of days before october 31. i think they we re days before october 31. i think they were 21 timetabled sitting days. the consequence of what the government has done is to shrink that even further, four or five days fewer for mps who oppose a no—deal brexit to try and find some sort of strategy to stop that happening, if that is what boris johnson to stop that happening, if that is what borisjohnson ends up pursuing. mps like dominic grieve and opposition mps are needed every moment available to them that there was if they were to have any chance to use parliamentary procedure to stop and no—deal brexit and ve window has shut further, and that is a deliberate consequence of number ten‘s actions. a deliberate consequence of number ten's actions. the queen is on holiday and presumably there has to be some sort of privy council meeting with her. jeremy corbyn is seriously unhappy about this and has written to the queen protesting in the strongest possible terms about

this prorogation. not complaining about what the queen has done because it is borisjohnson‘s decision to request the prorogation that has infuriated the labour leader and many others in westminster. thank you very much. parliament was due anyway to go into recess because it is conference season recess because it is conference season at the end of september and at the beginning of october, so in essence what we are really talking about is the loss of seven days in parliament. let's talk to john redwood. i just wonder whether claims of outrageous behaviour, this is clearly a ploy to try and derail any anti no—deal brexit. is clearly a ploy to try and derail any anti no—deal brexitlj is clearly a ploy to try and derail any anti no-deal brexit. i don't agree with that. we have had to yea rs of agree with that. we have had to years of them trying to stop brexit and they have had endless debates about the

and they have had endless debates ab that 1e and they have had endless debates ab that parliament can debate new so that parliament can debate new proposals. is this a very high risk strategy given that it will increase calls for a no—confidence motion and the possibility of a legal challenge, and doesn't it put the