it should be between parliament. parliament takes exception. they have the tools available to address the matter. employ theseot to tools and that is a political matter, and it is entirely up to them. i will just add this one further point. how, in the context of that political minefield, is the court to opine on the issue of purpose or improper purpose or legitimate political purpose or illegitimate political purpose? how are these concepts to be defined and applied in this context? the applicants and the petitioners are inviting the court into for bid and territory , and into what is essentially a minefield, and ill-defined minefield -- an ill-defined minefield. the courts are not properly equipped to deal with this. i turn from there to some of the particulars of the appeal in the -- the case at hand. the first point i wish to make is simply this. it may have been noted by the court already. in his submissions, the prime minister new and made no attempt whatsoever to respond to criticisms that i have made of the reasoning of the inner house

is accountable to parliament.trol by parliament stands the basic principles of constitutional law on their head. it conflicts with the basic principle of our constitutional law, stated by lord browne wilkinson, i'll take the court to the authority later, but let me give the citation, it is in the fire brigades union case, authorities volume three, tab 42, page 552, e — f, mayl authorities volume three, tab 42, page 552, e — f, may i quote, "the constitutional history of this country is the history of the prerogative powers of the crown being made subject to the overriding powers of the democratically elected legislature of the sovereign body". we will say that the arguments for the prime minister and the advocate general asserts the constitutional novelty that the powers of the democratically elected legislature are subject to the desire of the executive to avoid parliamentary scrutiny. and our third submission will be, with great respect, that the divisional court was wrong to conclude that the issues in this cas

they are now back before parliament, parliament will wa nt to before parliament, parliament will want closer. whether there will be parliamentary theatre like a no—confidence motion in the prime minister, proceedings of content etc, we went to see. the important thing is parliament is back in business and back in the ordinary day—to—day business of its detailed scrutiny of the government and all their brexit plans. just give us a sense of how much pressure boris johnson is under. many will say, this was a massive problem of his own making, prorogation did not happen because he had already lost a vote to push back the october deadline. in short, he has lost control of the brexit process. i think that happened some time ago but obviously it has worsened by this ruling of the supreme court. i would agree with everything, but to extend the horizon because i guess most people watching are wondering what on earth happens next.” most people watching are wondering what on earth happens next. ijust wa nt to what on earth happens next. ijust want to interrupt. we are watching borisjohnson want

, then parliament is free to sit, it is a matter for parliament, but parliament is free to sit again.he position, in an english ruling, and also the position in relation to and also the position in relation to a scottish ruling, but that is one view from a lawyer is a very close to this case, who feel very strongly that the ruling stands until the appeal, today's ruling stands until the appeal and therefore, parliament is free to sit again. could the government, though, try to argue that until the supreme court delivers itsjudgment that until the supreme court delivers its judgment that it is not obliged to come back? that they could make an application to the supreme court to that effect under the spring court rules, but these events a re the spring court rules, but these events are moving very quickly, and thus far, that has not been applied for, so it is a possibility, certainly, but as norman was saying, quoting keir starmer and others, there is a view that parliament can just sit again, and this isjust hours after it was prorogued, it is an extraordinary roller—coaster ride in te

parliament, it is all made void.hat is the case, it is extremely difficult because proceedings in parliament cannot be considered or questioned or impeached in court. if there is such a legal chain then there is such a legal chain then there are serious questions. if the initial decision is wrong, questions as to whether it puts a cloak over all the decisions are naked not considerate. complex discussions. i feel like i have just considerate. complex discussions. i feel like i havejust been considerate. complex discussions. i feel like i have just been at one of your lectures. let's get the latest business news. apple is in court in an attempt to overturn a european commission ruling which says it owes ireland more than £10 billion in back taxes. brussels ruled three years ago that apple's effective tax rate of i% in ireland amounts to illegal state aid. apple and the irish government argue that the arrangement is legal. the deadline for smart meters to be rolled out in homes across the uk has been delayed by four ye

tomorrow, parliament will return. account for what it has done. borisjohnson has been found to have misled the country. this unelected prime minister should now resign. cheering and there was more. he thinks he's above us all. he's part of an elite that disdains democracy. i will tell you this, i don't think he is fit to be prime minister. applause so, what is mr corbyn going to do next? he could hold a vote of no confidence in boris johnson but for now he is reluctant to act. this crisis can only be settled with a general election. that election needs to take place as soon as this government's threat of a disastrous no deal is taken off the table. cheering labour's disagreements over brexit have been on full display at this conference. they agree they want a second referendum but corbyn‘s top team is split over whether they should say now that they will campaign for remain. labour will end the brexit crisis by taking the decision back to the people with a choice, a credible leave alongside remain. that is not complic

parliament no longer sets.nt closer to the people with a general election. with prorogation, we are moving it further away, by taking away the parliament. this is the essence of the case against the prime minister, he was denying parliamentary scrutiny and sovereignty? exactly, there is the argument put forward by there is the argument put forward by the government to say, when you think about parliamentary sovereignty it is about the legislative supremacy of parliament and that parliament is supreme law maker which can choose to make and unmake any law it wishes. the good point made in the submissions now, it requires some thought and time. you need to be able to sit and discuss to make and unmake the laws and hastily crafted laws are not good laws and parliament must be able to sit as well and this is part of this principle. part ofjohn major's argument is if you letter minister just effectively suspend parliament, where does it end? you might have a prime minister who wa nts to might have a prime minister wh

neither has of parliament sits. during prorogation, parliament sits.n, parliament does not meet and that means legislation cannot be considered or introduced by mps and peers. debates in the chamber and westminster hall are not held written and oral parliamentary questions cannot be asked. committees do not carry out usual business of enquiry and evidence taking. temporary suspension of activities not normally significant asa activities not normally significant as a new session typically begins shortly thereafter. for a longer prorogation however, this suspension of activity we is the ability of parliamentarians to hold the government to account. that is the undisputed position. inevitably, thinking about your ladyship's question, there will inevitably have been parliamentary questions that we re been parliamentary questions that were pending on the 9th of september, which will not have been answered and will not now be answered and will not now be answered until the 14th of october. but the point i emphasise is that parliament is prevented from respon

he prorogued parliament to try to prevent prorogued parliament to try to p reve nt m ps prorogued parliament of the conservative party. —— stopping a no—deal brexit. including churchill's grandson. just because they dared to stand up to him. there is even now the suggestion that he would break the law and refuse to ask for an extension of article 50. silencing critics, purging opponents, ignoring the law. for someone opponents, ignoring the law. for someone to do it but hooper claims to hate socialist dictators he is doing a pretty good impression of one. applause. and borisjohnson's insults of choice are rather revealing. big girl's blouse. girly swot. let me tell you, conference, if he thinks being a woman is somehow a weakness he is about to find out it is not! applause. when the general election comes i cannot wait to take on the collective forces of nationalism and populism that will be standing on that debate stage. johnson, faraj and corbyn. if he had campaigned to remain in 2016 with half of the energy you put into the 2017 election we may have seen a different result. applause. then

perrot king parliament is quite different from parliament going into recess.is prorogued, neither house can meet, debate or pass legislation. neither house can debate government policy zero may members ask written or oral questions of ministers ought meet and take evidence in committees. in general, bills which have not yet completed all their stages are have not yet completed all their stages a re lost have not yet completed all their stages are lost and would have to start again from scratch after the queen's speech. during a recess on the other hand, there has does not sit but parliamentary business can otherwise continue as usual. this prolonged suspension of parliamentary democracy took place in quite exceptional circumstances. the fundamental change which was due to ta ke the fundamental change which was due to take place in the constitution of the united kingdom on the 31st of 0ctober. parliament, and in particular the house of commons, as the elected representatives of the people, has a right to a voice in how that change comes about. the effect on the

ultimately, parliament would be able to hold parliament would be able to hold parliament to account forotion of no confidence. massive amount of difference to the usual parliamentary procedures. chris, from cambridge university, do you buy those arguments that we've been hearing from aidan o'neill this afternoon? no, i don't think! buy any of the arguments. it's been a colourful presentation. a lot of romance and colour in what he had to say. but not that much prurience, if you'll forgive me. enough legal argument for me. he's been reliant, hisjob is somewhat argument for me. he's been reliant, his job is somewhat straightforward in that he is defending the decision but i think he could have done a betterjob. stefan, how do you see this going? we've heard this morning from sirjames eadie representing the government, now we are hearing from aidan o'neill. do you think it's a finely balanced in terms of the view that we started to hear coming from the 11 judges in terms of their questions? finely balanced, i think you'd be hard—pressed to tell from the questioning which way thejudges are

parliament.me on you! each opinion expresses the view that the advice given, by the government, to her majesty the queen, to pirogue parliament from 9th september to 14th october, was unlawful and that therefore the prorogation itself is unlawful. to prorogue parliament from 9th september to 14th october, was unlawful and that therefore the prorogation itself is unlawful. the case was brought by more than 70 parliamentarians, who had argued that suspending parliament was an attack on democracy and an abuse of power. they are now calling for parliament to be recalled. this is a unanimous decision, a unanimous decision by scotland's highest court, that the prorogation of parliament by boris johnson was unlawful and as tommy sheppard, one of my co—petitioners has pointed out, now, for every moment parliament remains prorogued, the british government are breaking the law, so we, as politicians, are calling for parliament to be recalled, so that we can get on with scrutinising what this government is

parliaments act.er the terms of that act and the periods are quite instructive i will suggest, the period between dissolution and an election must be 25 working days or 35 calendar days. during which time the executive will clearly not be accountable to parliament. and there it will be for the executive in that exercise of prerogative powers to determine when parliament will actually be summoned. now in respect of prorogation, it is clear that political purposes may very well prevail over any formal purpose or requirement for prorogation of parliament and we have seen many instances of that over the years. if in the event of prorogation parliament takes exception to that course of action, it has a very clear route to adopt. it may, following the prorogation to which it took exception or in anticipation of the prorogation which has not begun because that would be the instant case, at the beginning of september of this year, move a motion of no confidence in the executive. in such a motion if move by th

by the houses of parliament and therefore it was denying the house of parliament the ability to do its jussi then the most serious question of all was this lawful deed boris johnson have the right to do this was he acting lawfully and unanimously these justices all decided no he wasn't so effectively this the suspension of parliament is void it has no effect that's what lady hale was saying there but now it is up to the speakers of the houses of parliament the house of commons and the house of lords so work out what happens next but effectively this means that i she just said parliament is still in session and it's been brought up at any and boris johnson has said that he will respect whatever the court decides the ball is in his court no. he certainly is it was quite a damning statement to the supremes court judge brenda hale said saying that parliament has not been perogue basically saying that the strategy has a chance of rivals claim he has implemented. was really to make sure that m.p.'s were out of the way to push forward with the possibility of a new deal brags that this will co

parliament was not prorogued. up for work tomorrow and get on with scrutinising this government. and they plan to. we will talk more about that any moment. outlines the government's priorities on october 14th. boris johnson suspended parliament for five weeks on september 10th — arguing it was necessary before a queen's speech, which outlines the government's priorities on october 14th. but by doing that, mps were restricted in their ability to work on brexit before the deadline on october 31st. remember there are only 37 days until the uk leaves the eu on october 31st — with, or without a deal. mrjohnson‘s opponents accused him of trying to stop mps scrutinising his brexit plans. and they're now demanding he quit. here's the leader of the scottish national party in the house of commons, ian blackford. what we wanted to do was make sure we didn't crash out on 31st october. this is a prime minister who doesn't have the dignity required for office. he has acted outside his powers, we want to get rid of him, we want

parliament. what about the ruling of the judges? i do parliament.t should have gone to the judges in the first place. as it did, what do you make of the ruling? not very happy about it. there are nine judges who were remainers. are you suggesting they we re remainers. are you suggesting they were not independent? you have to think. if you went to court and you had to have a jury, you could say, i do not want him on thejury had to have a jury, you could say, i do not want him on the jury because i know do not want him on the jury because iknow him, do not want him on the jury because i know him, he is a labour man and he does not like conservatives and you get 12 fair—minded people on the jury. if the ruling had gone the other way would you be questioning the independence of those judges? when the high court ruled, where you are saying they were not independent? are you saying they we re independent? are you saying they were influenced? i would be dubious. 0ur judiciary were influenced? i would be dubious. 0urjudiciary is one of the most independent

applause parliament has been suspended for less tha n parliament has been suspended for less than twos. the decision to shut it down proved controversial. now it has been ruled unlawful, with all threejudges in a court in edinburgh ruling that the suspension of parliament was motivated by what they call the improper purpose of stymieing parliament. this opinion ex presses stymieing parliament. this opinion expresses the view that the advice given by the government to her majesty the queen to pirogue parliament from ninth september to 14th october was unlawful and that therefore the prorogation itself was unlawful. the case was brought by more than 70 parliamentarians who had argued that suspending parliament was an attack on democracy and an abuse of power. they are now calling for parliament to be recalled. this is a unanimous decision by scotland's highest court that the prorogation of parliament by borisjohnson was unlawful and as tommy sheppard, one of my co—petitioners has pointed out, for now every moment that parliament remains macro to the british government are breaking the l

and what is the point of parliament, what is the point of parliament, what is the value of parliament brexit? i do wonder if you have any inkling as to what thejudges might if you have any inkling as to what the judges might decide if you have any inkling as to what thejudges might decide on if you have any inkling as to what the judges might decide on the basis of what you have heard today or is it just too early to say?|j of what you have heard today or is itjust too early to say? i would echo almost everyone in it, which is we don't know. it is so difficult to us we don't know. it is so difficult to us sitting here because both arguments are so strong. i know that i favour the legality and decision ability but i'm driven by the rule of law. you were dealing with 11 judges who are highly motivated not to give away what they are thinking. because the actually cannot do that because it could move markets. so when they ask, the deputy president and president soon i think in january, he almost seems to enjoy asking questions on the opposite side of every debate. so he will ask a vicious

but it applies to control the sittings of parliament if parliament stands prorogued.s to parallel with the solution. we have dealt with the solution. we have dealt with that in our case between paragraphs 82 and 85. the position we submit is this, in the days when dissolution was subject to the prerogative, in other words pre—fixed term parliament act, it was regularly singled out as a core example of a prerogative power whose subject matter rendered its political and thus... if you still have the case of a there are three quotations on that citing it as an example of that. lord bingham in our case in paragraph 66. five lines up from the bottom of the quotation in brackets. lord ross gill in our case in paragraph 49 in the gchq case. and you see the dissolution towards the end of the line about halfway through that code. and lord justice taylor if you cast your eye down the case to paragraph 52. he mentions making treaties and making war. 0ur submission is that there is for present purposes no distinction between dissolution and prorogation. there is no distinction be

this parliament is a dead parliament. it should no longer sit.the green benches and whatever... clamouring. mps shouted and jeered as the attorney general said there should be an election. they can agree to a motion to allow this house to dissolve, but they are too cowardly... clamouring. hear, hear! this parliament should have the courage to face the electorate, but it won't. it won't because so many of them are really all about preventing us leaving the european union. hear, hear! but the time is coming... the time is coming, mr speaker, when even these turkeys would be —— will not be able to prevent christmas! no shame today. no shame at all. the fact that this government, cynically manipulated the prorogation to shut down this house so that it could not work as a democratic assembly. he knows that that is the truth and to come here with his barrister‘s bluster to obfuscate the truth, and for a man like him, a party like that and a leader like this — this prime minister to talk about morals and morality is a disgrace! barry sheerman. as mps ga

to see than just words, actions on what parliament wa nts. words, actions on what parliament wants.who already kind of subscribe to the prime minister possible provision of do or die probably won't have their minds swayed by this. this will probably entrench their views even further. i think the thing to watch now is the level of reaction from the government. there are some soundings already that this is about the remainer establishment against the people, which i think is a very dangerous path to go down, because it will just fuel further division, but i think trying to instil a culture war around this, which seems to be where the government is heading, is the wrong thing to do. lets explore that a bit further, if we may. you've worked at number ten. you give us an insight into what borisjohnson you give us an insight into what boris johnson and his you give us an insight into what borisjohnson and his advisers will be considering? i think all the options will have been wargamed. the reality is that there were some situations where the gap it would lose this, but probably people di

absolutely i'm for parliament doing its job, but if you recall parliament, what are parliamentariansuse they will not actually admit that they are in denial about where they should all go. electrical reaction to the release of operation yellowhammer documents. —— political. our political correspondent chris mason is at westminster. light rather than heat, what's the extent of what's released in these documents? it is quite stark, the detail in this document. there's a i’ow detail in this document. there's a row about the extent to which this isa row about the extent to which this is a worst—case scenario, this document is badged, or it might be closer to a middle ground scenario on the worry—ometer about what no—deal might look like, because the league to the sunday times a couple of weeks ago was similar to this but it was described as a base scenario, a middle scenario, rather than this, a middle scenario, rather than this, a more worrying thing. at least the government is entertaining the prospect of this kind of reaction or consequence of a no—deal brexit. a couple more details y

parliament or whether recall parliament and then suspended again.s the stakes are enormous for mrjohnson because were he to lose, symbolically, in terms of the standing, it would be the first time in modern history a prime minister had beenjudged to have misled parliament. it would almost certainly prompt contempt of parliament proceedings against him by mps seeking to secure more documents to prove he lied and to prove he lied to the queen, which in turn would refuel demands that he should quit. there would be fresh pressure on him to disclose more details about his brexit negotiating strategy, about his planning for no deal. it would make it harderfor him to defy mps a second time as he has threatened to do over this bill backbenchers past seeking to block a no—deal brexit. those around mr johnson are confident they are going to win. they say this is a matter for the politicians, not forjudges. surely the one thing we have learned about boris johnson's premiership surely the one thing we have learned about borisjohnson‘s premiership is to expect t

. -- in parliament.having to ask for the extension and if he does not want to do that, he will have to resign or face a no-confidence motion in parliament. i think the next move will probably see parliament come back, and they do not come back automatically. there will be more discussion of brexit, but i don't think that will change the situation we have, which is parliament has blocked a no deal. boris johnson will have to ask for an extension, or someone will have to do it in his place. francine: let's go back to the u.k. supreme court where we are hearing from joanna cherry, the s&p lawmaker. -- smp lawmaker. there are still a lot of loopholes that boris johnson could foods -- force through no deal. tim: there are loopholes, there always are, but those can be blocked by parliament. if there is some new trick up their sleeve, parliament at the -- at has a no deal majority against no deal and if it is sitting, will be able to do anything about that trick. if thisry likely judgment makes a difference to

how can the supremacy of parliament. how can the supremacy of parliament.n suspend parliament for as long as it wa nts ? suspend parliament for as long as it wants? thank you forjoining us. i know you are heading into court right now. in the meantime, more from our legal correspondent clive coleman, who has got more details about what the judges are going to be deciding this week and how they are going to be deciding it. a prime minister accused of misleading the queen and parliament, has all ended up here in the high court in the land. two contradictory ru ns court in the land. two contradictory runs having appeared, one from the scottish court which ruled that the prime minster‘s advice to the queen to prorogue or suspend parliament for five weeks was unlawful, and one from the high court in london, which ruled that the entire matter, the prorogation of parliament, was political, and not a matterfor the courts at all. it is not really like the kind of criminal court we see in tv dramas. there are no witnesses, juries or cross—examination. it is all a bit

this was the moment in parliament...s to the right 311, the noes wrote to the left, 302. —— noes to the left, 320. the ayes to the right 311, the noes to the left, 302. —— noes to the left, 320. unlock! so, another defeat for the government. the motion forces the publication of private text messages between mps on the proroguing or the suspension of parliament. it also requires the government to publish more detail on its assessment of the impact of no—deal, the yellowhammer report. this is their preparedness for a no—deal brexit, but whether those documents will be forthcoming remains to be seen, because we had a similar motion last year regarding the backstop, but that details not so the backstop, but that details not so forthcoming. we will watch to see what happens and we will hope to speak to dominic grieve who brought that motion this evening late in the programme. you mention that number ten might not be obliged to offer up these text messages and documents, what is available to mps who voted for the motion to mak

will end when this parliament ends. if the house does not so vote, i have concluded that the least disruptive and most democratic course of action will be to stand down at the close of business on thursday, october 31. [laughter] [applause] mr. bercow: least disruptive because that date will fall shortly after the votes on the queen's speech expected on 21st and 22nd, october. a week or so after that may be quite lively and it would be best to have an experienced figure in the chair. for that short period. most democratic because it will mean that a balance is held when all members have some knowledge of the candidates. this is far preferable to a contest at the beginning of a parliament when new m.p.'s will not be similarly informed and may find themselves vulnerable to undue institutional influence. we would not want anyone to be with senseless, would we? [laughter] mr. bercow: throughout my time as speaker, i have sought to increase the relative authority of this legislature, for which i will make absolutely no apolo

this parliament is a dead parliament. it should no longer set!we have a lot of business to transact, there are five ministerial statements remaining. the attorney must be heard and so, i hope, well lots of other people. the attorney. they don't like to hear it, mr speaker! they don't like the truth! twice they have been asked to let the electorate decide upon whether they should continue to sit in their seats. well they block 17.4 million people's votes. this parliament is a disgrace! given the opportunity, given... since i am asked, let me tell them the truth. they could vote no confidence at any time. but they are too cowardly! they could agree toa are too cowardly! they could agree to a motion to allow this house to dissolve, but they are too cowardly! this parliament should have the courage to face the electorate. but it won't. it won't! because so many of them are really all about preventing us leaving the european union. but the time is coming. the time is coming, mr speaker. when even these tackys won't be able to prevent christmas! —— tur

i'm just in a taxi going back to parliament, parliament should never have been suspended, it was not suspended, and therefore we should be back in there doing ourjobs, holding him to account. the official invitation on this crazy day was issued with customary formality — last—minute pomp in the rain. i have instructed the house authorities to prepare not for the recall — the prorogation was unlawful and is void — to prepare for the resumption of the business of the house of commons, the house of commons sits tomorrow, and that it does so at 11:30am. but once mps have raced back here tomorrow, what will they actually do? the alliance of former tories, still rebels, might try to take control again after the government's approach went so wrong. that advice was clearly very poor, and i think some of his advisers are going to have to leave. they are still coordinating with the opposition parties. he does not want to be held to account, he doesn't want to have to answer questions about his disastrous brexit policy, and in doing so, he was prepared to mislead the queen and indeed to mislead

parliament might be recalled, the government might try to prorogue parliament all over again.e to wait and see. but it will be a momentous day with huge legal, constitutional and political ramifications. let's get this report on what we can expect from our legal correspondent clive coleman. it's arrived at speed — judgment day. 11 justices at the supreme court will rule on whether borisjohnson acted unlawfully in advising the queen to prorogue or suspend parliament for five weeks. is he anxious? i'm going to wait and see what thejudgement is, and... but i want to stress that this is a government that fully respects the law and fully respects the judiciary. the supreme court will resolve two dramatically contradictory rulings. scotland's highest civil court ruled the prime minister's advice to the queen to prorogue was motivated by the improper purpose of stymieing or frustrating parliament during critical weeks before brexit. but the high court in london, in a case brought by the businesswoman gina miller, ruled that proroguing was a political matter and there were no legal st

parliament has not been prorogued.me the session. for the businesswoman who has battled for years to give parliament its say on brexit, this was a landmark moment. the ruling today speaks volumes. this prime minister must open the doors of parliament tomorrow. mps must get back and be brave and bold in holding this unscrupulous government to account. thank you. the high court said this was a judgment on the boundaries of government power, not on brexit, but many in the uk will see those two issues as one and the same. richard lister, bbc news. gina millerjoins us now, the businesswoman and anti brexit campaign who brought the successful case against this set of decisions by the government. thank you for joining us again. we heard your response and what you said when the ruling came out. what are the implications? from a constitutional point of view, it means that a prime minister cannot close down parliament at any time, but has to a lwa ys parliament at any time, but has to always act within the law. for where we are

e and the accountability of the government to parliament. lord sumption a former supreme court judge wrote today that boris johnson is guilty of what he calls constitutional vandalism and he said that it's regrettable that it had to come to this what do you think he means with regrettable is it regrettable that johnson apparently misled the queen and then illegally suspended parliament or is it regrettable that the supreme court had to rule on this matter so i don't want to read into the words of florence option who's a fantastic jurist but this is certainly a discussion in the broader sense that is ongoing here in the u.k. the question of bringing the courts and also bringing the queen because the advice was to the queen the queen didn't exercise her royal power but bringing these 2 constitutional organs that traditionally have nothing to do with politics the queen does not pronounce political opinions and the courts are very deferential of anything to do with political matters now suddenly where we have little sizing these organs of our st

represent themselves as on the side of the versus per city is parliament, but parliament is rollingof avenues borisjohnson is seen to be trying to go down. —— perfidious parliament. they have put a roadblock on the idea of an early general election and closed off the idea of pursuing a no—deal brexit, borisjohnson is a man running out of options pretty quickly, and it was interesting yesterday in dublin, his language around a deal. yes, he has always said he wants a deal but i have never heard him being quite so i have never heard him being quite so enthusiastic about an agreement, even sounding a cautionary note about the prospect of no deal, last night after losing the vote on a general election, again saying his first priority was a deal. you just wonder, if at team johnson, they are beginning to conclude that the only way out of this is some agreement, however difficult, very little time to getan however difficult, very little time to get an agreement, not cleared there is the mechanism to alert the backstop, but may be, they have two pivots to putting a lot more effort into get

that's why we are so angry that parliament was prorogued because i should be in parliament with the abilitye prime minister and ministers. warnings about the impact of a no—deal brexit have at times been dismissed as project fear but these are government assessments so hard to downplay, and for those mps against a no—deal departure but for the recall of parliament, these papers provide extra ammunition. that is the thing about yellowhammer today, which is we have to remember the government has suspended parliament, silenced the elected representatives so that they are not going to be scrutinised in the way they would have been in parliament if parliament had been, as it should be today, still setting. mps who don't quite go in for this military discipline forced boris johnson to publish these no—deal assessments. could the supreme court next week force him to recall parliament? the captain ofa force him to recall parliament? the captain of a ship is not always in control. jessica parker, bbc news. our assistant political editor norman smith is at westminster. how much difficulty is the prim

well our air it is the most of all parliaments and the headline here mother of all parliaments shut down by the father of all lies those are the words of one of the lawyers that supremes courts a judgement by 11 judges unanimous it's a seismic legal decision and it has immense political implications will boris johnson he's going to fly back from the united nations general assembly in new york overnight he will arrive on wednesday will be it and parliament that isn't clear yet but one thing is clear john bercow the speaker of the house is determined to get things moving again and you have this vicious circle if you put it that way of 3 pillars of the establishment parliament here 10 downing street within walking distance an even shorter walking distance the supremes course all 3 sometimes at loggerheads in normal times and these times undoubtedly are extreme in every sense what will happen in the parliament well there will be normal business emergency debates could be called it's an open book really because parliament is in control and the mathematics are the same in the sense that boris

this parliament is a dead parliament. it should no longer sit. it has no moral right to sit on these green benches. a party like this, and a leader like this, this prime minister, to talk about morals and morality is a disgrace! we'll bring you the latest from the house of commons and look at what's likely to happen next. also tonight: one of the uk's main busmakers goes into administration — over a thousand workers are laid off. a warning from the un — extreme flooding could be happening every year by 2050. president trump releases details of confidential conversations amid moves to have him impeached. and archie meets the archbishop — the first good look at the royal baby on harry and meghan‘s tour of africa. and in sport on bbc news, there's a a surprise result at the rugby world cup injapan as uruguay beat fiji in their opening match. good evening and welcome to the bbc news at six. borisjohnson has flown back overnight from new york to address mps. they are back at westminster after the suspension of parliament was ruled unlawful by the supr

it will not be a new parliament, and it might be a brexit parliament, and it might be a brexit parliamentthe speaker? you might say that. these attributes are going on longer than they ought to. —— tributes. it is an important moment because he has been the champion of parliament and holding the executive to scrutiny. that is fine, should be acknowledged. of course, he has chosen the 31st of october quite smartly because the tories will not have the pleasure of fielding a candidate against him when the general election comes and it will be this parliament to elect a successor, not the new parliament. you see a general election whenever it comes. it is not going to come when borisjohnson it comes. it is not going to come when boris johnson wants it comes. it is not going to come when borisjohnson wants it because he is not going to get his motion through later on. and yet, once this building is prorogued, you are all sent away, the election campaign is off, isn‘t it? sent away, the election campaign is off, isn't it? that is right, the campaign will start immediately. the important thing i

tonight is crime enough i think it's disgraceful parliament should be sitting and parliaments we hold in government to account when the prime minister appears to be wanting to run away from questions we are in extraordinary times when you have a prime minister saying he doesn't want to abide by what is a clear decision of a democratically elected parliament and that he's prepared to countenance plunging many people's lives into complete chaos but we will do everything we can to prevent the crushing out of on the say 1st of october and we'll support from the election when that is clear that we're not doing that crushing out of we all want an election we all want to avoid a question out there or there was labor leader german corben there will today during that final session of parliament the man. you presides over it all the man whose guttural coals to order have made him a global star or that manned he called it quits john bercow speaker of the house of commons said that he will step down by october 31st and he offered a strong defense of parliaments place and power in a democracy thro

the power of parliament has been hard won, and the power of all the people to choose that parliamentvery important big moments — in 1215 the extraction of rights from the king by his barons, a charter still widely celebrated around the world. and no wonder the 17th century stands out too. there was first civil war in england, the beheading of a monarch, a republic, monarchy restored and in 1689, a ground—breaking bill of rights, gradually accumulating power to parliament. so is today a big historical moment? at university college london, professor robert hazell tells me it certainly is. it's clearly a very big landmark case. but the court did reach back into history as far as the 1ath century and in particular the 17th century in reminding us about the fundamentals of our constitution, as they have always been. i don't expect that any future prime minister will dare, when the question of prorogation comes up, to prorogue parliament for more than a few days, or at the most a week or so. but in the 17th century, it was very few wealthy men who voted and made our laws. it took another 2

we know parliament resumes tomorrow, but then what?ps will be back here at 11:30am champing at the bit to get going again, but doing what is not a very easy question is not or answer. the rebel alliance of former tories kicked out of the party have the numbers to take control of events here. one cabinet minister said to me today that borisjohnson has completely lost control of the brexit policy, but the difficulty for them and frankly therefore for all of us and everybody who wants to see the process move on, somehow, is that they don't agree amongst themselves what to do next. so although the court made history today, we are actually still in pretty much the same situation. we have a prime minister who is determined above all else to deliver what people voted for in the 2016 referendum, at the end of october, no matter what. a parliament that is determined that he should not be allowed to do that, if it means opening the pandora's box of leaving without a deal. and nobody still in enough numbers are really in the mood to come together

parliament is perrotte on an almost annual basis one session of parliament ends purgation happens a new session of parliament opens with a queen's speech setting out the government's legislative priorities downing street saying the u.k. government needs to bring forward a strong domestic legislative agenda for road in parliament is the legal and necessary way of achieving this and that i think for the moment will be downing street and the government's position stand all right thanks so much jonah how there . still ahead i'll just era. i'm natasha butler in paris where new exhibition offers a rare glimpse into the final decades of francis bacon one of the 20th century's most important our tastes. the weather should quieten down for japan over the next couple of days following on from the recent 3rd still a little legacy of cloud just pulling in here must still see want to see showers long spells of rain but bright skies coming back as we go on through thursday perhaps your chad out towards the far south of q shoe south korea could also see some a wetter weather on the day this area c

their real anger that parliament is being prorogued. a minority government, what on earth are they going to achieve anyway even if they were sitting? but the opposing argument to that is that there is concern that by proroguing parliament, the government, perhaps, some argue, could exit position and leaving mps very little time to scrutinise the brexit position when they come back in october. let's go back to parliament to hear mps scrutinise before the five—week suspension. let‘s go back to the house of commons in britain. to assure not only myself and my constituents that a government that does not listen to the so—called sovereign parliament is therefore undermining... the honourable member should maybe macro 180 we minute. i‘ve told him once, i won‘t tell him again. —— maybe hush a we minute. if they will not implement the law of they will not implement the law of the united kingdom of great britain... of great written and northern ireland... ask sasha about it! what is open to you, ms, and the house, to make sure that they do? i‘m