Skip to main content

tv   BBC News at One  BBC News  August 28, 2019 1:00pm-1:31pm BST

1:00 pm
the government says it will suspend parliamentjust days after mps return to work next month and only weeks before the brexit deadline. the controversial move limits mps‘ chances to stop a no—deal brexit. but the prime minister insists it will not prevent them playing their role in the process. 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 and brexit and all the other issues. the commons speaker says the move is a "constitutional outrage" as mps from all sides condemn the government's decision. borisjohnson has behaved in a wholly undemocratic, disgraceful way, for which there is no precedent, as we face a huge crisis about to crash
1:01 pm
out without a deal. the queen is expected to give her formal permission to the move today at balmoral. i'll have the latest from wetminster, where there's concern today's move puts the government on a collision course with parliament. and the rest of the news this lunchtime... anger and disbelief in bury — the club is thrown out of the football league after a financial rescue couldn't be agreed. and unearthed by metal detectorists in somerset — more than two thousand coins, dating back to just after the battle of hastings. in sport on bbc news... as bury are expelled from the football league, will a second club in the north west face the same fate? the race is on to save bolton.
1:02 pm
good afternoon and welcome to the bbc news at one live from westminster. in a dramatic move, the government is to ask the queen to suspend parliament just days after mps return to work next month and only weeks before the brexit deadline. the government says it's to allow a queen's speech, laying out its legislative plans on other issues, on the 14th of october. the prime minister denied that he was trying to silence mps opposed to a no—deal brexit. but senior politicians have condemned the move as an affront to democracy. the commons speakerjohn bercow described it as "a constitutional outrage". 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.
1:03 pm
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,
1:04 pm
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. next week i think parliament will stop borisjohnson dead in his tracks. and insist that parliament discharges its responsibilities. 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.
1:05 pm
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 and will outrage many people. whatever the constitutional implications, there is no doubt that
1:06 pm
kicking mps out of here for a month is going to cause an almighty political row. and tom joins us now. how much of a political gamble is this for the prime minister? this is a big gamble. borisjohnson is, without question, raising the sta kes. is, without question, raising the stakes. yesterday we saw opposition party leaders opposed to no deal coming together to agree to use parliament as a mechanism to try to stop it. well, this could well stop them in their tracks. number ten argues it is within its rights to do this, it is simply doing what every new government and prime minister has done throughout history in holding a queen's speech. and they are right to point out it is an extraordinarily long time since the last green‘s speech was held. as we have heard, borisjohnson argues that this has nothing to do with
1:07 pm
brexit at all. but there is a big political risk for boris johnson because the conservative back benches in parliament are full of tory mps who are vehemently opposed to this idea and they are furious. there is even some in cabinet who have previously described this option of suspending parliament as being anti—democratic. the danger for borisjohnson being anti—democratic. the danger for boris johnson is being anti—democratic. the danger for borisjohnson is that this move could galvanise those mps into supporting moves to use parliament in one way or another to stop no—deal brexit and actually make his life harder rather than easier. this is high stakes poker and it is impossible now to know who holds the best hand. tom, thank you very much. tom, thank you very much. our royal correspondentjonny dymond is at buckingham palace. is there a concern that this puts the queen at the heart of the whole brexit dispute? if you ask the
1:08 pm
question, you have given the answer to some degree. suddenly the queen has been placed in a political situation which she and the institution are not used to. does she have a difficult political decision to make? that is a different question. we do not have written, legally binding constitution, our constitution is based on precedent. although the length of this progression would be extraordinary and it comes at an astonishingly constitutionally charged time, there is clear precedent for provoking before the the queen's speech. add to that the fa ct the queen's speech. add to that the fact that the queen is constitutionally charged with taking the advice, effectively the instruction, of her prime minister. there is not that much political wriggle room. there are constitutional arguments going back and forth as we speak about whether or not she could say no, about whether there is precedent for her saying no. the reality is, given
1:09 pm
there is precedent for stopping parliament for the queen's speech, given it is the explicit desire of boris johnson's given it is the explicit desire of borisjohnson‘s government, given it is the explicit desire of boris johnson's government, she given it is the explicit desire of borisjohnson‘s government, she will say yes. to some extent that deeply politicise his/her own role. to some extent that deeply politicise his/her own role. let's speak to our correspondent rachel bell who's at balmoral. with this announcement today, what will the queen bee having to do today? compared to the kind of scenes we are seeing today? compared to the kind of scenes we are seeing in london today, this is a very serene scene at balmoral, the queen's scottish home that she comes to every year. in terms of the process, we are expecting the cabinet ministers to arrive anytime now, we have been waiting for some time, no sign of yet. they will head to the gates that you can see behind me and then they will head up to balmoral castle, which is hidden in the trees behind me. there they will meet with
1:10 pm
the queen and they will ask if they can suspend parliament. this is a private holiday for the queen, she comes here every year, she has been here since mid—july. this is a private time for her. she does to state matters, but it is time for her to relax and spend time with the family. last week we had the duke and duchess of cambridge here along with their children visiting the queen. it really is a private time. but it is not unheard of for ministers to visit the queen here. in the past day they have come here to be sworn into the privy council. in terms of the significance of this meeting, it is quite unusual. we are waiting for them to arrive anytime now. we thank jacob waiting for them to arrive anytime now. we thankjacob rees mogg, as lord president of the privy council, will be heading up the cabinet ministers are going to arrive any time now. in recent years it is safe to say this will be the most
1:11 pm
significant ministerial meeting to happen here at balmoral. rachel bell and val morrow. rachel bell and val morrow. ——inbound —— inbound moral. so could there be a legal challenge to the suspension of parliament? let's speak to our legal correspondent clive coleman. is there any basis for a legal challenge? there is already one taking place in scotland. in order to suspend parliament, the prime minister has to go to the queen and adviser. as you are hearing in the report, the queen by convention accepts that and does suspend parliament. it is not possible to legally challenge the exercise of the queen's personal prerogative powers in her own courts, you cannot do that. but you can legally challenge the advice given to her by her prime minister, borisjohnson. that would be done in the courts of england and wales by way ofjudicial review, go|ng england and wales by way ofjudicial review, going to accord and asking the court to rule on whether the giving of that was lawful. the bases
1:12 pm
would be that the prime minister has simply misconceived and misconstrued the constitutional law that underpins the use of the prerogative power that he had acted unlawfully. what would be argued by him is that the use of that power is there to ensure the healthy functioning of the uk's democracy and this is being used for more political purposes. if the court was to be persuaded by those arguments, it could rule that the prerogative power had been misused and it could rule, therefore, that that was unlawful. if that happens, we would have a full—blown constitutional crisis. it would be the biggest constitutional case of the century, bigger even than the case brought by gina miller on the triggering of article 50. it would be huge. it would be huge. in the past half hour, the european parliament's chief negotiator, guy verhofstadt, has accused borisjohnson of suppressing debate. our correspondent adam fleming is in brussels.
1:13 pm
there is a suspicion that what boris johnson has done today adds pressure on the eu after the g7 meeting at the weekend. he might be getting an upper hand? someone very close to the eu negotiating team sent me a text this morning saying whatever happens the eu will not change its position just because the threat of no deal had become more credible, or because the opponents of no deal had got more organised. in other words, as far as they are concerned, the eu negotiators, this isjust a as far as they are concerned, the eu negotiators, this is just a very loud, dramatic noise. what they care about is, is the uk going to come forward with concrete proposals to fix the backstop in a way that is compatible with the eu's red lines and is interest? will that lead to a revised brexit deal that can be approved by the uk and eu leaders? will that then be approved by the
1:14 pm
british parliament? that is what they care about here in brussels, about what is happening in parliament, rather than there will be fewer or longer sitting days and if there is a queen's speech or not. having said that, politically this has gone down quite badly with some politicians across the continent. they saw that tweet that you referred to from guy verhofstadt, who quoted the slogan from the league campaign when he said never has taking back control looked more sinister. a french mep, who is an ally of emmanuel macron, says it is almost as if the uk is suffering from a disease, which means it is not prepared to have a big parliamentary debate before having a big move, such as leaving the eu. a german mp close to angela merkel says, how can you say on the one hand use respect democracy by delivering the result of the referendum, but on the other hand you say you will shut down parliament temporarily? everyone is watching and wondering what it is
1:15 pm
going to mean. the dup, who support the government on a confidence and supply basis, have welcomed the suspension of parliament. our ireland correspondent chris page is in coleraine. as far as they are concerned, this changes nothing? yes, that is right. the democratic unionist party, northern ireland's biggest political party, whose ten mps keep the minority government in power at westminster, are right behind boris johnson. they say the queen's speech is long overdue and this is perfectly usual parliamentary procedure. but when you look at the other parties in northern ireland, particularly sinn fein, they have just said they regard this as a callous political move by the british prime minister, which means we are heading towards a no deal. it is the party is on the other side of the debate, the parties that supported remain in the 2016 referendum, like the sdlp and the
1:16 pm
alliance party, they say they really speakfor alliance party, they say they really speak for northern ireland alliance party, they say they really speakfor northern ireland in situations around brexit because 68% of people here voted to remain. northern ireland has been at the sharp end of the brexit process because it is the only part of the uk with a land border with another european union state and that has been the focus of so much effort and the sticking point remains, the so—called backstop, after all this time, this plan to avoid any new controls on the border under any circumstances. if there was no free trade agreement in the future, it would remain the whole of the uk would remain the whole of the uk would remain the whole of the uk would remain within the european union customs regime and northern ireland would remain more closely tied to european rules on the movement of goods. borisjohnson says the backstop has to be stopped. the irish government and the eu say it must remain. still very difficult to see how that issue so, what do voters make of today's dramatic developments? back in 2016, birmingham voted to leave the european
1:17 pm
union by a whisker. our correspondent phil mackie has spent the morning speaking to people there. birmingham caught many people by surprise when ed narrowly voted to leave in 2016 but with a population of1.1 leave in 2016 but with a population of 1.1 million there was no uniform vote across the city. this is an affluent suburb in the centre of birmingham were 65% of people voted to remain in the 2016 referendum. it has also always been a key election battle ground as well although the conservatives have not held a seat yet since 1997. no one voted for no—deal brexit. i have come to terms with brexit but give us the options. the fundamental principle is democracy and of parliament itself is not democratic then democracy overrides the principle of a
1:18 pm
parliamentary democracy because they're not working in a democratic fashion, theyjust want to undermine the democratic votes that had taken place. what they're doing is dangerous. so you think to stop legislation preventing no—deal brexit, suspending parliament... it seems to be the only way. the area has a thriving high street was small, independent businesses and here there is frustration with westminster and desperation for certainty. i thought i suppose as i would like to see a completion and we need to stick to the dates in place so far. even if that meant no deal? even if it means no dealfor that this is about four miles away ina that this is about four miles away in a less affluent suburb and in 2016 62% of people voted to leave. the sleep family are in the minority here, all remainers but they think that proroguing parliament is the right thing to do. there's so much
1:19 pm
messing about, but this has been dragging on and on and we cannot, nobody can settle to do anything so i think it is probably the best thing all round. i'm happy to go with the majority and if you can do something that is good for the country and decide we are going to suspend that to get the best decision for the country then good on him. give him a chance, let him get on with the job and see what happens. and here the high street has independent businesses as well who want certainty however that is delivered. it makes a lot of difference to eve ryone's delivered. it makes a lot of difference to everyone's livelihood because nobody wants to invest, no one wants to spend money on the people are a bit wary. so either way whatever happens let's get it done and sorted so that people can get back to the normal routine. three yea rs back to the normal routine. three years ago the city was divided with just 1% of the vote splitting levers and remainers. there is still
1:20 pm
division but increasingly in exasperation as well. the labour leader has been giving his reaction in the past few minutes. let's hear what he's been saying. it is a constitutional outrage. this is an attempt by a prime minister, who was elected by a very small number of people in the country's conservative party membership, to ride roughshod over parliament and prevent any legislation or debate that would stop this country leaving the eu without a deal, and all the problems that it would cause. so, what does all this mean for the brexit process? our reality check correspondent chris morris is here. let's just remind people that parliament was due to be in recess in any case? normally there is a recess of about three weeks during the party conference season three weeks during the party conference season but the difference is with a recess mps could have voted to shorten that or abandon it altogether. once parliament is suspended they would be unable to do that and that is why we had these
1:21 pm
expressions of outrage and why opponents are borisjohnson are now looking at legal or legislative ways to prevent that happening in the first place. of course the government say this is normal, we a lwa ys government say this is normal, we always prorogued before a queen's speech but who are they trying to kid, there nothing normal about politics in the next couple of months because everything is looking towards that date of october the sist. towards that date of october the 31st. the date on which the government say they are determined to leave the eu come what may. that day is looming. it is and the significance is the default position is that we leave on that date. we go back to article 50, come october the the date that article 51 runs out and if nothing is done to change that then by default default the uk leaves the eu then and the laws binding us into the eu disappear whether there is a deal or not and that's what opponents of boris johnson are so keen to prevent. looking towards that date and so is he, he says we want to talk about
1:22 pm
fighting crime, the nhs, but for the next couple of months it is going to be brexit, brexit, brexit and this isa be brexit, brexit, brexit and this is a big moment in that. he has played a card ethic in the way he wa nts to played a card ethic in the way he wants to get this through parliament in the next few weeks and his opponents will have to do the same in return. the temperature here in westminster is rising! back to you. after 125 years in the english football league, bury have been expelled. they've been in financial crisis since winning promotion to league one last season, but a final rescue attempt collapsed yesterday. meanwhile — the club's near neighbours bolton wanderers are also at risk of expulsion. the club has been given another two weeks to prove it is financially viable. our sports correspondent katie gornall reports. for this club, for this community, these are dark and desperate times. after 134 years of history,
1:23 pm
bury football club has been dealt a fatal blow. late last night, after numerous delays and complications, they were told it was all over. i came down here this morning, what can i do? i came down. it's a bereavement, isn't it? you are losing part of your family. i have a sister who has just been diagnosed with alzheimer's. i used to bring her, and that is the only thing that she could really accept. there is none of that now. this will affect the whole of football. the whole of football needs to change. it is dead to me now, i don't want to watch any football, i have no interest in it. but it needs to change, the whole lot, it is wrong. yesterday there had been hope a deal to save the club could be reached, as volunteers arrived to get the stadium ready for the weekend's scheduled match. but their efforts were in vain, as the company leading the takeover backed out 90 minutes before the deadline, saying bury‘s financial problems were insurmountable.
1:24 pm
pleas for a last minute stay of execution came to nothing, and there was anger directed at the bury owner steve dale and the english football league. i have consistently said that what we have to do from this is learn lessons. this is a devastating situation. i saw on television yesterday, the fans, the fans' reactions, the emotional impact of this has had, and of course we are cognizant of that. so i accept that we need to look and we need to learn lessons from it. it is not yet clear what the future holds for the players, the staff, or the town, and those with a strong connection to bury fear the worst. the heart of the town has ripped apart, and now it is up to the bury people, myself included, to try and put some heart back into a town that relied heavily on the football club. it was the reason, when i was growing up, when i was eight, nine, ten, that we used to
1:25 pm
go travelling around, because that was our town. every town needs a football club. and just a few miles down the road, bolton fans anxiously wait to see if their club can avoid the same fate, after they were given 1a days to complete take takeover or show proof of funds. today, staff at bolton were told of plans for the club's liquidation have been put on hold, providing some hope that a deal could be close. but the club right now remains on the brink. they, like bury, unsure if they will ever play again. a woman who claims the late financierjeffrey epstein forced her to have sex with prince andrew says the duke knows what he's done and has urged him to be honest. virginia giuffre claims she was 17 when it happened — the duke of york strenuously denies the allegation. laura podesta from cbs news is in new york. a number of women in court where you are yesterday, what to do women want to happen now? these accusers want
1:26 pm
the accomplices of jeffrey to happen now? these accusers want the accomplices ofjeffrey epstein to be held accountable including the recruiter of the teenage girls, allegedly, jermaine maxwell. these victims also want prince andrew to be held accountable. virginia giuffre called herself a sex slave forjeffrey epstein and said as a teenager she was forced to have sex with prince andrew three times further as we know the prince has adamantly denied those names although he was photographed holding her around the waist when she was 17 yea rs her around the waist when she was 17 years old. yesterday outside the newark courthouse virginia giuffre said he knows exactly what he has done and i hope that he comes clean about it. it's one of the biggest hoards ever discovered in the uk —
1:27 pm
more than 2,500 coins, the first of which were found by a couple out metal detecting in somerset. it turned out the coins date back to the aftermath of the battle of hastings, a find which experts say is hugely significant. lisa grayson told us about the moment they discovered the coins. ourfriend found our friend found the first and we looked at it and said this is a william the conqueror coin and bees are extremely rare. to find one in 30 years is what it would take 30 yea rs of metal 30 years is what it would take 30 years of metal detecting to find one. let's return to our main story, the day's dramatic developments at westminster, and rejoin simon mccoy. thanks, jane. yes, it's being described by the commons speaker as a constitutional outrage — but borisjohnson says suggestions he's trying to force through a no—deal brexit are "completely untrue". let's speak to our
1:28 pm
political correspondent tom barton again. john pienaar is here. is this bold or outrageous? both of those things in spades depending on which way you look at it but borisjohnson has certainly seized the initiative. all the plotting and counter plodding has been going on and both sides for weeks now spilled into action and borisjohnson has clearly limited the scope, the ability of mps to frustrate the idea of leaving with no deal on october the 31st. not eliminated but limited. where will the focus be now, is it un—senior politicians at the heart of the row or on the queen or perhaps the speaker. again all of the above to some extent. the queen, it is hard to see the queen taking a sadly proactive role which would amount to a political intervention and that is what buckingham palace avoid at all costs. but those mps on both sides
1:29 pm
who want to find a way through to legislation will be weighing up the options. what they also now know is the speaker if they did not know it already, is with them absolutely. he called this a deliberate attempt, blindingly obvious, he said, to stop the house of commons doing its duty and when these mps move as they will no doubt do it soon, we will expect the speaker to be among them. and the speaker to be among them. and the chance of a no—confidence motion now? is perfectly possible and the feeling seems to be better moving towards some kind of a season of the order paper is in the house of commons, to pass some kind of legislation to frustrate the ambition of boris johnson. legislation to frustrate the ambition of borisjohnson. but boris johnson may have been somewhat successful in limiting that action in that case a vote of no confidence and bringing down borisjohnson, all these possibilities that we can now
1:30 pm
discuss, that could be where headed now. but no one really has a clue! much more on the bbc news channel of course through the afternoon. temperatures are rising here but what about the rest of the country? time for a look at the weather. here's darren bett. it is cooling down elsewhere across the uk partly because we had some rain around today. here example in saint helens 23 degrees yesterday but cooler now because of that rain. i have that some sunshine in parts of hampshire but temperatures 8 degrees cooler than yesterday. we have some showers on the scene, this moving away from the east coast and then the next band comes in from the west pushing towards the midlands, lincolnshire and the west country and behind that some sunshine but also some showers. and cooler


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on