Wednesday, 14 May 2014

Osbourne at the SAC of Westminster

Let's just say Scotland votes 'Yes' in September 2014 to end the 1706 Treaty of Union which in turn then ends the current United Kingdom Parliament (as legally constituted) as it has no constitutional or legal basis to negotiate the end of itself (a legal and constitutional position already conceded by the UK Parliament at Westminster - Lord Cooper; McCormack, 1953).

It follows that the temporarily suspended parliament of England and Wales (with NI) will have to be recalled to negotiate with its fellow sovereign parliamentary co-signatory of the Treaty of Union - the already recalled Scottish Parliament - as the currently constituted UK Parliament has no such legal or constitutional power to enter into any such negotiation.

How is this recalled parliament of England and Wales (with NI) going to acquire its legal and constitutional legitimacy?

The most likely occasion is after the electorate of England, Wales and Northern Ireland take part in a general election to this recalled parliament in May 2015.

I ask because until such a point where the parliament of England and Wales (with NI) is recalled, Osbourne has no legal or constitutional competence to comment on a currency union or not, as the UK Parliament and its parliamentarians can have no role in the negotiations over their own demise which may or may not include the issue of a currency union.

It may well be, after the general election in May 2015, Mr Farage is Prime Minister of England and Wales (with NI) and his pal, Lord Monkton, is his Chancellor. Under English law and constitutional practice there can no be such condition as declaring 'there will never be a currency union' as a previous government's policies and programs are not enforceable on its successor parliament.

What is clearly obvious is Osbourne, as usual, is talking total mince and no one appears to be asking the important questions of Osbourne with regards to the actual constitutional position he may well find himself in on September the 19th after a 'Yes vote':

  • Just who will he then be speaking for?
  • What will be his legal authority to do so?
  • What will be his constitutional authority to do so?
The Edinburgh Agreement has already made clear that both successor government's will enter into negotiations to end the UK Parliament and split assets currently seen as joint assets on a 'Yes vote'.

Yet no one has yet explained to me where the legitimacy in legal and constitutional terms lies for the current UK Government to negotiate the end of the UK Union on behalf of the electorate of England, Wales and Northern Ireland as they, technically, have no parliamentary representation - except as part of the UK Parliament which, in turn, has already conceded it has no legal or constitutional role in its own demise.

Catch 22?

No comments:

Post a Comment