Major accuses PM of ‘ulterior motive’ for prorogation in unprecedented intervention
SIR JOHN MAJOR accused Boris Johnson of having an “ulterior motive” for proroguing Parliament as he compared him to a council boss buying land to evict gipsies.
The former Conservative prime minister said he was “uniquely qualified” to judge whether Mr Johnson had acted lawfully, and said it was “difficult not to infer that the prorogation is intended to facilitate a no-deal Brexit”.
Sir John’s decision to make a court statement against a sitting Prime Minister from the same political party is unprecedented in modern times, but the ardent Remainer said: “I have huge admiration for our Parliament and am a keen supporter of its rights and duties. I cannot stand idly by and watch them set aside in this fashion.”
Sir John was himself accused of proroguing Parliament for political gain in 1997 when he suspended it for 17 days. However, he insisted the circumstances were different and that it was “incorrect” to suggest he himself had an ulterior motive on that occasion.
In statements to the Supreme Court, Sir John said Mr Johnson’s alleged failure to explain the “full facts” around
his decision was “conspicuous” and “the only conceivable explanation is that the true reasons, if disclosed, would be adverse to his case”.
Mr Johnson has refused to give a sworn witness statement to the court confirming his reasons for asking the Queen to suspend Parliament, instead submitting a series of official documents including Cabinet minutes.
Mr Johnson has insisted his only reason for proroguing Parliament for five weeks was to prepare a new legislative agenda for a Queen’s Speech on Oct 14.
Sir John, supporting the appeal by businesswoman Gina Miller against a High Court ruling that courts cannot intervene in prorogation, did not appear in person, instead letting his barrister Lord Garnier argue his case.
Sir John said the Prime Minister’s behaviour was similar to teachers being dismissed on educational grounds when the reality was to save money, or a local authority seeking “to acquire land for its benefit when its true motive was to remove gipsies from the land”.
Lord Garnier highlighted an article in The Spectator in June written by Nikki da Costa, now the Prime Minister’s director of legislative affairs, before her appointment, in which she said that “an adept Government could delay the passage of future legislation to buy time”. She added: “The clock will be on the Government’s side if the next prime minister can head to the next EU Council summit on Oct 17 with his hands unbound, we may finally have the conditions for negotiations to shift.”