Sir William Cash is the Eurosceptic's Eurosceptic. He voted to remain in the EEC as it then was, in the 1975 referendum, but says he realised soon afterwards that it was a mistake and has spent the rest of his life trying to get us out. He is often referred to as a constitutional lawyer but really he's just a silly old buffer and hypocrite at that.
When Gina Miller was taking the government to court in 2016 because it intended to invoke Article 50 without a vote in parliament, Cash was right behind the government. He thought parliament was trying to thwart the will of the people and urged Mrs May to write to the EU to kick the whole thing off using the Royal Prerogative and without reference to MPs at all. The use of so called Henry VIII powers was something to be supported - then.
This is Cash in October 2016 (HERE Col 47) questioning David Davis, the then Brexit Secretary who had just told the House (Col 43) in response to a question from Kier Starmer, "The hon. and learned Gentleman is a lawyer by training and career. Article 50 is a prerogative power in the view of all the lawyers we have spoken to".
Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con)
Has my right hon. Friend observed that some seem to have forgotten that the European Union Referendum Act 2015 gave the right to make the decision? Furthermore, the sovereignty of the people was given the opportunity to make that decision on the occasion of the referendum itself. As regards the repeal Bill, the sovereignty of Parliament will be maintained, because it will be decided in this House. All the procedures relating to article 50 are Government prerogative and not subject to the decision of Parliament itself at this stage.
Cash thought it was quite enough for MPs to debate the repeal Bill and not be involved in 'All the procedures relating to Article 50" which he though was a prerogative power to be exercised by the government alone. This was when he thought parliament might STOP Brexit.
How things change. Wind the clock forward to this week when the PM announced she had agreed with the EU a delay to our departure under the 'procedures relating to Article 50' - something with which Cash was wholly in agreement in 2016. But now? No. Because now he thinks the government might stop Brexit, see? His argument changes depending on who is trying to avert a catastrophe. There are no fixed principles at all, only Brexit:
This was Cash on Monday intervening on a point of order (HERE Col 29):
Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con)
The statutory instrument for the extension of time was laid one hour ago. There is grave concern that there was no lawful UK authority for the decision on 22 March to extend the exit date. Did the Prime Minister seek the Attorney General’s advice beforehand, as clearly required by both the ministerial code and the Cabinet manual, and will she publish that advice? Why did she not invoke the commencement order for section 1 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, repealing the European Communities Act 1972?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend talks about the decision to extend article 50. This House had supported an extension of article 50. Yes, the Council took a different decision in relation to the length of time that that extension could take place for, but the House was clear—people are saying to me, “Listen to the House and respect the House”—that an extension of article 50 should be sought, and an extension was agreed.
Now he wants to know who gave the PM 'lawful Authority' to DELAY Brexit - although not having lawful authority to START it didn't trouble the old hypocrite Cash in 2016 in the slightest.
I note Sir Bill is persistent if nothing else since he raised the issue again at PMQ's not half an hour ago.
Yesterday, another Conservative MP, Craig Mackinlay raised the same point (HERE):
"Will the Leader of the House confirm that the very act of the Prime Minister signing what is, in effect, an amendment to the Lisbon treaty under royal prerogative makes whatever we have to say on the matter of an extension rather irrelevant?"
I can't remember Mr Mackinlay supporting Gina Miller either can you?
Amazing? Not really is it?
Amazing? Not really is it?
