The Queen’s Speech raises fears of a No Deal Brexit - but it can be stopped

Last week government announced that it intends to prorogue parliament from the 8^th to the 14^th of October in preparation for a Queen’s Speech. This was not unexpected but the timing causes concern that it could lead to a No Deal Brexit on the 31^st of October. Whether this happens or not, this could be the most dramatic Queen’s Speech in living memory.

According to the schedule, parliament will be suspended, legally this time, from next Tuesday until the 14^th Oct, with a Queen’s Speech on that day. The six-day prorogation is a more usual length of time associated with preparations for a Queen’s Speech, unlike the previous five-week long attempt which was of course annulled in the Supreme Court.

The Queen’s Speech allows the government to set out its priorities and programme for the coming session, although this one will be unusual in that a General Election is almost certain before any government business gets underway in parliament, so it will be more of a Party Political Broadcast than a speech. Obviously the queen doesn’t write the actual speech (something which the present government may be thankful for). Instead the Queen lays out in neutral terms the government’s planned legislative agenda for the coming parliamentary session.

One possibly surprising fact is that the Queen doesn’t have to be the one to give the speech. Twice in the past, while heavily pregnant, she has not been present. In these circumstances the Lord Chancellor (Robert Buckland at the time of writing) stands in. If the Queen were to be, let's say, too unwell to attend in person it would still go ahead.

After the speech is delivered there is a short break of a few hours then a series of debates begins about the content of the speech. These debates usually last for a few days followed by a vote on the contents of the speech, known as a Loyal Address. There is also a general debate in the Lords on the speech but clearly the commons debate and vote are key.

Passing the Queen’s Speech is usually a straightforward process because the government has a large enough commons majority to pass its agenda. The issue arises in those cases where Queen’s Speech does not pass a commons vote, something which the current Commons makeup makes distinctly possible. The failure to pass a Queen’s Speech traditionally causes the government of the day to fall.

The concern is that this could open a path to No Deal.

Politically, the Queen’s Speech is important because it is a test of a government’s ability to command the confidence of the Commons. Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act (FTPA), if the government were to fail a traditional Vote of Confidence there would follow a 14-day period during which an alternative government (led by another Tory leader or someone else) which commands a majority in the House of Commons can be formed. If this doesn’t happen within a 14-day period then a General Election is called automatically under the Act.

Clearly the issue is time. There could potentially be no government in place during the 17^th-18^th of 

October, when the UK is scheduled to attend an EU summit, and the 19^th when the Benn Act mandates that an extension to the Brexit date is requested from the EU if no deal is agreed before then. It also means that if no alternative government could command a majority in the Commons then the General Election campaign that the Prime Minister has been begging parliament to give him would be underway right around the date we are scheduled to leave the EU by automatic operation of the law. No Deal Brexit by default.

Thankfully there are a number ways in which such a scenario can be avoided.

Firstly, the debate on the Queen’s Speech itself can take a number of days – in recent years up to six sitting days, although government could obviously try to shorten this. If the debate manages to continue to the end of the week that takes us to the point where the Benn Act requires an extension request.

Also, the Queen’s Speech is open to amendments. This clearly leaves it open to all kinds of shenanigans, though commons a Standing Order limits the number of possible amendments selected by the Speaker to four. One is an official Opposition amendment which is debated in commons, and all are voted on.

Sometimes (though one wouldn’t necessarily expect it of this government) the threat of an amendment is enough for the government to make changes of its own. This happened in 2017 when an amendment relating to women in Ireland seeking abortions in England was tabled by Stella Creasy with cross-party support, and the government incorporated the amendment rather than risk losing the vote. Recent history suggests this government is less concerned about losing such a vote than previous administrations.

But a defeat on an amendment, or even the whole speech, does not seem to fall under the definition required under the FTPA to bring about the automatic removal of the government and the 14-day period to find a replacement. The Act places a very specific definition on how a Vote of No Confidence leads to a change of government/General Election, and losing a Queen’s Speech vote doesn’t come within that definition. The option is open to the Prime Minister to resign, or the Opposition to table a traditional Vote of No Confidence, but without either of these government is simply hogtied, unable to pass its agenda.

The final way in which No Deal could be blocked is the now tried-and-tested method of an Emergency Debate under Standing Order 24. This can, and as recently as 2006 has, been used to interrupt the Queen’s Speech debate. This potentially allows parliament to once more introduce legislation blocking the Executive from taking the country out of the EU on the 31^st of October.

Many of these scenarios would undoubtedly be labelled a constitutional outrage or even a coup by those who wish to pursue the government’s agenda. However, recent history shows us that precedent means nothing in these times, and if parliament decides to oppose the Queen’s speech and also prevent a No Deal exit, there are ways to achieve that.

A fuller explanation of the constitutional traditions surrounding the Queen's Speech are given by the Institute for Government here.