Parliament will return next Monday for the Queen’s Speech, a spectacle full of pageantry and history. But it’s not all flummery and horses, it matters. The speech opening the new Parliament sets out the government’s legislative agenda for the next year. It is followed by five or six days of debate with each day covering a particular theme. On the final day of debate the Commons votes on whether or not to welcome the speech (i.e. agree to its contents).
There are usually two votes. The first, on an amendment to the motion, is tabled by the Opposition which declines to approve the government’s programme. Traditionally losing that vote meant that the prime minister had to resign. Since the 2011 Fixed-term Parliaments Act that view has changed, which why Boris Johnson can risk that vote though he doesn’t have a majority. He might well lose the second vote on the government motion welcoming the Queen’s Speech.
It is expected that this time the Commons will vote on Monday 21 October or Tuesday 22. The suggestion today that the Commons might meet on Saturday October 19 to discuss Brexit might complicate things (see below).
What should pro-European MPs do about these votes? Should they use their majority in the Commons to vote down the Queen’s Speech? This would demonstrate the powerlessness of the minority Johnson government but without risking a general election or a no-deal Brexit. On the other hand, rejecting the government’s programme would strengthen Johnson’s argument that this is a “dead” Parliament and we need a general election.
What about a cross-party backbench amendment to the government’s motion, for example calling for a referendum? Although rare, this is not unprecedented. In fact there is a handy precedent from 2013 when an amendment calling for a referendum on EU membership was tabled by backbench Tories. On that occasion, David Cameron accepted it because it was Tory policy that such a referendum should be held and because he knew that Labour, Liberal Democrat and SNP MPs would vote against it. They did and it was thus defeated.
If pro-European MPs can muster a majority for a referendum amendment, it would be tempting to force such a vote. If they were successful, they would create a terrible dilemma for Johnson. As the votes on amendments take place before the vote on the main motion, if the referendum amendment was carried would Johnson accept an amended government motion or send Tory MPs into the lobbies to vote against his own Queen’s Speech? He would be damned whichever course he took.
Does the prospect of a Saturday sitting on October 19 affect this? If the government wants such a sitting, it can propose this under Standing Order 13 of the House. But they will have to table a motion on the timing of the day’s business, which the House could reject or amend. If the Prime Minister wanted to bring forward the Queen’s Speech vote to that Saturday that too would require the consent of the House. The purpose of holding a Saturday sitting in the event the Prime Minister had secured a deal would be to try and get MPs’ approval before support for it began to unravel. If there is no deal the purpose of such a special sitting is unclear.
The Queen’s Speech is an opportunity for pro-Europeans in the Commons to expose the many contradictions in the government’s negotiations with the EU, to re-make the case against a no-deal Brexit and to explain why a new referendum is the only way to end the stalemate on Brexit and begin bringing our country back together. If there are enough votes to carry an amendment supporting a referendum that would be even better. It wouldn’t force the government to bring forward a referendum Bill of its own but by showing there was a majority for it, it would pave the way for a new vote in future.