Prorogation of Parliament

Prorogation of Parliament
Name	Prorogation of Parliament
Type	Parliamentary procedure
Participants	Monarch; Prime Minister; Parliament; House of Commons; House of Lords
Outcome	End of a parliamentary session; suspension of business

Prorogation of Parliament is a formal constitutional mechanism by which a session of the Parliament is brought to an end by sovereign authority on the advice of the Prime Minister and Privy Council. It terminates active proceedings in the House of Commons and House of Lords until the next session is summoned, and it interacts with statutes such as the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 and common-law precedents derived from disputes involving figures like Boris Johnson and R (Miller). The mechanism has implications for executive-legislative relations, judicial review, and constitutional conventions linked to the Crown.

Definition and purpose

Prorogation denotes the formal termination of a parliamentary session effected by the Monarch on ministerial advice, distinguishing it from dissolution under laws such as the Parliament Act 1911 and the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011. Its stated purposes include concluding a sessional agenda as exemplified by the ceremonial State Opening of Parliament and enabling preparation for a subsequent Queen's Speech or King's Speech outlining the government's legislative programme. Prorogation interacts with instruments like Order in Council and is informed by constitutional conventions traced to cases such as Case of Proclamations.

Historical development

Origins trace to medieval practice under the Plantagenet dynasty and procedures developed during the reigns of monarchs like Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, evolving through conflicts exemplified by the English Civil War and settlements like the Glorious Revolution that shaped parliamentary supremacy. Statutory and common-law adjustments emerged across centuries, including impacts from the Act of Settlement 1701 and decisions in the Judicature Acts. In the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, controversies involving figures such as Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, and more recently Theresa May and Boris Johnson prompted litigation and scholarly debates referencing judges from the Supreme Court and rulings in appellate bodies.

Legal framework and constitutional implications

Prorogation operates at the intersection of prerogative powers vested in the Crown and limitations under statutes like the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Communities Act 1972 (historic). Judicial review of prorogation was central to judgments in cases such as Miller/Cherry where the Supreme Court examined whether prorogation could be challenged as justiciable. Constitutional implications touch on principles from the Bill of Rights 1689, separation disputes involving the Attorney General, and comparative doctrines reflected in writings of scholars influenced by institutions like the Institute for Government.

Procedure and duration

Prorogation is typically effected by proclamation issued at the Privy Council meeting, with procedural observances in the House of Commons and House of Lords including formal notices and suspension of sittings until a new session begins with the State Opening of Parliament. Duration varies: short prorogations have been routine under administrations such as Tony Blair and David Cameron, while extended prorogations prompted litigation during the tenure of Boris Johnson. Practicalities involve clerks of both Houses, the Speaker, and ceremonial officers like the Black Rod, with statutory time limits for parliamentary business arising from laws including the Parliament Acts.

Political controversies and notable instances

Prorogation has provoked political controversy in episodes such as the 2019 prorogation advised by Boris Johnson which led to legal challenges brought by activists and politicians including Gina Miller and interventions from the Scottish Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly contexts. Historical disputes occurred in the era of the Long Parliament and decisions by monarchs like Charles I, which fed into the English Civil War. Other contentious instances involved tactical uses by leaders like Winston Churchill during wartime and strategic scheduling by Margaret Thatcher to manage parliamentary timetables, drawing criticism from opposition parties such as the Labour Party and commentators affiliated with outlets like the BBC.

Effects on legislation and parliamentary business

Prorogation causes bills in progress to lapse unless protected by mechanisms such as carry-over motions agreed by the House of Commons and the House of Lords, affecting high-profile measures like budgetary and treaty-implementing statutes tied to negotiations with the European Union and executive initiatives advanced by the Cabinet. The interruption of select committee inquiries—such as those conducted by the Public Accounts Committee and the Select Committee on the Constitution—can impede scrutiny of ministers including the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Foreign Secretary. Legislative scheduling tools used by parties like the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats influence the practical effects of prorogation on parliamentary oversight.

Comparative practices in other jurisdictions

Analogues to prorogation appear in other parliamentary systems: in Canada, prorogation by the Governor General on advice of the Prime Minister of Canada has drawn debate in episodes involving leaders such as Stephen Harper; in Australia, governors and governors-general have exercised prorogation under conventions shaped by the Governor-General of Australia and crises like the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis; in former British Empire jurisdictions like New Zealand and India, sessional adjournments and prorogation follow local statutes and conventions influenced by instruments like the Constitution of India. Comparative analysis engages scholars at institutions such as the Oxford University Press and considers rulings from courts including the Supreme Court of Canada.

Category:Parliamentary procedure