Alpha 
Post by fretslider on Sept 2, 2019 5:40:12 GMT -5
It would seem not...
From Guido Fawkes:
Rebel MPs’ planned legislation to force the Government to delay Brexit beyond the 31st will not provide an extension long enough to hold a second referendum, according to darling of FBPE Twitter, Nick Boles…
The former Tory MP has said Letwin’s bill will only extend Article 50 for “a couple of months”; with UCL’s Constitution Unit having said a second referendum would take “a minimum of 22 weeks” to conduct – 12 weeks to pass the legislation and another 10 weeks to organise the campaign and hold the vote. Of course, the biggest barrier to a second referendum remains MPs repeatedly voting against having one…
The Financial Times is reporting splits amongst the rebel MPs, with other Remainers wanting to extend Article 50 until May 2020. The compromise date could be “brought forward to mollify Labour MPs in Leave seats” however. How can No. 10 possibly win against such a united remain front?..
order-order.com/2019/09/02/remainers-planned-bill-wont-allow-time-2nd-referendum/
Not sure that they've thought this through, or have they?
As for ignoring inconvenient legislation...
Guido can now reveal there is extensive precedent of Governments asking the Queen to not sign legislation they don’t approve. Anti-Brexit spokesman Tony Blair himself used this power on a number of occasions to “quell politically embarrassing backbench rebellions”. Perhaps most notably to block a bill by Tam Dalyell in 1999 that aimed to give MPs a vote on military action against Saddam Hussein.
Going further back, Labour PM Harold Wilson used the Queen’s veto to kill off two “politically embarrassing bills” about peerages and Zimbabwean independence, in 1964 and 1969 respectively
order-order.com/2019/09/02/labour-governments-forced-queen-block-numerous-bills/
You watch the reaction if and when Boris follows convention...