Oh, this one is deep in the weeds… but it just might explain why Boris has been happy to say he “Will not break the law” (while not saying which law) and also saying “We’re out 10/31 period.”.
What I think the presenter is saying is that, thanks to something called a “commencement act” the UK law stating “out Oct 31” is now operational, i.e. has been commenced, and so is bound to superior EU Law as it is part of a treaty with the EU. Thus no simple act of Parliament can suspend or change it. Thus the “Surrender Bill” can not change it. Thus mandating that Boris must write a letter asking to change it is asking Boris to “break the EU law” per the fixed date already “commenced”. I think. Maybe.
If so, that would explain the actions of Boris, but also the actions of Parliament in being so P.O’d about the prorogation. They wanted more pot stirring time to try to get round this obstacle. More time to get EU coordination to abort the law worked out. They want to be “in the game” for the next 3 weeks, but are not.
It all hinges on a peculiarity in UK law (the “commencement act” that makes something take operational effect) and how that interacts with an EU agreed treaty as “superior law”. Things well beyond my ability to assess as to veracity and / or how both the UK and EU courts might rule.
What I can say with some certainty, is that Boris can well assert that to do as Parliament commanded would require he break a “Superior EU Law – already commenced” and that would be highly unlikely to have a resolution in BOTH the EU and UK courts inside the last 2 weeks of October. Maybe.
It certainly is an interesting idea… 9.5 minutes.