Brexit: Boris Johnson regards parliament as a ‘nuisance’, court told

High Court to rule on Friday on campaigner Gina Miller's claim PM's five-week suspension of the Commons is unlawful

Gina Miller: ‘As our politics becomes more chaotic on a daily basis, the more vital it is that parliament is sitting’

Boris Johnson regards parliament as a “nuisance” and a threat to his policy of taking Britain out of the EU on 31 October come what may, the High Court has been told.

Lawyers for businesswoman and campaigner Gina Miller told judges that the prime minister’s decision to suspend parliament for five weeks ahead of the Brexit deadline was “an unlawful abuse of power” which removed MPs’ ability to take decisions at a critical time.

The court will issue its ruling on Friday morning on Ms Miller’s claim, backed by former PM Sir John Major, that the five-week prorogation is unlawful and should be reversed.

Lord Pannick QC, representing Ms Miller told the court that Mr Johnson had discussed prorogation in a hand-written note dated 16 August in which he argued that parliament’s September sittings were no more than a “rigmarole” designed to give voter the impression MP s were “earning their crust”.

The barrister said it was “shocking” that the PM “does not understand the constitutional functions of parliament in proposing such legislation and considering such legislation as it thinks appropriate and holding the government to account during such a critical period”.

The PM’s decision to advise the Queen to suspend Parliament was "extraordinary" - both because of the "exceptional length" of the suspension and because Parliament will be "silenced" during the critical period leading up to the October 31 deadline, he said.

‘The judges, meanwhile, have to ask themselves one simple question: is what Johnson is doing reasonable?’ (Reuters)

And he argued that the reason given by Mr Johnson for suspending Parliament - to introduce a new programme of legislation in a Queen’s Speech on 14 October - did not require a five-week suspension.

Lord Pannick said the Prime Minister "has been very clear" that he views Parliament as a "nuisance" and sees it as a "threat to the implementation of his policies", in particular in relation to whether a deal can be made with the EU.

Appearing for Mr Johnson, Sir James Eadie told the court that the PM’s prerogative power to prorogue parliament was “intrinsically one of high policy and politics, not law”.

He said MPs would have an opportunity to debate Brexit before Halloween, arguing: "The prorogation does not prevent Parliament from legislating on any matter it wishes. Parliament is capable of legislating at pace if it chooses to do so."