Our Prime Minister has a way with words; ‘Brexit means Brexit’ – the acme of meaninglessness; ‘the Golden Era’, although inexplicably this has now slipped  out of usage; and ‘No running narrative on Brexit’, which is code for resisting parliamentary scrutiny on Brexit, now apparently a crown perogative. For Mrs May has an attitude towards parliamentary sovereignty somewhat akin to the early Stuarts (which, I recall, did not end well, at least for the King). So there has been a flutter of parliamentary activity to try at least to get a debate on the mandate for the Article 50 negotiations. Ed Miliband has made some calls. Mrs Soubry has taken to the airwaves. Ms Lucas is on board. All this is good and proper but the ambitions of these MPs seem limited to questioning the Executive, not controlling it. And yet there is another weapon to hand: the Great Repeal Bill (see part one of this post). Not even our imperious leader could deny Parliament the right to scrutinise and then vote on a Parliamentary bill. To date the opponents of ‘hard Brexit’ appear to buy the line that this is a technical measure designed to ensure that EU laws are now part of UK law, in preparation for the UK quitting the Union. Sir Keir Starmer, the new Brexit shadow on the Labour front bench, appeared yesterday to strike an almost gullibly positive tone about this potentially pernicious measure. More seasoned parliamentarians should now seize their chance: and drag out the Bill’s progress until they know the purpose and the outcome of the Article 50 negotiations, and until there are guarantees that none of the protections enshrined in EU law will be jeopardised. Let Mr Corbyn, Mr Farron, Mrs Lucas and the SNP make common cause with Conservative mainstream MPs to assert the true sovereignty of the UK Parliament. This way Mrs May can add a new phrase to her lexicon, ‘Control Means Control’.