THE word “unprecedented” has been thrown around a lot in recent weeks.

But then, the events in Westminster truly are unprecedented, as the deadlock over Brexit shows little sign of shifting.

Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend parliament in the run-up to the October 31 deadline for Brexit was described as unprecedented – the Prime Minister’s move would have seen MPs effectively locked out of the Commons from the early hours of September 10 until October 14.

Parliament is usually prorogued to allow for a new speech by the monarch to introduce a new legislative agenda – but it has been used controversially in the past.

In 1997, John Major prorogued parliament so questions could not be asked about the so called ‘cash for questions’ scandal.

However, Mr Johnson’s request would have seen the longest period of prorogation since 1930, and MPs on all sides questioned whether it was to avoid scrutiny in the run-up to Brexit.

Those theories were effectively confirmed on September 24.

If Mr Johnson’s move to suspend parliament had shocked people – whether it was seen as brave or brazen – it was nothing compared to the events of that day.

In a landmark ruling that will be the subject of constitutional law lectures for decades, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament was unlawful.

Announcing the verdict, president of the Supreme Court Lady Hale, said there was “no justification for such an extreme action has been put forward”.

“The court is bound to conclude the decision was unlawful. The prorogation was void and of no effect. Parliament has not been prorogued,” she said.

Never before in modern politics has a Prime Minister been held to have broken the law to “frustrate or prevent the ability of parliament to carry out its constitutional functions”.

There have been arguments that the court should not have intervened in such a political affair – but the fact 11 judges made a unanimous decision backs the legitimacy of the result.

MPs of all sides rushed back to parliament the following day – what followed was essentially a political bloodbath.

Despite Mr Johnson’s insistence that the suspension had nothing to do with Brexit – the government’s defence in the Supreme Court Case – the manner in which Britain will leave the EU was certainly the hot topic in parliament in a furious debate showing just how deep the divisions go.

Both MPs who represent this district – Hexham’s MP Guy Opperman and Penrith and Borders MP Rory Stewart – have called for compromise to deliver Brexit.

In parliament last night, Mr Stewart, who was axed from the party after voting to block no-deal said to the Prime Minister: “This Brexit deal is not a deal just for the next five years; it is the foundation of our relationship with Europe for the next 40?

“That requires us to speak with respect, with moderation and with compassion for our opponents in order to provide a foundation that appeals not just to a single narrow faction, but to every citizen and party in this great country.”

In a statement, Mr Opperman said: “My hope is that opposition parties will demonstrate a desire to compromise and decide what kind of Brexit it does want. Only then can we respect the referendum result from 2016, and deliver a workable Brexit deal.”