Bad breaking

In the mid-80s, the UK Government went to court in Australia to try to block publication of a book, Spycatcher by Peter Wright. In an extraordinary moment, the UK legal team had admit, when it was shown that the UK Government had, in fact been lying, but the term “lying” was replaced with “economical with the truth”.

As if it is a different thing.

"Yes, this does break international law, in a very specific and limited way" is 2020’s being economical with the truth.

Breaking the law, is breaking the law, no matter how you dress it up.

But it seems to have worked. On the BBC’s news bulletins last night, this was the second from last story, and the phrase “in a very specific and limited way" was prominent.

Vote Leave broke multiple election laws to win the referendum.

In 2017, a foreign power colluded to help the Conservatives win an election, the report shows that no questions were asked by the Government or security services.

Last year, the Prime Minister and Leaders of both Houses were found by the Supreme Court to have given the Monarch unlawful advice.

This year, Johnson’s chief political aid broke lockdown laws to drive from London to Durham, then to Barnard Castle for an eye test, and was forgiven.

Ministers can now, and do, pass laws not by the dull, slow method of publishing white papers, debating it in both Houses and then getting it given Royal assent. No, a swipe of a Minister’s pen and create an SI with the same legal force as a law. Why bother with Parliament?

The message from the Government is clear; laws are for little people.

News of a massive surge in restrictions to come into effect from Monday were released at 22:30 lest night, pushing the breaking international law story off many front pages. But the Government will expect us all to obey these new restrictions of meeting in family groups of no more than 6 people.

Will we listen, or shall we say that we are going to break the restriction in a in a very specific and limited way. Its what the Government says.

Today, Barnier and Frost meet face to face in London, talks are on the brink of collapse, and the Internal Market Bill will be introduced. As a new Bill it has to go through the dull, slow way through both Houses. Then we will know what is in them.

It has seismic implications for Northern Ireland and Scotland.

Oddly, the same convention, Salisbury-Addison , that means that the House of Lords cannot block Government business in the election manifesto, can also mean that any changes to a Bill which removes such manifesto commitments be put back in. Chances of the Internal Market Bill passing without such amendments through the Lords is about nil.

The wider effect of the news that the Government, it’s Ministers and appointed guardians of the Law are happy that the Government is willing to break the law, is yet to be known. This will effect the UK’s ability and ease of signing treaties for decades to come, as more, stricter, legal measures will be inserted as our word is no longer our bond.