Breaking the law

Democracy has many facets, but it revolves round the idea that dating back to Magna Carta, that no one in the kingdom is above the law, from the King to the lowest serf, the law applies.

Even in the 21st century, we assume that the Government obeys laws, which in fairness, it passes, but there should be recourse, and even then, the Government and its various ministires should obey the law.

But as we have seen over the last year, from Johnson with the Leaders of both Houses ruled to have given the Monarch unlawful advice, Cummings' trip(s) to Durham and now obeying treaty obligations is not for this Government, not under this Prime Minister.

No one thought at the start of the week that a Minister of the Crown, would stand at the dispatch box of the House of Commons and state it was to be Government policy to break its obligations under an international treaty, thus breaking international law.

I suspect this was always the plan, or to try to renegotiate the Irish Protocol. But as previously stated, wherever the regulatory border would be, it would political dynamite. That the excuse, or one of the excuses is to protect the GFA, when the Protocol itself does this, makes no sense. Neither does the State Aid line.

At least in terms of a conservative policy. State Aid regulation was a cornerstone of the Single Market from 1992, and something that the Brexiteer’s heroine, Mrs Thatcher, was the architect of. Regulating and reducing state aid, levels competition between countries, stopping a competitor giving its favoured domestic company or companies an unfair advantage.

Fighting against that is destroying her legacy. But that’s where we are.

A possible explanation has been that Dom wants to help his mates set up a trillion dollar tech company with public funds. Which might explain the Operation Moonshot guff from yesterday. One hundred billion quid handed over without a tender or any oversight.

I listened to every BBC news bulletin last night, and it presented the situation with equal coverage of the EU’s and Government position, and that the breaking of law was a mtter of UK Parliamentary sovereignty. Which has nothing to do with the IMB, it is 100% about breaking the terms of the WA, and further, any Minister able to break the terms of any law, domestic or international, agreement or treaty and it not be illegal.

It is actually insane, and was written by politicians and their advisors as the Civil Servants who would help with the drafting would not have any thing to do with this, and the chief on, resigned in protest.

It makes little legal sense, but could still be voted into law, if it passes through both Houses, which isn’t a given.

Previous Conservative PMs and Leaders have spoken out against the bill, but will it matter? Nothing seems to matter to them, gambling the economic future of the whole country to line their and their mate’s pockets?

Make no mistake, the bill breaks the Ministerial Code, and so should be a resignation matter for all of them. Including the Attorney General and Lord Chancellor, who have both sworn to uphold the law, in all it’s forms, above their party.

They, or any other Minister have so far resigned.