,
11 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
My timeline has filled up, unsurprisingly, with this tweet. It is both sad and contradictory in terms of its effects. But it is also worrying for another reason: it is just one Statutory Instrument (SI). Hundreds will be needed as the UK leaves the EU. (Short thread) /1
If SIs are spotted by someone somewhere, they might be withdrawn or corrected (in this case, it seems to be under the misapprehension the EUI is an EU institution) BUT only if (a) someone notices and (b) there is enough noise made that reaches the right ears. /2
However, these are bigs 'ifs'. It is impossible to know how many SIs will pass with untold effects because (a) the law is being read incorrectly (b) being misinterpreted (c) there is no consultation or impact assessment. /3
Add to that the inability due to time for civil servants or even ministers to properly consider the purpose and effects of such SIs, how they might have knock-on effects or contract other SIs or policies. /4
Legislation - of which a huge amount will be needed as part of Brexit and which is yet to be passed - will be the focus of concern and (some) debate. But SIs are arguably just as important. /5
For years, legal scholars have used the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as an example of bad legislation because it was rushed through with no proper thought. That was 'only' about dangerous dogs. Now imagine that it concerns potentially any area of current engagement with the EU. /6
With the best will in the world, no government would be able to pass the right amount of legislation needed, with proper consultation, debate and thought about consequences. Now add into the mix SIs and other decision-making processes against the background of potential chaos. /7
On top of all that, there will still be the 'ordinary'/non-Brexit matters of government to deal with over the coming months and years. It is impossible to imagine how any of this is going to end up in anything other than a huge mess. /8
There needs to be a much greater sense of public scrutiny of what the government and Parliament does than we are used to. /9
The government will not necessarily be acting in bad faith by making changes beyond what is necessary due to Brexit, but mistakes or bad interpretations are possible. And that would not be 'respecting the referendum' as we continue to hear. /10
This example shows that the UK's unwritten constitution is being tested to its limits. What might seem to be individually minor instances can matter far more than they seem to. /END
