Share this page!

George Peretz QC Profile picture
Twitter logo
Jan 31 • 9 tweets • 3 min read
This report of Johnson’s latest manoeuvre needs translating into English. theguardian.com/politics/2022/…
As matters stand, “bridging law” (retained EU law) can be removed as easily as any other law - by an Act of Parliament, subject to Parliamentary scrutiny, debate, and to suggest amendments.
What this proposal means is that Ministers will grab power to rewrite rules on eg product safety, the environment, and consumer and employment rights, by a flick of their pen and with minimal scrutiny by Parliament. No point in writing to your MP: there’ll be little they can do.
“Take back control”, as someone said.
And Tory MPs might reflect that the powers of Parliament that they are going to being invited to surrender to current Ministers may well, in 2 years, be in the hands of Labour ministers. Be careful what you wish for is good advice, in politics as elsewhere.
See this excellent thread by @bricksilk for details.
In addition to the democratic concerns raised by @bricksilk, there’s another set of problems hidden in this latest pronouncement from No 10. What is meant by “end the special status of [retained] EU law” (REUL)?
See here for the problem - it leads to chaotic and unpredictable consequences.
My conclusion: -

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with George Peretz QC

George Peretz QC Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GeorgePeretzQC

George Peretz QC Profile picture
Jan 24
Johnson on 10 June 2020. gov.uk/government/spe…
Nine days later
The law at the time. Note 7(2)(d)(i) and (3). No gatherings - defined as 2 or more present together in order to engage in any form of social interaction or activity with each other (even for 10 minutes). Includes wishing happy birthday and consuming cake.
Read 9 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Jan 24
Helpful analysis here.
But it’s also important to look at Johnson’s claim on 1.12.21. Regardless of what he knew/understood when he went into the garden on 20.5.20, is it credible that *after* that event, he still believed that guidance had been completely followed in No 10? Image
Is it also credible that - months after the party on the eve of Prince Philip’s funeral - he still knew so little about it (or other similar events) that he genuinely believed on 1.12.21 that “guidance was followed completely”?
Read 8 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Jan 23
Insisting that a serving Prime Minister should not knowingly mislead Parliament, and that if he has he must resign, is *defending* our democracy, not “undermining” or “belittling” it.
We do not elect our governments or MPs with carte blanche to do anything they like. That would be episodic autocracy. We elect them to operate within the rules of our constitution. Which is representative democracy.
And one of the few hard-edged conventions with hard-edged consequences in our constitutional arrangements is that if Ministers knowingly mislead Parliament, they resign.
Read 5 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Jan 20
Interesting analysis by @lewis_goodall last night on Newsnight on whether Johnson has lied to Parliament on Partygate.
One issue is whether he has lied in relation to what he knew/was told about the 20 May BYOB event before it happened. That will depend on evidence (written/oral).
Another issue - which Lewis correctly took separately - is whether this statement on 1.1.21 was a lie.
Read 15 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Jan 19
Which is why it doesn’t really matter (see the #r4today discussion with Heappy) whether Johnson knew what the event was before he arrived. He was there - on his own admission - for 25 minutes.
What we are being asked to believe is that Johnson could have been at a “work event” or party, with booze and people taking advantage of the lovely weather together, without realising that it breached rules and guidance (see @AdamWagner1’s explanation of what they were).
If anyone does manage to believe that, I’m impressed. Perhaps it’s something they practise at training sessions for Conservative candidates. Image
Read 5 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Jan 15
There really isn’t any more to be said. Johnson lied to Parliament. Johnson’s Ministerial Code sets out the consequence of that lie.
(From theguardian.com/commentisfree/…)
The central pillar of our system of parliamentary democracy is ministers’ accountability to Parliament. That pillar is built on sand if ministers - especially the PM - lie to Parliament without having to resign.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @GeorgePeretzQC has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @GeorgePeretzQC!

Read all threads by @GeorgePeretzQC

:(