Share this page!

George Peretz QC Profile picture
Twitter logo
Feb 9 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
Late to this by @alexinlaw and @john_vassiliou1: Home Office dictionary. freemovement.org.uk/joke-home-offi…
If you think that that’s making it up, try freemovement.org.uk/10-of-the-most…
One pillar of the case for judicial review and scrutiny is that, left unchecked, all bureaucracies administering complex systems with real impact on lives will tend to this cocktail of poor decision-making, unfairness and cruelty.
Especially where the pressure from the top - while genuflecting to standards of competence, compassion, and fairness - is, in reality, to cut corners and deliver “results”.

• • •

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
Feb 10
Claim: the Ireland/NI Protocol is “starving NI of medicines”. A very serious claim, if true. But it isn’t. Thread: and trigger warning - contains nuance and detail.
Start with some basics. Article 5.4 of and para 20 of Annex 2 to the NIP apply all EU legislation on medicines to NI. That provision overrides Article 7.1 NIP (U.K. law to govern what goes on market in NI) as Art 7.1 is subject to Annex 2.
Arts 7.3, 12 and 13 together have the result that the MHRA operates in NI in broadly the same way as the national competent authorities of EU member states do in theirs. Eg it can approve medicines in NI under EU law where national authorities can do so in the EU (most medicines)
Read 19 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Feb 9
Good piece illustrating the trade-offs involved in getting rid of retained EU law in the shape of complex regulatory regimes. 2 points.
1. These are really important and difficult policy choices. These should be made by primary legislation, scrutinised by Parliament, with those affected given a chance to be heard. Not by barely-scrutinised flicks of a Minister’s pen.
2. One other problem with the unilateral “we’ll let in products approved by countries we trust” options floated by Sam is loss of U.K. regulatory capacity and accountability. That matters when things go wrong: which, in this area, they can - very badly. Remember breast implants.
Read 4 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Feb 8
Quite.
And this is why scrutiny and accountability are critical, and why it isn’t either democratic *or* conducive to good regulation to give Ministers wide powers to change retained EU law by the flick of a pen.
The idea that *no* regulatory improvement of EU law is possible outside the EU can’t be maintained (see the CAP).
Read 4 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Feb 5
Johnson’s claim on Monday. Image
The truth.
(A) total crime *rose* by 14% if fraud and computer misuse are included “as they should be”.
Read 6 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Feb 2
It is not perhaps the ideal time (🇺🇦/🇷🇺) for a UK government to be demonstrating a cavalier attitude to its international obligations.
As for the idea that this is a matter for the NI executive: (1) that is irrelevant as a matter of international law (assuming that the current government accepts that NI is part of the U.K.); and
(2) s.26 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 gives it all the powers the current government needs to intervene. Image
Read 4 tweets
George Peretz QC Profile picture
Feb 1
Interesting use of coy language (“make it easier …)” to hide what @SuellaBraverman is actually suggesting: that Parliament hand over its powers to decide what critical parts of our law should be to Ministers, to exercise as they want without any proper Parliamentary scrutiny. Image
To be noted by Tory MPs - such as @SteveBakerHW and others - who have pointed that ministerial law-making without proper scrutiny during Covid has not exactly been an unalloyed triumph. And also by Tory MPs who might want to scrutinise what Labour ministers do with these powers.
Given that proposal, this complaint about EU law shows some front. Image
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

:(