Rubicon

This is a partial list of Acts that the government refuses to rule out being subject to the pending Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.

Act of Settlement 1700; Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001; Bail Act 1976; Bill of Rights 1688; Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919; Church of Scotland Act 1921; Civil Contingencies Act 2004; Claim of Right 1689; Constitutional Reform Act 2005; Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994; European Communities Act 1972; Freedom of Information Act 2000; Government of Ireland Act 1920; Government of Wales Act 2006; Government of Wales Act 1998; Habeas Corpus Acts 1679 to 1862; House of Lords Act 1999; Human Rights Act 1998; Identity Cards Act 2006; Immigration Act 1971; Local Government Act 1972; Magna Carta 1215; Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975; Ministers of the Crown Act 1975; Northern Ireland Act 1947; Northern Ireland Act 1998; Official Secrets Acts 1911 to 1989; Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949; Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986; Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984; Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005; Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Act 1706; Public Order Acts 1936 to 1986; Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000; Representation of the People Acts 1981 to 2002; Scotland Act1998; Security Service Act 1989; Statute of Westminster 1931; Succession to the Crown Act1707; Terrorism Act 2000; Terrorism Act 2006; Union with England Act 1707; Union with Scotland Act 1706; Welsh Church Disestablishment Act 1914.

So much for joined-up Government: 16 of these 44 Acts were Bills presented by this Government, but their schizophrenia isn't the issue. Neither, for that matter, is the fact that this Government, which has invoked the Parliament Acts like it's going out of fashion to force some fiercely-opposed laws through, includes both Parliament Acts on the list, although the likelihood of those laws being repealed if the law used to create them is changed is, of course, slim in the extreme. And let's just gloss over the fact that Magna Carta effectively created the English Parliament: so good luck tidying up that one.

What does it mean to introduce such a Bill? The Cabinet Office page linked says, reassuringly, that the Bill will make it "quicker and easier to tackle unnecessary or over-complicated regulation and help bring about a risk-based approach to regulation". Whatever that means. They used the word "tackle", so they must be doing something. Then "deliver" later on. And - ah! now I see it. It's to tackle unnecesary and over-complicated legislation. No wonder their own legislation featurs so prominently.

But, of course, it doesn't really go into any detail about how this alleged streamlining will take place. One could, of course, have a look at the Bill itself - but easier, surely, to let someone else do the hard work.

Ooof!

It gives ministers power to alter any law passed by Parliament. The only limitations are that new crimes cannot be created if the penalty is greater than two years in prison and that it cannot increase taxation. But any other law can be changed, no matter how important. All ministers will have to do is propose an order, wait a few weeks and, voilà, the law is changed.

Yikes!, as Boris might say. But the question, surely, must be: who asks for this kind of power? In a Parliamentary democracy that can, or could until recently at any rate, be more or less proud of the laws it has passed and the legacy of freedom it has engendered, what could possibly give someone the idea that such a thing would be necessary or desirable? Only, and I do mean only, if the laws that this Bill will be used to pass quickly, without scrutiny or debate, are completely unacceptable to the vast majority of people, and therefore to their representatives, will a facility such as the one provided by this Bill be needed. The only way of thinking or kind of attitude that engenders such a Bill is the "I know best" approach. The notion that certain people know what's best for us all, and too much scrutiny from other people will only get in the way even if they aren't too stupid to understand what's going on: this is how our masters now think. So accustomed have they become to having ever-greater control over ever more numerous aspects of our lives that we've reached the point where they're making their play, planning that final land-grab to end all land-grabs. They've come too far now, after all, to stop here. The Great Project must be completed, before those nasty Tories even look like they might be electable again. And so accustomed have we become to having our lives micromanaged by the state that we hardly notice when they try to take our brains out.