27 October 2021
At last the phrase ‘enshrined in law’ has met its perfect subject.
Sewage.
*
This blog has previously averred that ‘enshrined in law’ is one of the most dishonest phrases in the political lexicon.
https://twitter.com/law_and_policy/status/1453040659846336512
This is usually for one of two main reasons.
First: a commitment ‘enshrined in law’ is often accompanied by various get-outs, or is in broad terms – so it has no real legal effect.
For example, the supposed spending commitment on international aid.
Or second: the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy means that anything done by a statute can easily be undone by a statute.
This is because placing something on a statutory basis does not give it some super-duper magically entrenched power.
For example, the successive Brexit dates that were ‘enshrined in law’ before being postponed.
In the constitution of the United Kingdom it is impossible for any provision to be ‘enshrined in law’ in any meaningful way.
It will always be one political move away from circumvention or frustration, or a simple parliamentary move away from amendment or repeal.
The phrase ‘enshrined in law’ is therefore used by political and media fools, or by political and media knaves taking you to be a fool.
*
And so yesterday this dreadful phrase found its natural policy home.
The government’s apparent u-turn (or u-bend, in the circumstances) over sewage.
Last night the government published this statement:
“The Government has today (26 October) announced that the Environment Bill will be further strengthened with an amendment that will see a duty enshrined in law to ensure water companies secure a progressive reduction in the adverse impacts of discharges from storm overflows.”
This statement is political sleight-of-hand (and in a normal world would not be on an official government website in this form, but – hey – those days have gone).
For instance, the term ‘further strengthened’ is in tension with the government’s own backbenchers voting against the house of lords amendment on this very point.
What has happened, of course, is that there has been a political storm overflow, drenching those nod-along government supporters who voted down the amendment with the raw product of popular dissatisfaction.
And so the government has had to reverse its position, while getting publicly funded officials to misdirect the public about it being a ‘further strengthening’.
But.
If you look carefully at the statement you will notice something that is not there.
There is no text of an amendment.
And this, no doubt, is because the there is no text of the amendment, for the amendment does not yet exist.
So we have the spectacle of the government asserting that there will be a ‘further strengthening’ of a bill without saying how this will be done.
Just words, and air.
And it is this vapour is what will be ‘enshrined in law’.
Misdirection upon misdirection: government by panicky press release.
*
Whenever the phrase ‘enshrined in law’ is used then there is foolishness and/or knavery afoot.
Either the person saying this does not understand the law or that person is wanting to mislead you about the law.
And, in either case, something is being done that has not been properly thought-through.
The phrase has always come with a smell.
And we now know what that smell is of.
Sewage.
******
This blog needs your help to continue – each free-to-read post takes time and opportunity cost.
This law and policy blog provides a daily post commenting on and contextualising topical law and policy matters.
If you value this free-to-read and independent legal and policy commentary – for the you and for the benefit of others – please do support through the Paypal box above, or become a Patreon subscriber.
*****
You can also have each post sent by email by filling in the subscription box above (on an internet browser) or on a pulldown list (on mobile).
******
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated.
Comments will not be published if irksome.