THREAD:

THE JONATHAN SUMPTION LECTURE

1. I know some of you were bowled over. I agree with certain aspects of the lecture, but I feel there are many omissions which may result in a misleading view of the present restrictions.

2. I'll go through the lecture from start to finish & wherever possible will back up my point of view with facts and/or law on the bits I believe need a differing perspective.

It distresses me that people are being frightened from both ends of the spectrum.

3. We have the health disaster as depicted by the likes of Piers Morgan & we have the totalitarian accusations from others, including Sumption.

My personal view is that Sumption knows how persuade, but he gives the motive/game away at the start of the lecture.

4. The scene is set with 'the Government'. This cements in the mind that there is only 1 government in the UK & only 1 government can be blamed. So it seems quite a personal grudge from the outset, otherwise the the singular 'Government' would be 'Governments'.

5. The mind automatically assumes the Conservative Government & throughout the lecture the criticisms are directed at 'the Government', never Governments. I don't think Wales, Scotland or NI's devolved health administrations are mentioned?

6. Sumption dives in with Brexit & the prorogation. As a matter of fact & law Parliament wrestled power from the Government in regard to Brexit. The Benn Act sought to introduce a softer Brexit with a 2nd ref attached, similar in content to the failed May/Corbyn negotiations.

7. The Letwin Amendment sought to withhold the newly negotiated treaty until Parliament had got its hands on the implementation legislation, which it intended to shape to its own desires. As a matter of law, powers rest with the Govt. (not Parliament) to negotiate treaties.

8. See Art. 7 Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties & 'full powers' (pic below). Parliament attempted to take that power from the Government - Bercow gifted power to the rebels as a de facto Government. That to my mind was a terrible abuse of power & a bigger threat to democracy.

9. Sumption states 'People have no mechanism for holding the Government to account'.

Judicial Review is that very mechanism: see Miller 1 & Miller 2 for how powerful that legal mechanism can be!

10. I can't find the just before lockdown reference to the behavioural scientists quote 'Citizens should be treated as rational actors, capable of taking decisions for themselves'. SAGE minutes for the behavioural scientists on 16 & 23 March are below.

11. Without reading the extract Sumption refers to in context with any other observations by the behavioural scientists, it's not wise for me to comment other than the minutes posted above give a different slant on measures needed.

12. Sumption says the Govt. did not act on the advice of the behavioural scientists. We did have a voluntary lockdown commencing 16 March (same day WHO declared a pandemic if memory serves me well). Can't speak for elsewhere, but it was largely ignored here in Lincs.

13. Sumption states the Coronavirus Act was 'pushed through all its stages in a single day'. See pic below which is self explanatory.

14. It's stated in the lecture that Ministers are 'given very limited powers' under the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 & only 2 are relevant to lockdown. I think he missed s.13 of the PHA which refers specifically to epidemics.

15. S.13 allows a Minister to legislate 'for preventing spread of such diseases'. I don't think the definition is too wide as suggested by Sumption. As a matter of common sense epidemic legislation is what's intended under S.13.

16. Sumption asserts no power exists to control movements of healthy people.

The difficulty here is whether a 'healthy' asymptomatic person can spread disease unknowingly. That is a matter for scientists to evidence, not a lawyer.

17. Sumption goes onto describe the totalitarian & authoritarian nature of this Government, but fails to mention the Coronavirus Act 2020 expires automatically 2 years from date it came into force. The powers have a limited shelf life.

18. Midway through the lecture is where I agree with Sumption. In my view the £10k fixed penalty fines are excessive. Compared to other fixed penalty notices which range from under £100 to £500.

19. I also agree that the Police have been partisan with whom they've chosen to punish at demonstrations.

The law has to be applied evenly or people lose respect & trust.

20. Unlike Sumption, I'll make no comment on who is affected by Covid. I'm not a scientist or a doctor & the pandemic isn't over so any evidence is inconclusive. We've much to learn.

21. In relation to Sumption's comparison with other European countries, I disagree that our measures have been more draconian than Germany & France. As I write France has had a 9pm - 5am night time curfew in many regions & both countries have announced lockdowns.

22. The latter pages of the law lecture seem to steer away from law & into Sumption's personal opinion, so I'm not commenting on that part of the paper.

I just wanted to add a bit of balance to what is a worrying/frightening time for everyone.