The new leader should review the Government’s current plans and focus limited time and political capital where it counts.
There is a deep tension between a democratic constitution and efforts to insulate rights from changes in public opinion.
The Judicial Review and Courts Act is a significant defeat for activists who want more interventions by the courts.
Contrast what Jolyon Maugham’s outfit are saying about their most recent case with what the judges thought of it.
A new ConHome series offering a very short introduction to some of those who are making or who have made an intellectual contribution to conservatism.
There is much to be said for incremental reform, but too much caution can tip over into a failure to act boldly.
And we’re all for a rebalancing – but Parliamentary government must mean Parliament in full, not just the executive.
Whatever your view of the specifics, should it be for a judge to decide what is “worthy of respect in a democratic society”?
Repeal will to restore politics – and the electorate – to its rightful place at the core of the United Kingdom’s constitution.
It was promised “in our first year”. Instead, there will be mini-commissions, and a push to reform a Government bugbear: judicial review.
The Government is poised to reverse the trend to competition rather than collaboration that has marked healthcare policy for 30 years.
The big picture is that Johnson is dashing for growth. We devoutly hope it works but the precedents aren’t promising.
If governments are going to keep signing up to ‘legally-binding targets’, this sort of thing will continue to happen. Legislative indolence is the root of judicial power.
The political has been captured by the legal. Decisions of an executive, legislative and democratic nature have been assumed by our courts.
He will remember Lady Hale and her swipe over “girly swots”. More pertinently, he will have in mind the court’s constitutionally illterate decision over prorogation.