There was plenty of outrage on Twitter yesterday from lockdown sceptics about the renewal of the Coronavirus Act 2020 without the House of Commons being given an opportunity to vote on it. For instance, Julia Hartley-Brewer tweeted: “What kind of democracy do we live in when a six month extension to emergency powers to control every aspect of our lives can just be nodded through without any vote?”
But I’m a little more sanguine about this than others and have written a comment piece for Mail+ explaining why. Here is an extract:
Yes, the Act, as originally passed in March 2020, is an illiberal measure that grants the Government all sorts of sweeping powers. For instance, the ability to close businesses and schools, and restrict social gatherings.
But there are two reasons why its renewal should not set off alarm bells.
First, all the most draconian powers granted to the Government under the Act have been removed. The remaining clauses give ministers powers they would need to use in the event of another lockdown but which, by themselves, don’t enable them to impose one, such as allowing them to financially support businesses affected by COVID-19 and to stop landlords evicting tenants for unpaid rents.
However, the removal of these sweeping powers should not be a cause of comfort – which brings me to the second reason.
The last three times the Government imposed a lockdown, it didn’t need to rely on any of the authoritarian clauses in the Act. That’s because it has all the powers it needs under the Public Health Act 1984 and, unlike the Coronavirus Act, that piece of legislation doesn’t have to be renewed every six months.
That’s why Steve Baker, Conservative MP for Wycombe and Deputy Leader of the Covid Recovery Group, abstained in yesterday’s vote but didn’t call for a division of the House. He rightly understood that the renewal of the Act was small potatoes in the grand scheme of things.
I go on to say that for opponents of further lockdowns the focus should be on reforming the Public Health Act, not repealing the Coronavirus Act.
If we’re going to make it harder for the Government to lock us down again without carrying out a cost-benefit analysis – which it didn’t bother with on the previous three occasions – the critical thing is to reform the Public Health Act. That is what the Covid Recovery Group is campaigning for.
Of course, reforming the act wouldn’t prevent the Government from imprisoning us in our homes again. But it would mean that in order to do so, in the absence of any kind of risk assessment, it might have to pass another act of Parliament. That would at least give MPs and peers the opportunity to scrutinise and debate the merits of another lockdown.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: For those unconvinced by this argument, you can sign a petition urging the Government to repeal the Coronavirus Act here.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Hartley Brewer educated herself about the so called Climate “Emergency Crises” But remained quiet Un-Educated & naive ( as a sheep ) duding this past 18 months. I’m glad to see that she is waking up slowly albeit a little too late from certain events
“It’s only mild despotism, and probably won’t be abused much now.”
Talk about not reading the room, Toby.
Covid Crusher: Mix one heaped teaspoon of Iodine table or sea salt in a mug of warm water, cup a hand and sniff or snort the entire mugful up your nose, spitting out anything which comes down into your mouth. If sore, then you have a virus, so continue morning noon and night, or more often if you want, until the soreness goes away (2-3 minutes) then blow out your nose and flush away, washing your hands afterwards, until when you do my simple cure, you don’t have any soreness at all, when you flush – job done. Also swallow a couple of mouthfuls of salt water and if you have burning in your lungs, salt killing virus and pneumonia there too.
Gargling, using saline solution or tablets is a waste of time, because they deal with Covid in the body and not the virus in the head, where it is at its most vulnerable – how silly such an easy thing to destroy, is left to become the
bio-weapon which kills you.
I have been doing this for over 27 years and not one person has died from this simple cure, or been injured from it from those I… Read more »
Constitutionally where do we stand if a vote is required yet no vote is taken. Any Constitutional lawyers out there with an answer?
I’m sorry but for me democracy is democracy or it’s not. This is another chip off our standards.
“Steve Baker … He rightly understood that the renewal of the Act was small potatoes in the grand scheme of things.”
Wrong, wrong, wrong. There is a symbolism here that the government & parliament can do what it wants and laugh as the speaker did. No need to justify or explain or check. It was a parliamentary finger in the air to freedom.
Ok I’ll make this short!
If MPs can’t be arsed to vote…
I can’t be arsed to comply.
Get ready for more BS lockdown people. Sajid Hancock just said there COULD be 100,000 cases per day of the new Sub Variant. I am despairing.
ignore them, ignore him, get on with your life we all should just stick together and say as this gentleman does, if we all stick together they cannot break us,
https://www.bitchute.com/video/ygXJCp9ykhxB/
The utter contempt for the plebs displayed by our political class yesterday was an excellent opportunity for people to witness at first hand the manner in which our ‘democracy’ functions ie. there is no democracy. There is instead a one party state composed of various factions headed up by identical puppets all touting the same globalist mantras. The ritual shaking of fists across the floor over mild differences in policies are all part of the theatrics designed to give an illusion of choice when in reality, none exists. They all agree to accept the path dictated by the UN, WEF, World Bank and a plethora of other globalist bodies – and this is why this legislation was simply nodded through. The only difference now is that they can no longer be bothered to even give the impression of disagreeing on policy – and this level of contempt can only wake more people up.
It’s symbolic though, isn’t it? By renewing it they are saying that they intend this shitshow to carry on. I fully accept that the PHA is the bigger problem and that does need reforming, but non-renewal of the Coronavirus act would have given a message that normality was returning whereas renewing it without a vote says the opposite,
They need that fake ‘state of emergency’ to get people injected with the clot shot. Gates arrival and partying with demonic Royalty points to exactly where this is going. The old gal’s onboard for both convid and climate, while old Phil’s trying his best to be reincarnated as a virus..
Its outrageous, 2 years an the incompetent idiots are still at it. Obviously the jabs are going quick enough for Mr Gates
are not
I’ve given up on signing petitions. The government do what they want regardless.
The online harm bill is actually the online censorship bill
Totalitarians love to supress the truth
no Toby you are wrong. there is no excuse there is no argument that this is a less draconian sector rules. Once you go down that rabbit hole you are lost it is accepting of the principle of removing liberty because 80% is given back. which is better than nothing.
No we want complete removal not even 1% of the previous emergency rules. Because to accept crumbs is to accept a loss of what as a free human is your right you are just in a negotiation now to accept you must lose some rights in order to get a bit of the life you had before.
That is not good enough for me I don’t negotiate with terrorists.
The British were among the first slaves, this sovereign man, free man, Magna Carta, constitutions, treaties all nonsense.
Common law isn’t natural law, what man makes, man can break! Its not a right if it can be taken away.
You, me & the other 99.9% are just slaves of our own making. It’s mass cognitive dissonance, the population suffering Stockholm syndrome are beginning to see the truth of it.
You are not & never were free.
Bab not sure what you mean, but I do know I am not taking their crap anymore, when something is wrong, and I know its wrong I am not going along with it, If a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so,
I am outraged.
Not surprised, only outraged.
Press conference coming up, powers extended, new variant, pantsdown in the media and BOOM passports! Can’t wait.
Being outraged about anything hasn’t really helped our cause. It’s water off a duck’s back as far as this government is concerned. To the best of my ability I’ve just resisted their diktats as much as possible.
I got to paragraph two “But there are two reasons why its renewal should not set off alarm bells.”.
Is this guy for real? The fact an entire country has to obey even a watered down edict without any democratic oversight is an abomination. This idiot doesn’t even mention that this extension takes us up to TWO YEARS with no democratic oversight. Why not just get rid of votes? (one election was cancelled and where were the press on that one?). It’s obvious Parliament doesn’t matter, our votes don’t matter.
What do mean 2 years?
Genuine question, because I was of the understanding, the corona sunset clause meant the act expired after 2 years, it was up for review every 6 months until that point.
It really doesn’t matter any, still under the impression this is democracy is suffering Stockholm syndrome.
Denmark, Norway, Sweden … none of the Scandanavian countries are bothering with this covid claptrap any more because (quite sensibly) they consider the virus as no longer a national threat … so why has the House of Commons nodded through an extension of covid powers that are completely unwarranted for the very low level of threat from a virus that is about as deadly as a severe case of flu.
This does not make sense?
It makes sense if you stop thinking about well-meaning, honest motivations for political actions
although it’s a lot less deadly (and nasty) than flu if you’re body-aged below 75…
and that’s me experience unjabbed (without the dubious “protection” of the clot shots).
Odd. They didn’t give a flying fuck when they were murdering people in droves in care homes
But now it’s about one of their own
‘Amess amendment’ for last rites at crime scenes – BBC News
Why on earth do we need a law to allow this? I thought under English law, everything was allowed unless specifically forbidden.
Are they telling us that administering the last rites at a crime scene was previously illegal?
They do that a lot now with lawmaking – someone says ‘something must be done’, and an act of pariliament duly emerges about something very specific. In many cases there are perfectly suitable more general-purpose laws in force already which could achieve the same thing but just aren’t being enforced.
This argument completely misses the point. The message behind this is that our dear elected representatives can’t be arsed to care about this issue. That’s important and not some technicalities re: which laws the govermnent abused in which ways to do X.
Does anyone think this could emerge as an issue in the next General Election? I am thinking along the lines of anti-lockdown candidates or tactical voting to remove the MP’s who have supported this.
There were several anti-lockdown candidates in the London Mayoral Election. Between them they got hardly any votes. There are a few fringe parties with anti lockdown stances – Freedom Alliance, Heritage, Reform, Reclaim, SDP to an extent. Other than possibly Reclaim I doubt they have much funding.
If they united and were given funding and presented a single anti-lockdown candidate in each constituency they might make some inroads. it would be good for us to have some way to express our views when voting other than spoiling the ballot paper.
However the fundamental issue is not that the great mass of sceptics is being betrayed by the politicians, but that there is no great mass of sceptics. There was always something close to a silent majority for Brexit, and it took decades and hard work for it to happen. There’s no such silent majority who have seen the “pandemic” for what it is – a Big Lie.
Yes I see your point. I live in Scotland and it is interesting (or depressing depending on your perspective) that the election for the devolved legislature in May this year changed practically nothing – same as it did in Wales. It was disappointing that none of the anti-lockdown parties even managed to get seats on the regional lists which are usually the target for candidates who would otherwise find it impossible to win via first past the post.
“ … there is no great mass of sceptics”
Yes. This is the hard truth. There is no comparison with the Brexit issue, where the propaganda war was a two-way street, and the balance of belief was reflected reasonably accurately.
just vote to remove ANY incumbent MP.
https://marktwainstudies.com/the-apocryphal-twain-politicians-are-like-diapers/
Politicians are like diapers; they need to be changed often, and for the same reason. Mark Twain (attributed wrongly, as the article explain it was by a libertarian party candidate).
I was going to make a long comment but truthfully I don’t have the time. I want to join the queue early on to ensure I get my jabs for the upcoming Marburg virus. You know, the jabs with the RICIN toxin in. Can’t wait, bye ……….
Right at this moment, we should probably be more concerned at the exploitation of the Amess murder to push through the evil Online Harms bill:
Boris Johnson promises ‘criminal sanctions with tough sentences’ for people who put ‘foul’ abusive or extremist material online in the wake of the murder of Tory MP David Amess
NEW The premier said there would be ‘tough sentences’ for those behind abusive and extremist content posted to social media sites, as he faced Prime Minister’s Questions in Parliament. He sounded the warning to internet giants as he told MPs the Online Harms Bill will make progress in the Commons before Christmas. The legislation is expected to force the biggest tech firms, such as Facebook and Google, to abide by a duty of care to users, overseen by Ofcom as the new regulator for the sector. Mr Johnson was pushed by Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer to use the ‘inescapable desire’ of MPs, in the aftermath of the killing of Conservative Sir David Amess to ‘clamp down on the extremism, the hate and the abuse that festers online’.
If people haven’t noticed how laws and structures introduced to supposedly control “hate speech” were smoothly adapted to suppressing coronapanic dissent,… Read more »
“Right at this moment, we should probably be more concerned at the exploitation of the Amess murder to push through the evil Online Harms bill”
Jeez! We’re in agreement . 🙂
Eurosceptic Amess would’ve instantly been picked to lead the opposition to bills of this kind (like he ran the anti-vaxxpass0
This is a DELIBERATE INSULT to his name to put off others who want to step out of line.
Boris is the new Caroline Lucas, and still she stands in Parliament with a big smile on her face telling us about her Utopia once we have a different boiler or car. She wants it all done in 10 years! The control (virus) is to get their Green issues in full force and everyone keeps blabbing on about a virus, muzzles, lockdowns. ALL they care about is GREEN, its the new Industrial Pot of Gold, the nhs is a smokescreen
Actually, I think the colour they truly love is RED!
Hence them being described as the melon party (green veneer, red to the pips).
She did actually vote against the renewal of the legislation, back in March … along with most of the Tory right, Labour left and Lib.Dems.
Historically there seem to have been two wings of the G.Party …
1) libertarian/wanting a more decentralised society and
2) centralising/authoritarian.
There are some severe environmental problems and limits to growth. You only have to delve into the consequences of GM crops in the USA and the torrent of glyphosate spray they receive, which of course has health consequences. Is this one reason why Americans now have almost the shortest life expectancy of any rich country?
FWIW I read ‘the Population Bomb’ 50 years ago and understood its message.
But now we’re in favour of GM humans?
Lucas isn’t worth thinking about. She’s just another non entity spouting the script. If majority of these arseholes had to do a real days work they’d be on the floor begging to make it stop. Not one of them contribute anything of worth..
Can I just say that how lonely and depressed I’m feeling. It’s been 20 months and I still don’t know of anybody who’s died with or of covid, am I the only one who’s living in this despair of not personnally knowing anybody who’s died of this killer disease? (I’ve personally know of 10 people who have died over the past 20 months, all elderly. I’ve known of people who’ve tested positive and classed as very vulnerable but all have survived, including a 94 year old who’s paralysed from strokes, has advanced dementia and doubly incontinent and her own daughter says she should die as she’s living in hell).
You’re definitely not alone
I briefly met a doctor who later died of it in March 2020.
The BMJ obituary said that he was ‘healthy’. My information suggests otherwise; he was diabetic and on several strong drugs.
Chris Martenson did a talk on the health of people who in the USA died ‘of COVID’, based on CDC data. If I recall rightly, 60% of deaths were in people who had six or more co-morbidities
I didn’t know that one could have six co-morbidities and still be alive …
Forget Steve Baker, he’s very good at saying what people want to hear but when it comes to the crunch will always support Boris and restrictions.
He’s not actual opposition to anything at all.
Steve Baker.. ha ha ha ha.. my limp wrist.. yeah.. forget him!
Don’t worry, if you have a look at the votes, candidate names, and demographics of his constituency, you can be assured that he’ll be out on his ear come the next election.
Of course, what will replace him is hardly great news either.
It all seems to be an argument along the lines of “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin”. This lot can shove through whatever rules or diktats they want, in the face of a supine Opposition and slavish self-seeking Government MPs. It is patently absurd to be making excuses for this “legislation” or these “decrees” by pondering the niceties of this Act or that, and what has or hasn’t been removed.
No amount of explanation or justification can disguise the fact that the whole morass is a blatant dismissal of all and any democratic principles.
Well I’m not convinced by the argument, and I’m pretty sure we are about to see more draconian policies introduced or reintroduced on the back of the Act. But thanks for writing the article.
I don’t disagree with the detail of this article in terms of the legislative framework.
HOWEVER, debates are also symbolic theatre, and this was an opportunity for a working democracy’s representatives to forensically discuss the massively important issues around this Act.
That this did not occur is the most important lesson.