Piers Corbyn may be a crank but his treatment should worry us all

A “whiteout” is meteorological condition in which snow falling from the sky and snow whipped up from the ground is whirled by a gale into a disorientating blanket of whiteness in which there are no visual bearings and it is all but impossible to navigate. It is an apt metaphor for the blizzard of coronavirus regulations which have cascaded out of Whitehall (and of course Cardiff and Holyrood too) since March. A search of the www.legislation.gov.uk website reveals a mind-boggling 133 (albeit each Welsh regulation is counted twice in English and Welsh versions) separate pieces of UK legislation, nearly all of them statutory instruments. Thus we have such delights as the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel) (Amendment No. 7) Regulations, The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Leicester) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020, The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford) Regulations 2020 and so on. And on and on. It is enormously difficult to find ones bearings amidst all these constantly changing rules and regulations. As David Allen Green put it on August 14th:

There is not a lawyer or police officer in the land who any longer knows what is legal and not legal under coronavirus regulations. An absolute mess of a legal regime.”

Since August 14th matters have only got worse.

Piers Corbyn

It is not often that I have much sympathy with Jeremy Corbyn’s weather-forecaster brother Piers (or to give him his own rather baffling description LongRange WorldLeading weather+climate forecaster BIEuUsa. SolarLunar Method NotCO2! AmericanThinker Climate Predictor2010. Bro #JC4PM), or with any of the anti-vaxx, Qanon, and 5G conspiracists who participated in a rally against masks and coronavirus restrictions in Trafalgar Square on Saturday 29th August. As well as Mr Corbyn, they included the antisemitic conspiracy theorist David Icke and a small group who deployed a flag remarkably similar if not identical to that of the British Union of Fascists. These are not easy people to like, although no doubt there were some more reasonable folk amongst them as well.

Corbyn: £10,000 Fixed Penalty

Nevertheless the £10,000 Fixed Penalty Notice issued to Piers Corbyn as someone “involved in” the demonstration is disturbing. Mr Corbyn’s “FPN” requires him – strictly speaking one could argue it “invites him” but it is an invitation backed by a threat – to pay £10,000 for breaching Regulation 5B of The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) Regulations 2020, as amended.

Regulation 5B was hastily made law last Friday 28th August, the day before the demonstration was held. It was introduced under an emergency procedure and was neither debated nor given even the most cursory scrutiny by any Parliamentary process. It permits the most junior Community Support Officer in the country to issue a Fixed Penalty Notice to the suspected organiser of a political event, demanding £10,000 to avoid prosecution and consequent financial ruin. Given its timing, even if it was not introduced with the purpose of targetting the organisers of a political protest against government policy, it very much has that appearance.

Statutory Instruments

All the relevant coronavirus criminal laws – the lock-downs national and local, the closure of businesses, the requirements to wear masks, to quarantine and so on – have been created by statutory instrument. (The Coronavirus Act 2020, though the target of much misdirected criticism, is largely irrelevant). For readers with legal knowledge I apologise for stating the obvious, but a “statutory instrument” is a law made not by Parliament, like an Act, but by a Minister under a delegated authority given by an Act of Parliament, the “parent Act.” In this case the parent Act is the Public Health (Control of Diseases) Act 1984, S.45C of which, gives the Minister of Health powers to make regulations:

for the purpose of preventing, protecting against, controlling or providing a public health response to the incidence or spread of infection or contamination in England and Wales (whether from risks originating there or elsewhere).”

These powers include [S.45C (3) (c)]:

imposing or enabling the imposition of restrictions or requirements on or in relation to persons, things or premises in the event of, or in response to, a threat to public health.”

Particularly relevant to Mr Corbyn’s fixed penalty, these restrictions can include [see S.45C (4) (b)]:

a prohibition or restriction relating to the holding of an event or gathering.”

There are limits to the regulations that can be made. Under S.45D:

Regulations under S.45C may not include provision imposing a restriction or requirement by virtue of subsection (3)(c) of that section unless the appropriate Minister considers, when making the regulations, that the restriction or requirement is proportionate to what is sought to be achieved by imposing it.”

The “appropriate Minister” is Mr Hancock, and he has dealt with that somewhat fatuous requirement by including within the preamble to the regulations the statement that he considers that they are indeed proportionate to what he seeks to achieve (“a public health response … to the threat of SARS-CoV-2 in England”).

A general challenge to the lawfulness of the regulations was rejected in Dolan v. Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2020] EWHC 1786, although the unsuccessful applicants in that case have since been given leave to appeal. Although I over-simplify, Mr Dolan argued that the regulations were outside (“ultra vires”) the powers delegated by the 1984 Act, and that they were incompatible with various rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, such as that to a private and family life and the right to associate.

The lawfulness of the 28th August amendments to the regulations which gave rise to Mr Corbyn’s FPN has of course not yet been tested in court.

Statutory Instruments: Parliamentary procedure

Generally a statutory instrument, though made by a minister and not Parliament, must go through some sort of parliamentary scrutiny process before it becomes or remains law. The exact procedure varies but however it is done there is no power to amend, and in practice it is almost unheard of for an instrument to be rejected or annulled. Between 1950 and 2015 only 17 out of over 170,000 statutory instruments were rejected by Parliament.

The last time the House of Commons exercised its power in this way was in 1979 when, probably as a result of some procedural confusion, it annulled The Paraffin (Maximum Retail Prices) Revocation Order. For reasons too technical to explain here (and which I don’t altogether follow myself) the effect was to cause the Privy Council to issue the The Paraffin (Maximum Retail Prices) Revocation (No. 2) Order which revoked the revocation. The rejoicing, if there was any, of those who objected to the removal of the cap on paraffin prices was short-lived. On the very same day the Energy Minister issued the The Paraffin (Maximum Retail Prices) Revocation (No. 3) Order, thus revoking the revocation of the revocation. Farcical is perhaps too kind a word for this sort of nonsense.

Parliamentary scrutiny of statutory instruments is in practice so minimal that it would be unfair on vestigia to call it vestigial.

(It is outside the scope of this blogpost, but one of the indirect effects of Brexit by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2019, has been to hand to Ministers the power to make statutory instruments on a hitherto undreamt of scale, including many powers to amend Acts of Parliament by ministerial decree, so-called “Henry VIII” clauses).

Coronavirus Regulations: Emergency Procedure

S.45Q of the 1984 Act provides that statutory instruments containing regulations under S.45C should not become law unless:

a draft of the instrument has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.”

In theory, if not in practice, this should ensure a higher level of scrutiny than most statutory instruments receive. That is quite sensible given that the regulations capable of being made under S. 45C have been described by a Lord Justice of Appeal as “possibly the most restrictive regime on the public life of persons and businesses ever, certainly outside times of war.”

However, since Parliament was in recess, this procedure could not be followed.

Emergency Procedure

How then could Mr Hancock create the law with which Mr Corbyn has been hit? The answer lies in Section 45R which allows for an emergency procedure – an emergency within an emergency if you like – where:

The instrument may be made without a draft having been laid and approved … if the instrument contains a declaration that the person making it is of the opinion that, by reason of urgency, it is necessary to make the order without a draft being so laid and approved.”

The regulations themselves do indeed contain such a declaration:

In accordance with section 45R of that Act the Secretary of State is of the opinion that, by reason of urgency, it is necessary to make this instrument without a draft having been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.”

Some might question why there was such urgency to make a law targetting event organisers with a £10,000 fixed penalty on August 28th when the instrument could have been made in the usual way, laying it before Parliament at any time between March and July, when Parliament was sitting and the incidence of the disease was much higher; or why it could not wait three days until Parliament returned from its summer holiday on September 1st, but Mr Hancock’s bland statement that he thinks such urgency exists is all the law requires.

There are a few more general points.

The regulations do provide a “defence” of a sort to the organisers of political meetings. They do not apply to events organised by a “political body” if the organiser has carried out a risk assessment and taken “all reasonable measures to limit the risk of transmission of the coronavirus.” It is possible that the ad hoc alliance of lock-down sceptics of which Mr Corbyn is a supporter comes within the definition of a “political body” under the regulations, but it is very improbable, given the aims of the alliance, that it had taken any measures, let alone all reasonable measures, to limit the risk of transmission.

Payment of the fixed penalty is optional, in the sense that payment of a speeding ticket it optional. If Mr Corbyn pays the £10,000 no conviction is recorded against him.

If he chooses not to pay the fixed penalty he can be prosecuted in the magistrates court for the offence of breaching the regulation, and if convicted he would be liable to an unlimited fine. He cannot be imprisoned for the offence itself, but if he refuses to pay any fine imposed he can be imprisoned as an enforcement measure. For a fine of up to £10,000 the maximum period of imprisonment in default is 6 months. For a fine over £10,000 it is 12 months. No-one can predict what fine a Magistrates Court might impose, but there is no maximum fine. Presumably the £10,000 fixed penalty figure would be taken as some sort of guide.

The 28th August regulations fix the FPN for someone involved in an unlawful gathering at £10,000. There is no discretion given to set a lower amount.

You might assume perhaps that – as some government publicity seemed to imply – that it is only the “organisers” of such a gathering that are at risk.  Your assumption would be incorrect. The S.5B (1) offence is not to “organise” but to:

“hold or be involved in the holding of a relevant gathering.”

Involvement” is not defined except to make clear that:

a person is not involved in the holding of a gathering if that person’s only involvement in the gathering is by attendance at the gathering.”

The implication is that without those words simply attending at a gathering would count as “involvement” in its holding.  Thus, the regulations seem to catch anyone who, for example, publicises a demonstration (perhaps by posting a tweet or a link on Facebook). Even chanting slogans or carrying a banner goes beyond mere “attendance.” This means that in practice virtually anyone attending a “relevant gathering”, or encouraging others to attend, can be liable to a £10,000 FPN.

The penalties can be issued by an “authorised person,” which include a police constable or a community support officer (see Reg 9 (13) of the No. 2 Regulations, if you are still with me). Some might consider it remarkable that any police officer can now issue the organisers of political meetings with a demand for a sum of money so large that very few private individuals would have a hope of paying, and quite extraordinary that this is a power given even to Community Support Officers.

The quasi-criminal procedure of the FPN was originally devised to deal with minor parking and traffic offences. Over the years their use has expanded, to include minor public order incidents, litter, dog fouling and the like. Until the Coronavirus Regulations the maximum amount of any fixed penalty was £500 (for permitting noise from licensed premises). The procedure has now been deployed, with 2 days notice and no Parliamentary scrutiny of any sort, to target the organiser of a political meeting with a sum 20 times greater than any fixed penalty ever before created under English law. This is unprecedented and deeply disturbing and no less so because it is being used against a crank.

The fact that Mr Corbyn may be a crank, and that many of those at his meeting may have had disreputable or even disgusting political opinions is quite beside the point. As Sedley LJ put it in Redman-Bate v. DPP [1999] EWHC 733:

Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having. … From the condemnation of Socrates to the persecution of modern writers and journalists, our world has seen too many examples of state control of unofficial ideas. A central purpose of the European Convention on Human Rights has been to set close limits to any such assumed power.”

I’m afraid Mr Corbyn will look to the European Convention on Human Rights in vain. The judges will say that the government was entitled to make the law that it did, and that even if his right to freedom of speech and assembly has been engaged, any restrictions were “necessary in a democratic society” for “the protection of health,” something specifically permitted under the Convention.

If Mr Hancock’s emergency law is upheld by the courts, as I expect it will be, so much the worse for the law. There may very occasionally be a place – in a true emergency – for significant changes to the criminal law to be made by ministerial proclamation, without warning, without debate and with no opportunity for Parliamentary scrutiny, but in a democracy those occasions should be kept to an absolute minimum. There are plenty of countries where decrees are routinely issued to prevent or deter political demonstrations. Why are we trying to emulate them?

 

(Since this blog was originally posted, a planned demonstration tomorrow on trans rights was cancelled, after the police warned the organisers that participants, stewards and even BSL interpreters might be arrested if it went ahead.  I am grateful to the commenter Anne Coombes (below) who drew my attention to this).

Liked it? Take a second to support Matthew on Patreon!

Author: Matthew

I have been a barrister for over 25 years, specialising in crime. You may also have come across some of my articles I have written on legal issues for The Times, Standpoint, Daily Telegraph or Criminal Law & Justice Weekly

44 thoughts on “Piers Corbyn may be a crank but his treatment should worry us all”

  1. Really interesting. I’ve been trying to make sense of the legislation and the constitutional aspects for months. Here in a Leicester we had police officers fining people for leaving the city by car when no such offence had been created. Rather, there was mere guidance advising only essential travel. It took 5 days of emails before I was able to secure a concession from the plods that they had no powers to prevent travel.

    Ditto British Transport Police. They thought they could prevent people boarding trains at Leicester station. Happily, a brief flurry of emails lead to them conceding matters within an hour.

    Our incompetent council forced shops to close three days before they were legally required to do so. Again, mere guidance was elevated to threats of prosecution for non- compliance.

    Hopefully, a big , hungry no-win / no fee firm of Solicitors will rock up to town and recruit enough people whose rights have been trampled on , to build a class action.

  2. We are sliding a slippery slope. Equally troubling is the general lack of liberty literacy in the general population. This is a fact not lost on the government. The vast majority of people think that well intentioned mistakes are being made by Government in the fight against covid and the fear remains very much alive. Piers Corbyn would hardly be the sort of folk hero to make most observers question is it fair to fine. Moreover they would likely think a great thing to fine the nut jobs who deny the pandemic.

  3. Piers Corbyn is not a crank, those that see what is about to befall us are often vilified by the majority.
    One maybe two years at most from now you will not be so flippant.You maybe an expert in your field but it is a narrow one.You do not have the slightest clue about who is pulling the strings ,always has and what they have planned for us.The treatment of Piers Corbyn gives you a clue if you are looking and to not see the obvious smear by planting the BUF flag at the meeting is really unforgiveable.
    Have you checked the science behind 5G and CO2 pollution nonsense, I check my facts before espousing opinions, perhaps you know more about science than Edward Teller? If you purport to know and are the best there is to offer then we are really in trouble you obviously have no idea about the trouble we are in.If only you were right to be so dismissive and disingenious I would take it whole heartedly with the greatest sigh of relief.But there is no stopping the Greatest Economic Depression of all time from unravelling , the societal channeling into salvery and the debasement of life itself all planned, I wish you good look your going to need it, how will you survive?Will you take the DNA altering Vaccine with ID chip and cashless society to take away one of your last and most important freedoms?The law will mean nothing, for those that dole out misery and have ruled over us for 250
    years it never did.I have no experience of the law but can see those that litterly get away with mass murder and still occupy seats of power.Brace yourselves ..
    https://www.kitco.com/ind/fekete/jul062009.html
    http://www.petitionproject.org/
    Awards are given to those that comply..

    “When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.”

    ~ Dresden James

    1. In fairness to Matthew, it is asking a lot of someone who has made the several heavy investments necessary for a successful career in law to hazard it all on a rash outburst of politically unacceptable opinions. We live in dangerous times and it is advisable, if one has a lot to lose, when making any criticism of the powers that be to cover one’s arse where one can. Deriding critics of 5g, Global Warming orthodoxy and opponents of compulsory vaccination with dangerous and effectively untested drugs does little if any real harm but has the merit that it reassures vested interests that while one may rock the boat one is not going to capsize it.

      1. Well he claims to be a barrister….which I thought was much wayer up than a standard ‘solicitor’, but he has never even heard of jury nullification/ perverse verdict? If things actually worked how we’re taught they’re supposed to work…surely first thing you’re taught in lawyer training school is that you are an employee of your client, you do as instructed (not your paymaster)…if i ever manage to get a caught date (with jury) and papers again (and money to pay somebody of course)…it would be a yes, i smashed up the camera of my neighbours who put me under 24/7 surveillance probably with audio and filmed me through my bedroom window as well, with those women…or i did break car window and remove it from my property so i can get access to my workshop so i could work for a living….but it’s not ‘guilty’ by reason self defence/ perverse verdict….gawd i’m tired but i hope you get the point…no lawyer forced upon you by the state will do what they’re told and even if i had the money doubtful then either…but even with a not guilty verdict in that kind of scenario…nothing to stop them going around again and again until they get the verdict they want….7/7 bombers for example. You can be sent to jail for years on a whim of a judge, no jury with the accusation being ‘you took your father to see a solicitor’….when the state had locked him up without trial and stole all his assets. They also putting people into jail for literally doing nothing, that is the official version! I don’t know Matthew…but highly unlikely he could afford his education without family money behind him…and has been priveleged and programed from birth, more so than the rest of us…..but I see hope for this guy, I try to look on bright side despite everything! You forgot to mention the bit about the rfid chip in vaccine, some say mark of the beast referenced in the bible…like they do to cats and dogs (mortality rate rumoured to be between 2 and 10%)…can’t buy food without it or travel or do anything, every movement you make recorded/ tracked for life by anonymous psychopaths. US military has already ordered I think it was 15 million doses, only 2 million of the non rfid version…..

  4. “I’m afraid Mr Corbyn will look to the European Convention on Human Rights in vain. The judges will say that the government was entitled to make the law that it did, and that even if his right to freedom of speech and assembly has been engaged, any restrictions were ‘necessary in a democratic society’ for ‘the protection of health,’ something specifically permitted under the Convention.”

    If this is the case, and Mr. Hancock saw an urgency for creating the instrument, it raises questions about why an instrument was not created to prevent the Black Lives Matter demonstrations in early June, or the “counter-demonstrations” the following weekend. Surely the government couldn’t view them as constituting anything other than a major threat to public health, given that a “lockdown” of the entire population (which was intended to prevent such gatherings, slow down the spread of the coronavirus, reduce fatality rates, and reduce pressure on the NHS) was still in effect at the time. And if they weren’t a major threat to public health, then it throws the whole basis for the lockdown into question.

    And why haven’t the 28th August amendments being used against Piers Corbyn not yet been used against the Black Lives Matter demonstration which took place nearby on the same day?

    It seems to me that certain political causes are being given a “free pass” to do as they like, while others are held to a higher standard.

    1. This is why I object to Mr Scott’s “These are not easy people to like, although no doubt there were some more reasonable folk amongst them as well.” Has he said that about BLM and Ex R?

      He should be asking whether the law is applied according to what one thinks rather than what one does.

      Piers Corbyn is not a crank but has committed threefold thought crime in that he is a Brexiteer; he attributes more power to the sun to affect the climate than to man-made CO2; and he has worked out for himself what he thinks about the Wuhan coronavirus.

      That crowd of various people he assembled with was well-behaved. No-one was attacking the police or the sculpture in Trafalgar Square, or anyone else. No-one was abusive.

      So why are some people allowed to run riot, to intimidate and disrupt, and to cause criminal damage and GBH? While others are not allowed to assemble peacefully to hold a rally?

  5. Matt Hancock should be accused and found guilty of a lot of things, but thinking? Really? That stretches credulity to breaking point.

  6. Ignorance of the law is no defence, but surely some leeway must exist in cases where something has been made illegal surreptitiously only hours before.

  7. You smear the London demonstration because of the alleged appearance of a fascist flag. The picture of the flag and it’s presence on Saturday is an easily disproved hoax. In the picture there are clearly Canadian flags flying outside the Canadian embassy. On Saturday there were no flags flying outside the embassy. It’s that easy. Who benefits when these lies are repeated?

  8. section 20 of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 states

    “The local authority shall compensate a person who has suffered any loss in complying with a request under this section, and section 57(2), (3) and (4) below shall apply to any dispute arising under this subsection.”

    Can business owners in the UK sue the councils for business losses they incurred?

    Australians in Victoria have just started a group litigation against the government for this very same thing.

    It’s about time we started this here

  9. Great post. And just for your info. I’ve spoken to a number of people who were at the protest and no-one actually saw this facist flag. Some people believe it was there to discredit the protestors. Although David Icke did attend there was no discussion of Qanon or 5G, and these are being used to discredit the protestors in the mainstream media.
    A number of medical professionals spoke – Dr Mohammed Adil, Dr Dolores Cahill, Dr. Vernon Coleman. As well as Corbyn’s arrest I am very concerned with the misinformation the mainstream media is putting out about the caliber of speakers and who the protestors are.

  10. Speaking as a lawyer versed in this type of thing, I would check the notice to see if the officer messed it up. They usually do.

  11. The infamous Roman Emperor Caligula used to proclaim new laws by posting them so high up on a column that people couldn’t read them. Then he could fine and punish people for breaking laws they didn’t know existed.
    Sound familiar?

  12. Also consider the situation in Australia with the Biosecurity Act 2015 – My reading of the Biosecurity Act 2015 indicates individuals may be under threat of 5 years imprisonment and/or a $63,000 fine if they refuse to be vaccinated as directed by the Director of Human Biosecurity, i.e. the Commonwealth Chief Medical Officer. See more background via this link: https://overvaccinationepidemic.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/will-fast-tracked-covid-19-vaccine-products-be-compulsory.pdf

    1. that is some scary s*** 🙁 Boris the clown was saying similar things last NOVEMBER (yep they knew way back then….)

      i refuse all so called medical attention for many reasons, too numerous to list here…….only way forward seems to take up arms now 🙁

  13. It’s a shame you didn’t mention the way the Germans have dealt with similar demonstrations. They tried to ban them, then realised it would be undemocratic to do so. The demos went ahead, and made the participants look like the prats they are. That is how it should work.

    1. Why do you find it necessary to describe people holding views you do not share as ‘prats’? It seems to be a common characteristic of those determined to believe any absurd story put out by agents of the Big State, global corporations, internationalists or petty tyrants in some form of uniform.

      1. It’s all part of the plan to stifle free speech and any real effective opposition,, been slow slide into this for nearly two decades now….they undermine and demean us at every turn and in worse cases they murder people to silence them or destroy them by chemically labotomising them by interning them in mental health prisons. Yes, they still do also destroy brains by electrocuting them in 2020…. Last time i checked the government stats was 2008…..but since 2001 to then there has been a 40% increase EVERY YEAR of the supposedly ‘crazy population’ in England and Wales, what the real numbers are I couldn’t found out. If anything it’s probably increased since 2008…..I’m still under constant threat of it for ‘life’, no trial or jury or anything if I speak about the things I know…..you ever heard of Melanie Shaw?

  14. Is it strictly true that the maximum amount of Fixed Penalty Notices was £500 untill the CV regs? The device has been deployed in a number of areas over the last couple of decades, as a means of arbitrary punishment that evades the Bill of Rights and Art6 of the ECHR Notably in relation to failures to enforce Home Office immigration regime.Recall Baroness Scotland. Penalties for renting property to or employing people who don’t have the proper immigration status can be thousands of pounds. Anyone carrying stowaways evading immigration checks can receive a civil penalty of £2,000 a head for failing to secure their vehicle. The alternative in each case may be prison, if you fail to prove you took proper steps.

  15. So much I want to write and reply to here, struggling to find time here atm though….I hope you will comments open for the next few days at least!

    But firstly, how is it even possible to comply a supposed law that you don’t know about?

    As the law hasn’t been debated in parliament, both houses and given royal assent…is it really a ‘legal law’? Maggie Carter anyone……can NOT be undone….right to Jury trail?

  16. Threat of ‘arresting’ people now (even though we have repeatedly established these psychopaths don’t know what the word means) rather than fine them out of existence or is it threat of both now? It really is a threat of violently abducting and gang raping people again 🙁

    I can only hope you have a conscience and won’t be reporting me to my perps for further abuse by talking here. From what I here some TI protests are still going ahead…… It’s like they’re trying to drive people to take up arms/ suicide bombings again…..Looks like that really is the plan AGAIN.

  17. Oh i must have misread something…he was ‘arrested’, therefore DOES have a criminal record? But sure you also said he wouldn’t have a criminal record if he paid the fine immediately….both can’t be right surely?

  18. I would like to enquire as to what you think these 5g conspiracies are?

    is it the FACT that it was created by DARPA to be used as a weapon against people? Is it the FACT that it really should be called 5000g, considering the range of frequencies that it produces and the 5g part that is available for communications is something like 0.5% of that spectrum range? What do you think the other 99.5% is capable of? maybe it’s the FACT that all these radio waves can be used to map you and everything inside of your own home, effectively in full 3d holoporn in real time and can be kept indefinitely? What kind of person would want this power…..? presumably the same kind of idiot psychopath who bragged when he was mayor of london that he knew where anybody and everybody was at any given time in London because of the rfid chips in oyster cards….believe they’re still labelling that also as a delusion and sectioning people for that to….they’re in bank cards to you know…..
    why do you think dementia rates is increasing massively all over the ‘civilised’ world? what else has changed substantially in our environment to cause this?
    please look at this map
    https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
    now, why do you think there are a lot less cases in Russia? They’re pretty much advanced as all the other advanced nations on this planet….so why so many less virus cases? Could it possibly be some truth in the speculation backed by knobel winning scientist no less that 5g really is suppressing the immune system, means more fatalities and greater transmission rates…did you know Michael Mansfield QC suffers from all these delusions to and is actually leading a court case against it? why has he not been ass raped in mental prison like the rest of us? too much money/ too much in public eye maybe….?

  19. i just noticed something, seems every single comment i post now not just here but everywhere being blocked/ censored now…..so thought just struck, might not me the page ‘owner’s’/ mods that are doing it but some third party? would like to know for sure Matthew 😉 so much more i wanted to say…..

    1. No Jake, no censorship, I was just too busy yesterday to check the comments. I always welcome comments and never censor them unless they are defamatory or otherwise potentially unlawful. The only exception is that there is an automatic spam filter on the site. It’s pretty good at dealing with the thousands of junk messages that bombard this (and other) blogs every week (they usually say something like “Hey I loved this post, it’s awesome” and then link to a porn or gambling site), but I’m afraid it occasionally slips up and blocks real comnents too. But not in your case, I just hadn’t checked at the right time!

      1. oh, thanks Matthew! I get censored in so many places tbh…people have their own view of things and ‘skew’ the discussion accordingly mostly…..and thing was I had left the page open, it does show the comment ‘awaiting moderation’…..but when I refreshed the page looked like they had all gone! But I can see them back now…glad to see you’re finally starting to wake up though, as to the kind of cuntry this is now….I woke up two decades back and they totally destroyed me for it 🙁

        http://jakemaverick.blogspot.com/

  20. Hi,
    I no connection to the legal profession, but I would like to pose a question. Do you think the “ambulance chasers” in the legal profession should be held to account for representing the illegal economic migrants flooding into our country?

  21. Thank you for the article. I have no legal knowledge so forgive if I am wrong but does the ’emergency procedure’ mean that anything could be classed as an emergency if the minister is ‘of the opinion that’ it is? And if so, would there be anyway of challenging the definition of the emergency? It appears to me that this could be used to justify almost anything for the sake of public health and it wouldn’t technically be unlawful.

    Thank you

  22. Thank you for the article. I have no legal knowledge so forgive if I am wrong but does the ’emergency procedure’ mean that anything could be classed as an emergency if the minister is ‘of the opinion that’ it is? And if so, would there be anyway of challenging the definition of the emergency? It appears to me that this could be used to justify almost anything for the sake of public health and it wouldn’t technically be unlawful.

    Thank you

  23. talking about ridiculous fines….this was what partially got me so heavily targeted I think! Came in late 90s if memory serves under Bliar….drunk people getting beaten up by pigyobs and frog marched to ATMs (not even an allegation of ‘disorderly’) …..how many of those fines actually ended up in government coffers do you think….more likely tax free bonuses for heavily armed psychopaths…shortly after making these comments, walking about from work (I stopped for one pint), probably about half ten/ eleven, lot of overtime then…..they got me, didn’t notice until i got home that my wallet was £50 lighter…then there’s the guy who got fined for talking to other people’s dogs? I mean wtf….I do that all the time! then there is the woman who got fined for reporting her stalker ex boyfriend for threatening to kill her amongst other things, unclear whether she actually paid the fine before he murdered her….to give a few examples. This is the cuntry it is now….it’s not the one I was indoctrinated into fighting for and laying down my life to protect…not been so for a long time!

  24. talking about ridiculous fines….this was what partially got me so heavily targeted I think! Came in late 90s if memory serves under Bliar….drunk people getting beaten up by pigyobs and frog marched to ATMs (not even an allegation of ‘disorderly’) …..how many of those fines actually ended up in government coffers do you think….more likely tax free bonuses for heavily armed psychopaths…shortly after making these comments, walking about from work (I stopped for one pint), probably about half ten/ eleven, lot of overtime then…..they got me, didn’t notice until i got home that my wallet was £50 lighter…then there’s the guy who got fined for talking to other people’s dogs? I mean wtf….I do that all the time! then there is the woman who got fined for reporting her stalker ex boyfriend for threatening to kill her amongst other things, unclear whether she actually paid the fine before he murdered her….to give a few examples. This is the cuntry it is now….it’s not the one I was indoctrinated into fighting for and laying down my life to protect…not been so for a long time!

  25. I grew up in South Africa where anyone of colour was designated ‘sub-human’. Black citizens were not citizens of RSA, they were transported to open concentration camps called homelands and employment was provided by ‘firms’ requiring slave labour. Once transported you could not afford to leave. I was horrified by the age of 18 that this was allowed to happen, I fought without getting thrown out of a 15th story jail window until I was 28 when I was finally arrested, blagged my way out and jumped on a plane to the UK. I have seen this all before folks, NO ethical decent government destroys our family life, our social life, our economic life. Note how lockdown has moved from preventing deaths to preventing infections. An infection without a death is good, it provides immunity for when the Chinese release Wuflu 20/21 – is Boris just terrified or thick or both. Note how the fines are getting bigger. The only people standing between us and a Nazi, Stazi, Pol Pot state, are cranks like Piers Corbin and decent barristers like Matthew Scott. Embrace them, support them. Remember the British have never experienced living under a totalitarian dictator, so like lambs to the slaughter they go. The only other alternative is riot, assassination, violent protest which will come 0nce Matthew Hancock has destroyed our economic life.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.