Sensible shoes and open-neck shirts instead of combat fatigues if @instituteforgov podcasts take over state media

To follow @jillongovt & @cath_haddon points about the cab sec’s decision that govt work on this bill is compatible w civil service & min codes, a meandering thread https://twitter.com/anthonyzach/status/1304141493289050116

1) having taken the job in these circs, and given where we are, I don’t see how in practice Simon Case could have made a different decision. The CS can’t up sticks and just refuse to work on it. That would be counter productive for the CS as much as anything

2) that doesn’t mean the CS and the law officers couldn’t have done more to stop us getting here. But usual mechanisms to step back from brink aren’t operating - law officers and Lord Chancellor (we assume) not taking a stand, (ex)cab sec on way out so resignation threat absent

See my thread on prisoner votes - we got close a few times, but through creativity and keeping things ambiguous we stayed the right side of the line. No resignations, no breaches of the law. That’s how it’s “supposed” to work (rightly or wrongly, still many flaws in that process) https://twitter.com/alexgathomas/status/1303431849092546568

3) as has been said, the govt’s arguments about Parliamentary sovereignty don’t wash. Parl can legislate how it likes, but the treaty and int’l law obligations bite on the *govt*. And in introducing the bill the govt has taken an active step over the line into unlawful activity

4) which means a check on govt acting unlawfully - the fact that the CS won’t work on something that breaches govt legal obligations - no longer exists, in my view. Like so much of UK constitution it’s theoretical, reliant on institutional respect and unable to withstand attack

5) none of this makes indiv civil servant decisions about what to do easier. The cab sec ruling, based on the AG’s advice, justifies those CSs who are prepared to work on it doing so. But others will decide they can’t. I think that can only be an individual decision...

... based on an individual’s personal situation, their assessment of the law and the significance of the breach, and whether they feel it’s better for people to rally round or depart. I’ve no doubt that Jonathan Jones, having taken the hit for the team, will urge others to stay

6) I do think this will have ramifications for a long time inside the CS (as well as all the other well-documented consequences). It is a significant erosion of the political-administrative compact that has held despite all the strains for a long time

Whatever your view of the wisdom or coherence of the political tactics, introducing performative legislation that stretches civil service loyalty and duty in this way isn’t a great look

All’s fair in love and war, and government, and in the end I’m an optimist and think we’ll reach a more stable point, but there will be more turbulence before we get there. Keep your seatbelts on.