Armed with these quasi constitutional statutes, judges can now in some circumstances apply the law in ways which are contrary to
the unambiguous will of Parliament (albeit in human rights cases via the» shrewd compromise» of declarations of incompatibility).
ANDREW LANSLEY: Yes, I think he was right because the authority
of parliament frankly has been brought in to crisis point and that authority needs to be re-established not just in relation to the Speaker, but in so many other ways, which is why tomorrow for example, the scrutiny panel that David Cameron has established, that is going to be looking not only at making sure that everything we do is transparent and reasonable in the future on clear,
unambiguous rules, but we are going to look back, as indeed we've done in the Shadow Cabinet and said, it's not about whether we were within the rules, it's not about whether it was legitimate, it's actually about whether we have done something which is unreasonable, which the public would not regard as acceptable and that, that test, that tougher test is one we've applied to ourselves and we
will apply throughout the Conservative Parliamentary Party.