Undue Credit

Irresponsible and un-Christian left-wing firebrands at the Court of Appeal have once again put forth the long-discredited and irrational idea that the Government has some sort of obligation to keep within the law, even when engaged in its sacred vocation of poor-bashing. Scroungers, shirkers, migrants, anti-semites and other undesirables will no doubt recall the case of Cait Reilly, who was ordered to quit her voluntary work at a museum and go shelf-stacking at Poundland instead, in return for a similar lack of wage and an additional lack of prospects for proper employment. Reilly took the Government to court, was duly defamed as a graduate snob who thought humble labour was beneath her, and won her case because the Department for Workfare and Privation had thought it beneath themselves to provide appropriate information to people who were, after all, scroungers. The brilliant Iain Duncan Smith retaliated by shunting an emergency law through the Commons saying that he had been right all along, and was abetted by the Liberal Democrats and the glorious, election-winning pre-Corbyn Labour Party. Being the brilliant Duncan Smith, he also decided that his legislative patch-and-bodge applied retroactively, to those scroungers and shirkers whom the Idleness Police had sanctioned before the new law came in. The High Court and Court of Appeal have now both ruled that this was unlawful under the Human Rights Act, thereby emphasising once again that the beastly Euro-wogs have been sneakily giving human rights to the work-shy. The new Christian philanthropist at the Department for Workfare and Privation, who has sued his own constituents over the bedroom tax, is "considering the judgement"; though whether he can rival his predecessor's moral and intellectual incandescence remains to be seen.