The Professors passion for "The Science of Deceit" started here...

Employed by the Ministry (in a covert capacity) to help introduce the law ending dishonest politics, you can see his hand all over the posts of past.

Current political circumstances have forced him to reveal himself and as we speak, MPs are signing up to re-introduce The Elected Representatives (Prohibition of Deception) Bill for debate with over 80,000 voters supporting them.

Posts before Jan '08 are purely for the record (with hindsight they make fascinating reading). Posts after May 13th mark the Professor's return.

Meet the Professor

Monday, January 07, 2008

Law Against Lying Passed !!!!!

Sincerest apologies for the lack of posting.

We've been inundated with questions, abuse, requests etc.

Most of the abuse came from the armchair politician brigade, requests from schools and universities asking to show the programme - one of which led to a rather extra-ordinary discovery.

A professor of law asked us whether our proposed Act hadn't in fact already been dealt with by the Fraud Act 2006 (introduced in 2007), "This Act effectively criminalises
lying. See the article by Professor David Ormerod ('Criminalising Lying', Criminal Law Review, 2007, March, pages 193-219) and sections 2,3 and 4 of the Act itself "

Whilst our interviewees were chatting to us on camera, sputtering about how "you can't have a law against lying" (Jack Straw, Lord Falconer etc...), it seems that if they'd been in the legislative chamber they'd have noticed the aforementioned Act being passed onto the statute books (isn't that what we pay them for ? -Ed) and rather taking the wind out of our sails.

The old Fraud Act requires a material gain (or infliction of loss) by deception, the 2006 Act requires only the intention to make that gain or inflict a loss via deception. Indeed, it goes so far as to state the deception can be made by simply witholding material information. We've consulted the various oracles and all of them concur - depending on your definition of material gain, the Act effectively makes lying a criminal offense.

The question is - can it be applied to elected representatives making misleading statements ? If they hang onto office, or obtain an office is that a material gain ? If they cause someone else to lose their office have they inflicted a material loss ? On the surface the answer appears to be yes and certainly all the lawyers we've spoken to have said they'd be happy to have a crack at it in court (they would wouldn't they ? -Ed). Unfortunately, because the law's only just been introduced there's little in the way of case law to guide us.

Needless to say, if anyone out there's interested in having a crack don't let us stop you

Meantime, our job seems to have been done some time ago. Regrettably no-one, including the law-makers, realised.

'Nuff said.


  1. Hahahahahah! Hahahahahah! Fabulous! Oh pleeeeeeeease let someone pick this one up! I really really really can't wait!

    Mind you, I'm not going to hold my breath!

  2. The whole concept of "material gain" makes it vary vague... It seems to easy to build a defence against. For example the MP can claim that he didn't realise that leaving a bit of information out of a speech would allow him to keep his job (a perfectly valid thing to say), and then the subsequent promotion to the cabinet was a completely unrelated event and would've happened anyway.
    I would still like to see a bill which explicitly held MPs to account, and made it their duty to disclose all pertinent information at their disposal without spin or misdirection.
    I guess at the end of the day we'll have to see what happens with the Fraud Bill, and what constitutes "material gain".

  3. We should all stick a few quid in the pot to launch a test case. I'm sure the Blah! Party would back the idea.

  4. Faaaantastic!!

    I really hope someone does sue.
    Getting Dari Taylor to answer my Letters is like talking to a brick wall.

  5. Sadly any law against laying does not extend to the Duchy of Cornwall.

    How to make a county disappear:

    Well I don’t have the exact formula but if you study this website from the Duchy of Cornwall Human Rights Association you’ll be able to see exactly the constitutional loops the establishment and Duchy authority have jumped through to turn Cornwall, an extraterritorial crown possession legally separate from England, into a supposed English county.

    This site explains how a British territorial possession became someone’s private estate.

    It makes great and fairly easy reading and should be studied by all those interested in the UK constitution. For more details of the Duchy scam you can listen to the person behind the Duchy of Cornwall Human Rights Association, John Angarrack, in interview on BBC radio Cornwall talking about his new book here: