Welsh government promises Senedd politicians lying ban
www.bbc.com
Ministers promise a law before next election in 2026 in move to avoid an embarrassing vote defeat.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/445597

A ban on politicians lying will be brought in before the 2026 Senedd [the Welsh parliament] elections, the Welsh government has promised.

Counsel General Mick Antoniw […] promised that the law would disqualify Senedd politicians and candidates found guilty of deliberate deception from being a Member of the Senedd (MS). […] It is not yet clear whether the proposed law would make lying a criminal offence or a civil sanction. […] Mr. Antoniw said it was a “matter that goes to the heart of everyone”.

  • Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
    40·
    3 days ago

    A law like that would’ve been incredibly helpful back when those Brexit buses were claiming to somehow give the NHS £350M a week, most of which technically never even existed in the first place (as we got back something like 200M a week).

    Having Farage, Boris, and their cronies be forced to resign (or even face prison) would’ve been a damn delight.

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      6·
      2 days ago

      Authoritarian laws go both ways. The next right-wing government would use it to imprison their political rivals on trumped-up charges.

      If such a law had existed in the US, for example, Trump would have used it to throw everyone who denied that the 2020 election was rigged in jail

  • treadful@lemmy.zipEnglish
    172·
    3 days ago

    As much as I like the spirit of the idea, it honestly sounds pretty hard to enforce. What constitutes a mistake, bad memory, or a polished turd of a statement versus an act of deception?

    • ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml
      4·
      3 days ago

      I guess all public statements would essentially be “under oath” and would be held to that standard. So the questions would be 1) which statements are public and 2) what constitutes a lie.

      It can be proven that someone has lied - for instance, if they have said something on the record previously that indicates they had foreknowledge that what they said was false. It’d be a large administrative burden, so I imagine that only consequential lies would be prosecuted. But the law would also be ripe for abuse - an opposing political faction could scrutinize everything a public official says, sue them for everything that wasn’t true, and tie them up with court appearances and fees for a long time.

      Anyway, it’d be very difficult to consistently enforce this law and prevent it from being abused.

  • copd@lemmy.world
    151·
    3 days ago

    You wouldn’t have any politicians left? Or is that the whole point

  • bleistift2@feddit.orgEnglish
    6·
    3 days ago

    Awesome news. I hope it serves as an example to other governments.

    Also: Calling your parliament “Senedd” 👌

  • palordrolap@kbin.run
    3·
    3 days ago

    Meh. They’ll continue to lie until they get caught and then lie that they believed what they said to be the truth.

    Even, nay, especially in cases when that admission would indicate that they were an absolute clown lacking the capability to distinguish their rear end from their elbow.

    Lies upon lies until a lie is reached whose truth is hard if not impossible to prove and the whole stack of lies will rest on that in an uneasy balancing act.

    It’s not like they haven’t been doing that for centuries already. They attend courses on how to do it, for heaven’s sake.