Selectively then it would seem on the basis of “subsidiarity” I do criticise the Legal system for not being even handed, I can criticise on a fair basis. If the British Government can selectively promote HR for Matrix chambers to make a bomb out of immigration issues, shouldn’t the same be true of Banking retail misappropriations? AFter all the EU says they should. Conveniently Labour removed the 1988 Banking act, in 2005. And I have a letter from David Lammy re legal aid which interprets National interest as nothing more than convenience. Unfortunately ( I don’t know if it’s changed since) but the ECJ won’t hear a case from the U.K. unless it’s To challenge an SC hearing. So you see the argument of non implementation works both ways.