Again and again she shows very poor judgement.
For example, the Control Orders thing. The lawyers try to get around the right to justice ECHR rules by saying there are two types of Control Orders, the first one only needs Jacqui's say so, and any more restrictive one that would violate ECHR law need a court order.
By doing that they hoped to try to marginalize the right to judicial process as *optional*, depending on how strict the control order is. Of course it's not optional at all, there can never be any type of control order that doesn't comply with ECHR.
What it tells me is the lawyers know they're over the line, they know none of this shit can survive challenge, so they play lawyer games to delay the inevitable.
Same with the massive central government database of all communications context data. That's flat out illegal under the restrictions imposed by Article 4 of that directive. So they talk about 'efficiency measures' and 'implementation detail' to dress the violation of privacy as a technical measure so she can bypass Parliament.
The anti-p0rn law, likewise, the people chosen to make the 'research' report were chosen for their views to generate the report needed to support Jacqui own world view.
Here the underlings will restructure those comments, perhaps grouping them together, and assigning a straw man, then knocking it down. It's very much like she think she's dealing with children incapable of seeing through simple debating games.
She just shows incredibly poor judgement again and again. But Brown can't sack her, because she's one of his only loyal supporters, and she's a loyal supporter because she know this is the best job she'll ever have and it won't last much longer anyway.
It's sad you know, that the democratic controls have been so weakened that some off-reality politician can so damage the UK.