Theft Act..A Regular Dog's Breakfast?

So I have just finished the area on Theft pursuant to the Theft Act 1968 and of course I have been introduced to the controversy surrounding the definition of some of the key elements found in s 1(1) of the 1968 Act. After having dutifully read my cases, well the analysis of the cases, I have come to the conclusion that I need to read some journal articles dealing with the topic to gain a betetr insight. But oh, what a flurry of worries have I now opened because every Tom, Dick and Harry believes that he/she possesses the remedy for the deficiencies found in the act. One journal I read refer to the Act as "execrable", s 6 dealing with 'intention to permanently deprive' was cast off as 'regular dog's breakfast'.

"Regular dog's breakfast" is that a colloquial expression? I thought, wow, these critics are harsh. Hmm, if this saying has an established meaning in England, I would be delighted to hear it. For I, myself thought it to mean of such poor quality.

And so I am on to Fraud and I am ashamed to confess that I have not reviewed criminal damage but I have my finger on it, somewhat. So off to work I go until next time.