As before, a large majority given out to younger (under 35) men
19% of Fixed Penalty Notices have been given out to black and minority ethnic people - assume mostly young men as well.
Face covering fixed penalty notices also up to highest levels
Have suggested along with others for months that fixed penalty notices should include right of appeal. At present you can either pay or risk prosecution. No right of review as with a parking fine. We have seen how often police misinterpret the rules...
This is hardly the first time that the courts have said the Secretary of State should be given the benefit of the doubt on judgments national security.
But...
The courts (and the Human Rights Act) are supposed to be a safety net to temper executive power.
And that is particularly important when political decisions are taken at the expense of an individual's rights because the person is unpopular and the decision is therefore popular.
You may say Sajid Javid had only security motives when stripping Begum of her citizenship.
But consider, for a moment, if he did not.
What check and balance is in place to ensure she has a fair chance of revealing that?
Just reading this absolutely fascinating Lords debate on the 2008 amendment to the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 which inserted the part which has allowed for the Covid-19 regulations to be issued hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2008-05-…
Vaccine passports (to access venues, jobs etc) are another difficult, almost paradoxical, COVID issue from a rights perspective. Can both interfere with (privacy, discrimination) and enable access to (gatherings, family, 'open society') rights. Not straightforward.
I pointed out a similar rights paradox (I realise that's not really the right word) about lockdown. If we had locked down earlier and more strictly, we may still have had 175 days of it (see previous tweets) but less disease and deaths. unherd.com/2021/02/the-da…
But 'current pain for future gain' is itself a slippery slope as a justification for policies, so needs to be carefully considered.
I heard an interesting podcast about how privacy concerns may have led to a missed opportunity for use of real time data with contact tracing apps
One of the sad and largely untold stories of the year-long lockdown is it has been illegal for many people who don’t live together to meet indoors, meaning many in relationships haven’t been able to meet. @susie_alegre makes good points in this article cityam.com/squeamish-mini…
This has in my view been a huge oversight by the govt which has responded to calls from, for example, people with babies under one who are lonely to be able to form a linked household. It would have been simple to allow people in established relationship to form linked households
Some gatherings are prohibited but if you read the law itself there are many exceptions including where reasonably necessary for:
- Work
- Volunteering
- Accessing social services
- Assisting vulnerable people
- Suport groups
- Avoiding harm..
First up is the new requirement to book tests on days 2 and 8 after arriving in the UK. The helpful explanatory memorandum is the third image.
Note that these are amendments to another regulation (legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/568/…) so very difficult to follow. As per usual. Inexcusable that these have been published *zero* working days before they come into force and will not be scrutinised by Parliament at all before they do