First thing to say: this is another completely new system.
We have had national restrictions, local restrictions by separate regulations, the first lot of Tiers (1-3), a second national lockdown, new Tiers (1-3+) then Tier 4 added, third national lockdown
Now we have… Steps.
So, instead of being 4 tiers, there are 3 “steps”.
Step 1 is the most severe (confusingly as Tier 1 was the least severe)
Steps work like the Tiers, in that they apply to specific areas.
But at the moment, all we know is that Step 1 applies to all of England from 29 March
I considered really leaning I to the Steps theme, and starting sections of the thread with “Tragedy!” and other such hilarious references to this 1990s institution, but I couldn’t find the enthusiasm. I’m sorry, please add your own jokes.
NON-COMMERCIAL BREAK
I do regulations explaining for free, it takes time but I’m happy to do it.
If it makes you happy (or at least, not more sad) then please give a few £ to my @lawcentres fundraiser - get it to £35k!
I will get on to what the Steps mean - although to ruin the surprise, they are basically the government’s roadmap put into law gov.uk/government/pub…
For long time followers, you will recognise the three steps as similar to the previous tiers 1-3
The steps will presumably kick in on the dates already set out by the govt in the roadmap (unless they change that). So
Step 1 - 29 March
Step 2 - Not before 12 April
Step 3 - Not before 17 May
And can I just say: releasing these a week before start coming into force, and in fact months before the other bits come into force, is a big 'step' up (if you excuse the pun) from the previous habit of doing it at the very last minute.
What about Step 4 (not before 21 June). Well, like Tier 4, this will I assume come later because… the government doesn’t want to get people excited?
But before we get there, let’s talk about international travel - the first really big new thing in these regulations.
The ban on travelling out of the United Kingdom without a reasonable excuse
"8.—(1) No person may, without a reasonable excuse—
(a) leave England to travel to a destination outside the United Kingdom, or
(b) travel to, or be present at, an embarkation point for the purpose of travelling from there to a destination outside the United Kingdom."
Note the careful wording - this isn’t a ban on being outside out of the UK without reasonable excuse. Because (I assume) UK authorities have no jurisdiction as to what happens outside.
The ban is on traveling to or being at an “embarkation point” to travel out of the UK.
Previously, the ‘holiday ban’ which the government had advertised was assumed rather than explicit - because going on holiday wasn’t a reasonable excuse, it was assumed you couldn’t be outside of your home to do so. But now it is explicit.
What are the potential reasonable excuses?
Spoiler: going on holiday isn’t one of them
Work, volunteering, studying, elite sports, legal obligations, medical reasons, care and assistance to vulnerable person, wedding of a close family member
Another quick break - the really excellent @BHumanPodcast discussion on the ethical and human rights implications of vaccine passports has just gone up on YouTube
Back to travel
If you do travel or are at an embarkation point without a reasonable excuse then you would be in line for a £5,000 (!) Fixed Penalty Notice
If you are travelling outside of the UK, you also have to fill in a ‘travel declaration form’ (this was recently added to the All Tiers Regulations, but those are disappearing so it's coming here - penalty for not doing so a lot less, £200
OK, now on to Steps 1, 2 and 3 and what they mean.
As I said, Step 1 begins on 29 March when these regulations come into force.
I'm not going to do this in detail as I have a meeting in 5 minutes but I'll tell you the big things.
Outdoor protest is back!
Well, socially distanced protest organised by "a business, a charitable, benevolent or philanthropic institution, a public body or a political body"
Well done to everyone who campaigned for this, including my clients @ReclaimTS - though the position has been far too muddled and restricted in recent months, see tweets passim.
Annoyingly, to understand what a "political body" is, and it isn't quite what you think, you have to go to some random other regulations.
Another big change in Step 1 from the current position is that rather than 2+ gatherings outdoors being banned, it's now back to the 'rule of 6' OR two households together - as the govt told us a few weeks ago
And, there is no longer a rule against leaving or being outside the home without a 'reasonable excuse' - unless you are at a travel embarkation point.
I do now have to take a break - will be back soon, please read amongst yourselves
I'm back 👋🏻
Still in 'Step 1', which is 29 March to (not before) 12 April
Basically, it's the current Tier 4 restrictions but:
- Protest
- Just gatherings outside and inside restricted, no 'don't leave/be outside home without reasonable excuse'
I'm not going to do all the exceptions - I have done them before and they are basically the same as the current lockdown
- work, volunteering, support groups, weddings up to 6, funerals up to 30, students can gather to come home for Easter, communal worship, picketing, voting...
What then changes on or after 12 April?
Step 2 is in Schedule 2
(improvement on Tier 4 being in Schedule 3A but these are very small mercies)
Pretty similar to Step 1, rule of 6 outside and 2 inside, ...
I should have said earlier that 'linked households' and 'childcare linked households' (known in the guidance, confusingly, as support bubbles and childcare bubbles) look exactly the same as previously.
Back to Step 2
'Non essential retail' opens, personal care e.g. hairdressers and nail salons, libraries, community centres, gyms
Marriages go from 6 to 15 people
As do commemorative events after a persons death
3rd image is from the roadmap not the regulations
Oh, from Step 1 day (29 March) outdoor sports permitted, but not kickabouts in park over 6 people/2 households, has to be organised within the meaning below. So you can book a pitch at 5-a-side but not organise one in the park for 10 people who dont live together. Got it?!
A lot of people understandably asking about the international travel ban.
This is a really big deal, doesn't e.g. allow couples who live in different countries to meet, but does allow parents who live in different countries to travel for childcare. Harsh - is it lawful?
Also, the international travel ban is not linked to any "Steps", it lasts until these regulations expire which is end of June. Obviously it is possible the govt will bring in new regulations before expiry which is what it has done 70 times since last year
Step 3, which I think is a lot like Tier 1 (remember the Tiers, when we made jokes about tears? Seems so many regulations ago) is basically:
Rule of 6 inside
Rule of 30 outside
The government roadmap explains it clearly - basically more businesses open, bigger outdoor events, 30-person weddings (attendees!)
There is a lot more - 94 pages, over 40,000 words, but a lot of it is rules we have seen before, or at least I have.
I will try to do a video soon
Then, from June, could we be... regulation free? I truly hope so
As legal articles all seem obliged to end: only time will tell
I think the reality is that many of these regulations will continue beyond June:
self-isolation
travel rules
face coverings
large gatherings
But who knows.
I actually searched 'famous Steps songs' to make a final joke but literally didn't recognise any of them except Tragedy
Sorry not to have highlighted this: The travel rules do not apply to the "Common Travel Area" which includes "the Islands (that is to say, the Channel Islands and Isle of Man) or the Republic of Ireland" - see interpretation section and legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/77/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This sounds like a very important ruling. The first successful court challenge against the lockdown regulations, as far as I know. The rules in Scotland were different to England were communal worship has been allowed throughout the last two lockdowns bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla…
Here is the official summary. Fascinating! Ties constitutionality to proportionality. Finds Scottish government had failed to show less restrictive measures would have achieved the public health aim judiciary.scot/home/sentences…
As I have said repeatedly over recent weeks, the right to *peaceful* protest should be protected and every attempt to diminish it should be opposed - *peacefully*.
The bill which this protest is supposedly about won’t make a jot of difference to violent protest, which is already unlawful and unprotected by human rights law.
The bill is troubling because it could criminalise a wide range of *peaceful* protests.
I appreciate there has been a lot of confusion about what the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is going to do.
Key to understand is police *already* have powers to impose conditions on protests if "necessary to prevent disorder, damage, disruption or intimidation".
Good thread.
Covid is almost the perfect example of where a public inquiry would be good for society:
- Hugely complex issue,
- politically charged so judicial approach an advantage
- a decade until the next (likely) pandemic so thorough process both possible and useful
- the idea that a public inquiry would be ‘too costly’ seems odd in this context where mistakes likely led to tens of thousands of lives lost *and* billions lost from economy
- Ultimately, the litmus test is whether the people who are saying “let’s move on and not rake over the coals” are the very people who are likely to be in the crosshairs from an inquiry.
- with power comes responsibility and scrutiny cannot be avoided forever
This is just wrong - legally. Protest has not been banned in total under the current lockdown. See the judgment of Mr Justice Holgate in the @ReclaimTS case from last Friday. Should be published this afternoon
"He also submits, correctly, that it is inappropriate to treat the 2020 Regulations as if they give rise to a blanket prohibition on gatherings for protest"
(I should point out that although I am specialist advisor to this inquiry I had no part in this report - as it happens my year long post ends today)
The Committee makes the important point that the regulations are very unclear as to how powers of enforcement can be used against protest (this point was not addressed in the Dolan case but does raise the possibility the regulations are not compatible with Article 11)