I have no idea if they are substantially different or not - the explanatory note is extremely sparse!
I'm not going to be able to spend the next hour reading the 91 pages for you I'm afraid!
Interestingly, there has been no amendment yet to the Steps regulations to put the country into Step 3 from Monday, or to get rid of the "reasonable excuse" requirement for foreign travel. This is either coming shortly or the govt is going to delay it.
I was involved in a campaign at my university to stop David Irving coming to speak, which was successful. It would have been utterly ridiculous (indeed, grotesque) he had been compensated for being disinvited.
I think there are complex issues around freedom of speech and speech which is not illegal, but I am confident those issues are better dealt with on the ground then by some government quango which has been expressly set up to protect particular political viewpoints
The particular example of David Irving is instructive. It was not clear cut that he would be disinvited (indeed, he was reinvited a 2 years later), but there was a thoughtful campaign and debate. There was no attempt to involve law which is not always the sharpest tool in the box
The Prime Minister has confirmed that "Step 3" restrictions will come into force, as expected, from Monday 17 May. Short summary in the thread below (which also explains the context).
What you won't find in the regulations is the "you can now hug" rule - that's because the recommendation against hugging has been part of social distancing guidance, not law.
But we are now all so hopelessly confused about the difference that I forgive you
What is really important is that I can from Monday update my thread on the indoor 'sex ban' - a real ban, illegal - for people who don't live together and aren't in a linked household, in place in some parts of the UK for well over a year!
I deal with contempt of court cases fairly regularly (as it happens in the environmental protest context) and there are strong appeal rights from the High Court - you don't need permission and legal aid generally available. Supreme Court (v unusual procedure) has no clear...
... right of appeal. I am being a bit lazy by not looking up whether in certain circumstance lack of appeal right might be a breach of Article 6 ECHR (right to fair trial), I do recall reading somewhere there is no right of appeal in Art 6, but contempt interesting jurisdiction
Since posting this I have received many messages from people in similar positions - stuck in hotel quarantine after clear medical evidence given to the 'exemptions team' that they cannot safely be there. Can I encourage journalists/parliamentary committees to look at this issue?
I am concerned the 'exemptions team' are refusing many requests which they should not, in law, refuse - where there is compelling medical evidence that a person cannot safely be held in hotel quarantine because that would exacerbate a condition, they should never be refusing.
Now Turkey has been added to the “red list“ anyone who travels there has to hotel quarantine for 10 days upon return.
But in any case it would currently be illegal for fans to travel there for a football match as that wouldn’t be a ‘reasonable excuse’ bbc.co.uk/sport/football…
You have to have a ‘reasonable excuse’ to travel outside of the UK at present. That will change, I assume, for ‘green list’ counties and maybe ‘amber’ but won’t I imagine for red list legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/364/…
It is currently a reasonable excuse for elite sportspersons and coaches to travel abroad