As trailed by Home Secretary last week there is now a fixed penalty notice of £800 (or £400 if you pay within 14 days) for participating in an gathering of over 15 people in a private residence
🚨Important changes to lockdown/self-isolation regulations from 5pm
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (All Tiers and Self-Isolation) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021
£800 'house party' FPN & police can now access track & trace data
https://t.co/k9XCpVsXhC
As trailed by Home Secretary last week there is now a fixed penalty notice of £800 (or £400 if you pay within 14 days) for participating in an gathering of over 15 people in a private residence
Compare:
- Ordinary fixed penalty notice is £200 or £100 if paid in 14 days
- Holding or being involved in the holding of a gathering of over 30 people is £10,000
Since September has been a legal requirement to sell-isolate if you test positive/notified by Track & Trace of exposure to someone else who tested positive
Police can now be given access to NHS Track & Trace data if for the purpose of enforcement/prosecution
Data says only a small proportion of people meant to be self-isolating are fully doing so. https://t.co/LcwKfQ6PVx
Very important that obvious failures with Track and Trace and self-isolation (study late last year said 18% of people complying https://t.co/dhJUZ7Pm0l) are not painted as an enforcement issue. Plainly not. Would just pass buck to police who have almost no capacity to enforce https://t.co/Eb4Kl5Ze0E
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) January 25, 2021
They are only permitted to use that data for the purposes of Covid rules enforcement - but will they?
- Can police resist the temptation of using the data for other criminal enforcement purposes?
- Do we want the police having this information at all?
- Is enforcement going to make things better? Or make people less willing to share info?
\U0001f6a8Just caught these. Will be super quick
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) September 27, 2020
New legal duty to self isolate if positive test OR told by contact tracing system (not by app) to self isolate
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Self- Isolation) (England) Regulations 2020https://t.co/KNcNYNgcgH
How should the COVID-19 regulations be policed?
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) January 10, 2021
(Thread)
More from Adam Wagner
A year ago, the idea that you could close every restaurant, café and pub in the capital without a Parliamentary vote or even a debate would have been unthinkable. Today we have allowed government by executive decree and it now seems normal. Covid lawmaking has corroded democracy
To explain: since March, the government has used the Public Health (Control of Diseases) Act 1984 to pass lockdown laws - over 60 (I have listed them here https://t.co/5Z1p3gVjbX).
The lockdown laws have imposed stringent restrictions on movement, freedom of association, family life, religion etc. But each and every lockdown law passed has used the super emergency procedure which allows the government to pass them without a parliamentary vote for 28 days
The government did this for months before MPs revolted at which point it promised to put any major changes before parliament first. It has done this since the three tiers in mid-October.
BUT...
(1) The govt is still only giving parliament about 12 hours to consider laws and the vote is a simple yes or no
(2) Changes to tiered areas are not considered major changes so these don't go to a vote until 28 days later by which time it has usually changed.
To explain: since March, the government has used the Public Health (Control of Diseases) Act 1984 to pass lockdown laws - over 60 (I have listed them here https://t.co/5Z1p3gVjbX).
The lockdown laws have imposed stringent restrictions on movement, freedom of association, family life, religion etc. But each and every lockdown law passed has used the super emergency procedure which allows the government to pass them without a parliamentary vote for 28 days
The government did this for months before MPs revolted at which point it promised to put any major changes before parliament first. It has done this since the three tiers in mid-October.
BUT...
(1) The govt is still only giving parliament about 12 hours to consider laws and the vote is a simple yes or no
(2) Changes to tiered areas are not considered major changes so these don't go to a vote until 28 days later by which time it has usually changed.
🚨New lockdown regulations just published, in force tomorrow
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 3) and (All Tiers) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021
https://t.co/L5jwlTDaIE
(Thread)
These are not a new set of regulations: they are amendments an old set of regulations
Which we thought were gone! But they are back
Welcome back No.3 regulations
A quick thing before we continue!
I have been analysing these laws for free for 9 months now - if you want to say thanks and have a few £ to spare please give to my @LawCentres fundraiser
They give free legal advice to people who need it
They also amend the All Tiers regulations
Oh god it's all amendments by paragraph references
Basically all of England now in Tier 4 and Tier 4 is amended but not by a huge amount
This really is a terrible way to make laws on the fly - who can possibly understand it?!
So, to explain, you need 2 documents open if you want to understand what is going on:
All Tiers regulations (Tiers 1-4, 2 December as amended) https://t.co/IraPQ112ak
And amendments https://t.co/L5jwlTDaIE
No sensible way of doing except by track changes, on it now, back soon
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 3) and (All Tiers) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021
https://t.co/L5jwlTDaIE
(Thread)
These are not a new set of regulations: they are amendments an old set of regulations
Which we thought were gone! But they are back
Welcome back No.3 regulations
A quick thing before we continue!
I have been analysing these laws for free for 9 months now - if you want to say thanks and have a few £ to spare please give to my @LawCentres fundraiser
They give free legal advice to people who need it
They also amend the All Tiers regulations
Oh god it's all amendments by paragraph references
Basically all of England now in Tier 4 and Tier 4 is amended but not by a huge amount
This really is a terrible way to make laws on the fly - who can possibly understand it?!
So, to explain, you need 2 documents open if you want to understand what is going on:
All Tiers regulations (Tiers 1-4, 2 December as amended) https://t.co/IraPQ112ak
And amendments https://t.co/L5jwlTDaIE
No sensible way of doing except by track changes, on it now, back soon
More from Health
You May Also Like
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
