🚨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 most

https://t.co/NqjdiiAjqW
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
First thing to go is "open air recreation" which is what we suspected based on the guidance.

So this means that you can go out for exercise (or any other listed reasonable excuse) but not to recreate (is that the verb?).
Before I go on - this is going to sound a bit abstract unless I explain that the new "lockdown" is an amendment to the Tier 4 restrictions. Tier 4 was a lockdown but slightly less strict than March.

This is my thread on Tier 4 - perhaps read that first https://t.co/zkKiVO62cd
Some minor changes here to Exception 1 to being outside the home ("leaving home necessary for certain purposes").

Key point is the original reasons - work, voluntary services etc. etc. are still there

"public outdoor place" can't include sports grounds or facilities
Important to see that you still don't count a child under 5 or person with disability who needs continuous care when you are with someone from another household for exercise

Not in the guidance I think but maybe they don't want to publicise
Next change is to para 13 so the exceptions almost all stay in - see last thread https://t.co/DnXxk1DQfK
Paras 13 and 14 are about childcare. Some small but important changes:

I think it means that you can only provide informal childcare for "critical workers" in very limited circumstances

Tell me if I'm wrong
Children's outdoor sports gatherings removed as a reasonable excuse - we knew that from the guidance
Parents and child groups no longer permitted
What is important really is how similar this is to Tier 4:
- No open air recreation
- No parents and child groups
- More limited informal childcare options (I think)
- No children's sport or other outdoor sport such as tennis)
But otherwise its very similar
Elite sport and sport for people with disabilities is still permitted
Also well trailed in the announcements is the closure of outdoor sports facilities such as swimming, gyms, sports grounds
No alcohol takeaway
Have to pop off to eat, back later! That's basically it though, not much else changed from Tier 4
Oh, before I go, so as not to build tension, here's what's not in the law which is in the guidance :
- Time limit on outdoor exercise;
- Geographical limit on outdoor exercise
- Travel between areas.
I was indeed partly wrong on informal childcare, apologies https://t.co/s44qSsp88I
Charles has it here https://t.co/eY1P4nk7cD
I am going to wait until there is a consolidated version of the regulations to make a new video, hopefully tomorrow afternoon. I understand that the amended version of the regulations should be up tomorrow
All this remains in place https://t.co/5oaU0W3RjD
And this is still there https://t.co/ClJGeOkZwE
As is this - guidance has changed but not law re students https://t.co/vgsxo9nVvX
Communal worship still permitted https://t.co/94CtyjP41i
Linked households (bubbles) remain the same - exactly the same, people. Really important to get that https://t.co/VpcNmSAayM
One other error sorry - it is the carer of a person with a disability who needs continuous care who doesn’t ‘count’ for gatherings not the disabled person themselves https://t.co/Mpt5DLb0YX
The amendments have a sad little ending
Here is my unofficial and probably unreliable track changes version of the Tier 4 rules. Please don't rely on it, for illustrative purposes only! https://t.co/GmVC9GwjhN

More from Adam Wagner

A short thread on why I am dubious that the government can lawfully impose charges on travellers entering the UK for quarantine and testing (proposed at £1,750 and £210)

1/

The UK has signed up to the International Health Regulations (IHA) 2005. These therefore create binding international legal obligations on the UK.

The IHA explicitly prevent charging for travellers' quarantine or medical examinations.

https://t.co/n4oWE8x5Vg /2


International law is not actionable in a UK court unless it has been implemented in law.

But it can be used as an aide to interpretation where a statute isn't clear as to what powers it grants.

See e.g. Lord Bingham in A v SSHD https://t.co/RXmib1qGYD

/3


The Quarantine regulations will, I assume, be made under section 45B of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984

https://t.co/54L4lHGMEr

/4


That gives pretty broad powers but I can't see any power to charge for quarantine. Perhaps it will be inferred from somewhere else in Part 2A?

But...
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.
🚨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


“Large gathering offence”

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


Fixed Penalty Notices double for each subsequent “large gathering offence” up to £6,400

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


Second big change:

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


This will make it easier for police to enforce people breaking self-isolation rules. Currently there has been practically no enforcement.

Data says only a small proportion of people meant to be self-isolating are fully doing so.

More from Health

1/
Remember woman who tuk multiple @SriSriTattva products 4 range of problems frm diabetes 2 gas 2 liver disease & developed liver failure, listed for liver transplant?
Here is original thread:
https://t.co/PXxI1Slyv2
23 samples, Analysis results
#MedTwitter #livertwitter


2/
Before I go into results, I must say this was overwhelming. There was SO MUCH the lab identified, impossible to put everything here. So I made a summary. At the end of this thread, I have linked a full analysis described in Excel format. Some results were VERY concerning

3/
How did we analyse?
Here R links 2 methods
They R high end, done under strict protocols
Frm Ministry of Forest, Environment, Climate / NABL approvd Lab
ICP-OES https://t.co/O1CLhqVQAu
GC MSMS https://t.co/zRJoXyWQIr
FTIR https://t.co/goAembQ08p
Here is list V analysed 👇


4/
Sample names written on top (each column).
First 5 samples: C what we identified in #Ayurveda #medicines
Antibiotics
Steroids (anabolic/synthetic)
#NARCOTICS - LSD, Morphine
Blood thinners (possible reason Y bleeding tests were off the roof in the patient)
Heavy metals!


5/
Next 5 samples (total 10 now)
Mercury is clear winner. Almost all samples
See controlled substances - Butyrolactones https://t.co/CPz0FwPEOm, methylamine https://t.co/OZnXY7U9UQ
Alcohols, industrial solvents
Rare metals - cobalt, lithium
Again lots of blood thinners
#Ayush

You May Also Like

The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.