New English COVID legislation published

[Horizons83]

The new English legislation has just been published, so I thought it would be useful to summarise what the law actually says, rather than the guidance.

Please do not take this as an endorsement to disregard the guidance… but I do think it’s important that people understand when they are breaking the law and when they are merely not following guidance.

I’ve seen posts (not necessarily on MN) from people who refused to bubble up with a lonely relative over Christmas because they lived in a different tier from them, people who decided they could not go to the supermarket they could see from their window because the county boundary was in between – all of which were legally permissible under the Tier system.

The legislation is here:

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/8/contents/made

Basically, it tweaks the Tier 4 legislation and states that all of England is now Tier 4.

This is not a definitive list of the rules, but ones that I’ve been able to highlight from a quick review. It is for the general public only – employers obviously may have their own rules, or certain sectors will have other legislation they must adhere to.

Support bubbles

Support bubbles still exist in the same way as before.

Should you be in a support bubble this means that you are in effect treated as one household, living under one roof. You can therefore do anything you would do as one household. You do not need to stay in your local area to travel between each other’s houses – you could be opposite ends of England and still be able to travel to each other. You can stay overnight in each other’s houses.

Exercise

There is NO legal requirement to only exercise once per day. There is NO legal requirement to limit this to one hour.

There is NO legal requirement to only exercise within walking distance of your home. There is NO legal reason why you cannot drive across county lines to do that exercise.

You are only allowed to meet up with one other individual from outside your household or support bubble, and the reason must be for exercise in an outdoor space. However, children under the age of 5 DO NOT COUNT – so a parent and toddler can still meet up with one other parent and toddler to exercise.

Other reasons to leave home

The following are all permissible reasons to leave home . In every case there is NO legal requirement to only do those things if they are within your village/town/county. If your hospital appointment is in London and you live in Birmingham, that is absolutely fine to attend. If your local supermarket is in the next county, you can use it.

Work – where the work cannot be done from home. The work itself does not need to be deemed ‘essential’.

Voluntary services – these are still allowed, where they cannot be done from home.

Shopping for food and other goods – this is also permitted if you are doing it on behalf of a vulnerable person, or someone who is self isolating. There is no restriction on what goods you buy, they do not have to be deemed essential goods. Rather, if the shop selling the goods is legally allowed to be open, you can purchase from it.

Care of a vulnerable person – for example, elderly relatives who you cannot form a bubble with. It is perfectly legal to stay overnight with them.

Taking a child to their other parent’s house.

Attending to animal welfare.

Attending medical appointments and visiting family or close friends in hospital.

Attending other legally required appointments such as passport and visa services.

Social distancing

The requirement to keep 2 metres away from others not in your household or support bubble is NOT in the law, and as far as I am aware never has been. Of course, it’s very sensible to follow this guidance, but no-one is going to be arrested if they get too close to another person.

I hope that is helpful.

I'm not sure where you got your excerpt from?

The legislation looks to say:
(3) For the purposes of determining whether a person is complying with the limits in—

(a)sub-paragraph (2)(c)(ii) and (d)(ii), no account is to be taken of any person who is present as a carer for a person with a disability who needs continuous care (a “carer”),
(b)sub-paragraph (2)(c)(iii) and (d)(iii), no account is to be taken of a carer or a child below the age of five,
provided that, in either case, there are no more than two people present in the capacity of carer.

So it makes it quite clear that a carer is a person looking after someone who is disabled, not someone looking after a person under the age of 5. Unless, I guess, the child is the disabled person.

It is helpful.

But I think pointing out the 2m is guidance only and not law will allow some people to be reckless.

It didn't need highlighting. People should be doing their bit me keeping the distance where they can anyway.

It always said where you reasonably can.

@MargeryMcLatchie

I read a legal expert on Twitter ( *@adamwagner1* - Barrister and Professor of Law at Goldsmiths ) who noted that while you can exercise outdoors, they have removed the clause about "outdoor recreation" which would presumably imply you can't sit or loiter outside. I can't link to his thread but it's really informative

Genuine question - taking my toddler out requires a certain amount of “loitering” on my part, while she runs around. This is us leaving the house for her exercise, I assume this is legal?

The trouble with the law is that it also needs to be precise. So "socially distance where you can" is not precise, as "where you can" is open to intepretation.

I do think people should follow the spirit of the guidelines and not just the letter of the law though. For example, it might be legal to have multiple different types of bubbles but that's not what they are really intended for. On the other hand, taking your dog out for 2 half hour walks in a quiet local location is probably more in the spirt of the guidelines than driving to and spending hours in a busy area with lots of others.

Op or anyone,

I don't want to be outing but we had police in our town not allowing people to cross a natural border, over this boarder within a 2 miles radius is a large supermarket. We have two other supermarkets in the town, one is very hard to access the other expensive, a 3rd brand is just over the natural border.

Someone said they were going for a walk and the police said only accessed via the foot or cycle not car.

Genuine question - taking my toddler out requires a certain amount of “loitering” on my part, while she runs around. This is us leaving the house for her exercise, I assume this is legal?

Perhaps you could do star jumps on the spot if anyone questions it? :)

Exercise is individual to the person. DD has a foot problem and her exercise consists of: walk for a minute, stop for a rest, walk for a minute, stop for a rest, walk home. Not much for most people, but exercise for her.

I always wonder what it must be like writing such leglisation.

e.g.

(10) In paragraph 15(7)—
(a) in paragraph (e), omit “indoor arenas at”;
(b) after paragraph (n), insert—
“(o) aquariums and zoos, including safari parks;
(p) animal attractions at farms, wildlife centres and any other place where animals are
exhibited to the public as an attraction;”;
(c) in paragraph (t), omit sub-paragraphs (v) and (vi);

Thank you OP, I've been looking out for this to be published. It's still spaghetti law at the moment - a collection of amendments to two other sets of regulations - so I appreciate the summary.

The examples of police overreach on this thread show exactly why it's important to know what's guidance and what's law.

Thanks @Bumpsadaisie. I am trying to make sense of it... It is impenetrable to me!

A bit of confusion on my part: The document you linked to seems to mention exceptions for visits to the zoo- I'm fairly sure this is no longer permissible?

The documentation linked to by Bumpsadaisie is the old Tier 4 legislation. The legislation linked to in the OP lists the changes to old Tier 4 for the current lockdown. And this includes the closing of zoos.

AdamWagner's tweet mentioned above is good at summarising the changes.

Didn't the police get told to calm down and reign it in a bit last time? Why are they immediately jumping in with all this overreach again?

On a practical note, is there anything people can do when incorrectly hindered or challenged by the police? I mean, it would be pretty risky to ignore them and I don't imagine you'd get too far arguing about it?

Thank you @RedskyAtnight

On a practical note, is there anything people can do when incorrectly hindered or challenged by the police? I mean, it would be pretty risky to ignore them and I don't imagine you'd get too far arguing about it?

I have the legislation bookmarked on my phone

I also have a husband begging me not to get into a discussion with them if I am challenged. I pointed out to him that as I haven’t actually broken even the guidance a thing any point it’s unlikely to be an issue. But I will calmly state my case if needed.

Hopefully the last question from me: the law says no account is to be taken of 'a child under five' as opposed to 'a child/children under five'- does this make a legal difference or not? If my exercise buddy and I have a toddler each, are we still OK legally? Might be a daft question but I'd like to be sure.

have the legislation bookmarked on my phone

That would be an interesting conversation with the police, judging by how complex it is along with the amendments.

Thank you for posting this. I too would like to know what we can do if the police over-reach and make up their own interpretation.

I think I will bookmark it too.
I'm ok with sticking with the law - though I think it stinks if an elderly or less able person can't sit on a bench to catch their breath. Im not ok with police forces inventing their own rules.

Legally so what? We have to remember why we are being advised to follow these rules.

We don't have to witness people dying in ICU fortunately but if we did we wouldn't keep trying to push and find loopholes.

Legally so what? We have to remember why we are being advised to follow these rules

True.

But the police can't fine you if you aren't breaking the law.

@Littlebelina

mobile.twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1346513665193873412 link to Adam's thread

Thank you.

Also a list here on Sky: news.sky.com/story/what-are-the-new-lockdown-rules-across-the-uk-12179267

@lovelemoncurd

Legally so what? We have to remember why we are being advised to follow these rules.

We don't have to witness people dying in ICU fortunately but if we did we wouldn't keep trying to push and find loopholes.

No, the law does matter. It matters because people need to know what they can do, otherwise it can cause unnecessary anxiety and upset. My uncle and his wife provide some care to my gran who lives alone, she was very distressed when she was in tier 4 and they weren’t and she thought they weren’t allowed to see her anymore because they couldn’t enter a tier 4 area.

From Sky

You can leave your home to exercise outdoors once a day, but this should be within your local area

Sky are not quoting the legislation though. The relevant section does not say once a day. That is advice and Boris did say once a day but the law does not so you cannot be fined because you are doing something different to what Boris said.

For those with dogs too, exercising a pet is a separate category of reasonable excuse to leave your home to the category of exercise.

As for pp talking about some trying to find loopholes, this is not the case - the government have set out what is permitted under law and people are trying to familiarise themselves with this in order to comply with it and maintain their physical and mental health as well as any caring or other responsibilities.

If someone feels they need 2 walks a day for example in order to cope, the law does not forbid this. Pressure from others does not forbid this either.

The irony is that being challenged and forced to have a conversation with police increases their and your risk of virus.

I do think people should follow the spirit of the guidelines and not just the letter of the law though

Agree.
Which is why the law of ‘don’t be a dick’ also matters

The intention is that everyone should stay at home, unless it is essential to do otherwise, and reduce contact with people unless absolutely essential

They’ve still not updated the shielding advice (that I can find) so not clear if I’ll be OK to exercise from tomorrow

And I know it wouldn’t be illegal if I just decided to exercise outdoors anyhow.