The new "rule of six" -- and the absence of an SI
Discussion
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
In March, I reluctantly agreed with lockdown as a policy. I was always very concerned about (1) the highly dodgy legal methods used to effect it, and (2) the over zealous enforcement of it by police etc.
Over the months, my concerns as to (1) and (2) have increased. I have also read the non-crazy scientific stuff produced by many people who oppose the SAGE line. Thus I have changed my mind, and I now regard lockdowns as a stupid policy.
But for some, the issues have become religious, and they are incapable of even beginning to see that the opposing view might have any merit. This is, of course, assuming that the views they express are sincerely held, and are not just an exercise in a form of rather duff sixth form debating.
In March, I reluctantly agreed with lockdown as a policy. I was always very concerned about (1) the highly dodgy legal methods used to effect it, and (2) the over zealous enforcement of it by police etc.
Over the months, my concerns as to (1) and (2) have increased. I have also read the non-crazy scientific stuff produced by many people who oppose the SAGE line. Thus I have changed my mind, and I now regard lockdowns as a stupid policy.
But for some, the issues have become religious, and they are incapable of even beginning to see that the opposing view might have any merit. This is, of course, assuming that the views they express are sincerely held, and are not just an exercise in a form of rather duff sixth form debating.
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
unident said:
Where have I said I “enjoy people being restricted”?
It is obvious from your conduct. I think that clarifies who enjoys others being locked up.
I offered some weeks ago to wager that Johnson would call a lockdown on or before 1st November. Nobody took me up on the wager - you are all far too sensible!
Thus, rule by a bunch of maths geeks with computer models rolls on. Do we think that anyone is in charge at Downing Street? Any bets on when the next lockdown will be? February maybe? When will the penny drop? A year? Longer?
Vaccine? Floreat Oxonia! But it looks a long way off still.
Thus, rule by a bunch of maths geeks with computer models rolls on. Do we think that anyone is in charge at Downing Street? Any bets on when the next lockdown will be? February maybe? When will the penny drop? A year? Longer?
Vaccine? Floreat Oxonia! But it looks a long way off still.
Breadvan72 said:
I offered some weeks ago to wager that Johnson would call a lockdown on or before 1st November. Nobody took me up on the wager - you are all far too sensible!
Thus, rule by a bunch of maths geeks with computer models rolls on. Do we think that anyone is in charge at Downing Street? Any bets on when the next lockdown will be? February maybe? When will the penny drop? A year? Longer?
Vaccine? Floreat Oxonia! But it looks a long way off still.
TBH, rather than it being announced like it was today, my thinking was we'd end up there by BoJo spending November gradually increasing every area around the UK into Tier 3. Then, in the first week of December, he'd claim that as every area was now Tier 3 anyway it would be an ideal time to lockdown until Jan '21 and portraying himself as some form of hero saving Christmas for everyone Thus, rule by a bunch of maths geeks with computer models rolls on. Do we think that anyone is in charge at Downing Street? Any bets on when the next lockdown will be? February maybe? When will the penny drop? A year? Longer?
Vaccine? Floreat Oxonia! But it looks a long way off still.
Of course everyone else would assume he was more like one of the bungling burglars in Home Alone
Actually that's unfair - surely even the burglars had more common sense 
agtlaw said:
Thank you for the link, agt.Interesting to note on the link within it:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-1...
GOV.uk said:
If you have a positive COVID-19 test result
If your test result is positive, you must continue to self-isolate for 10 days from when your symptoms started, or when your test was taken. Anyone who is notified that they have tested positive for COVID-19 and advised to self-isolate has a legal duty to self-isolate. Failure to comply may result in a fine, starting from £1,000.
You will receive a request by text, email or phone to log into the NHS Test and Trace service website and provide information about recent close contacts. This information will be used to give public health advice to your contacts, but they will not be told your identity.
It is very important that you provide this information, as it will play a vital role in helping to protect your family, friends and the wider community. It is now an offence to knowingly provide false information about your close contacts to NHS Test and Trace and failure to comply with these requirements may result in a fine.
If your test result is positive, you must continue to self-isolate for 10 days from when your symptoms started, or when your test was taken. Anyone who is notified that they have tested positive for COVID-19 and advised to self-isolate has a legal duty to self-isolate. Failure to comply may result in a fine, starting from £1,000.
You will receive a request by text, email or phone to log into the NHS Test and Trace service website and provide information about recent close contacts. This information will be used to give public health advice to your contacts, but they will not be told your identity.
It is very important that you provide this information, as it will play a vital role in helping to protect your family, friends and the wider community. It is now an offence to knowingly provide false information about your close contacts to NHS Test and Trace and failure to comply with these requirements may result in a fine.
GOV.UK said:
1. Stay at home
This means you must not leave or be outside of your home except for specific purposes. These include:
- for childcare or education, where this is not provided online
- for work purposes, where your place of work remains open and where you cannot work from home (including if your job involves working in other people’s homes)
- to exercise outdoors or visit an outdoor public place - with the people you live with, with your support bubble or, when on your own, with 1 person from another household.
- for any medical concerns, reasons, appointments and emergencies, or to avoid or escape risk of injury or harm - such as domestic abuse
- shopping for basic necessities, for example food and medicine, which should be as infrequent as possible
to visit members of your support bubble or provide care for vulnerable people, or as a volunteer
This list is not exhaustive and there are other limited circumstances where you may be permitted to leave or be outside of your home. These will be set out in law and further detailed guidance will be provided.
So the list of reasons to be outdoors is now limited by law?This means you must not leave or be outside of your home except for specific purposes. These include:
- for childcare or education, where this is not provided online
- for work purposes, where your place of work remains open and where you cannot work from home (including if your job involves working in other people’s homes)
- to exercise outdoors or visit an outdoor public place - with the people you live with, with your support bubble or, when on your own, with 1 person from another household.
- for any medical concerns, reasons, appointments and emergencies, or to avoid or escape risk of injury or harm - such as domestic abuse
- shopping for basic necessities, for example food and medicine, which should be as infrequent as possible
to visit members of your support bubble or provide care for vulnerable people, or as a volunteer
This list is not exhaustive and there are other limited circumstances where you may be permitted to leave or be outside of your home. These will be set out in law and further detailed guidance will be provided.
Breadvan72 said:
But for some, the issues have become religious, and they are incapable of even beginning to see that the opposing view might have any merit. This is, of course, assuming that the views they express are sincerely held, and are not just an exercise in a form of rather duff sixth form debating.
I might just be right this time (searching for the undeniable truth that a man is just a fool)Ref: Boris's speech today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJl3QF58g3s&t=...
Does this fall under the 'extraordinary circumstances' (or whatever the wording was) that the Health Act mentioned by Sumption allows things to be done? (IIRC??)
Or are we going to get a lovely surprise when the legislation arrives (probably late) next week and gets nodded through by the puppets claiming to be our MPs?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJl3QF58g3s&t=...
Boris speech from 22m36s to 24m35 said:
...
As we come together now to fight this second wave I want to say something about the way ahead, because people will reasonably ask 'when will this all end?', and as I said before, I am optimistic that this will feel very different and better by the Spring.
It's not just that we have ever better medicines and therapies and a realistic hope of a vaccine in the first quarter of next year, we now have the immediate prospect of using many millions of cheap, reliable, and above all, rapid turnaround tests; tests that you can use yourself to tell you whether or not you are infectious and get a result within 10 to 15 minutes.
And we know from trials across the country in schools and hospitals that we can use these tests not just to locate infectious people, but to drive down the disease.
And so over the next few days/weeks, we plan a steady but massive expansion in the deployment of these quick turnaround tests, applying them in an every growing number of situations; from helping women to have their partners with them in labour wards when they are giving birth, to testing whole towns and even whole cities.
The army has been brought in to work on the logistics and the programme will begin in a matter of days.
Working with local communities, local government, public health directors, organisations of all kinds, to help people discover whether or not they are infectious, and immediately help them self-isolate and stop the spread of the disease.
...
How is mandatory testing of entire towns / cities legal?As we come together now to fight this second wave I want to say something about the way ahead, because people will reasonably ask 'when will this all end?', and as I said before, I am optimistic that this will feel very different and better by the Spring.
It's not just that we have ever better medicines and therapies and a realistic hope of a vaccine in the first quarter of next year, we now have the immediate prospect of using many millions of cheap, reliable, and above all, rapid turnaround tests; tests that you can use yourself to tell you whether or not you are infectious and get a result within 10 to 15 minutes.
And we know from trials across the country in schools and hospitals that we can use these tests not just to locate infectious people, but to drive down the disease.
And so over the next few days/weeks, we plan a steady but massive expansion in the deployment of these quick turnaround tests, applying them in an every growing number of situations; from helping women to have their partners with them in labour wards when they are giving birth, to testing whole towns and even whole cities.
The army has been brought in to work on the logistics and the programme will begin in a matter of days.
Working with local communities, local government, public health directors, organisations of all kinds, to help people discover whether or not they are infectious, and immediately help them self-isolate and stop the spread of the disease.
...
Does this fall under the 'extraordinary circumstances' (or whatever the wording was) that the Health Act mentioned by Sumption allows things to be done? (IIRC??)
Or are we going to get a lovely surprise when the legislation arrives (probably late) next week and gets nodded through by the puppets claiming to be our MPs?
Here is the formerly pro-Johnson Peston briefing against Johnson in the Speccy. I am revising my opinion that Johnson will remain as PM until 2024. I now think that he will be gone within a year. It may be that those who plot to take his place will want to wait until they can take over at a time when some change of policy seems plausibly achievable, but in the meantime they need to make Johnson look as bad as possible. This is not hard to do, because Johnson is singularly inept at doing the job that he thinks he was born to do, just as he has been inept at every other job save the job of self promotion; but kicking a man while he is down is of course in the best traditions of the Tory party.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-has-alre...
Maybe all that Sunak will need to do in order to be King for 100 years is buy off the impoverished northern seats with some pre-election tax rises (he can promise the punters oop north that they will get the money - they won't, but they won't find that out until too late).
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-has-alre...
Maybe all that Sunak will need to do in order to be King for 100 years is buy off the impoverished northern seats with some pre-election tax rises (he can promise the punters oop north that they will get the money - they won't, but they won't find that out until too late).
RSTurboPaul said:
So the list of reasons to be outdoors is now limited by law?
Law stuff: In March, there was a NON EXHAUSTIVE list of reasons to go out. Many, police included, wrongly treated that list as being exhaustive, and some of the fanatics even objected to people doing things that were on the list (I've been told off by some frothing zealot in the bike forum for going to see my non-resident minor child, as expressly provided for in the rules). Many were and remain wrongly convinced that the test was and is "essential" not reasonable. Quite a few said then and will say now that the law does not matter, that clarity does not matter, that civil liberties do not matter, and that all that matters is total compliance. This misses the point that if you insist on total compliance then you really do have to know exactly what it is we are to comply with.Science stuff: Is OxCEBM the only place that is talking about excess deaths? No, but it sometimes seems so.
Serious points: The doc helpfully linked to by agtlaw includes words such as
"the Government has ordered..."
The usual suspects will make their usual pooh pooh noises about this, but anybody who takes the rule of law seriously should be concerned by those words.
Note that -
1. The legislation that will implement the lockdown has not yet been made. That legislation will be subject to some form of parliamentary approval (probably a rubber stamp). Therefore, nobody "has ordered" anything in a legally enforceable way.
2. The Government in a Westminster style democracy governs through various mechanisms. It does not govern by simply giving orders.
It is worth restating that none of Johnson, Patel, Gove, Cummings etc has any demonstrated understanding of the UK Constitution or any interest in it. The Attorney General is a formerly obscure barrister of no eminence, selected for her party loyalty, who has repeatedly shown herself unable to fulfil her duty of giving independent legal advice to the Government. Whatever your view on how serious C19 is, I suggest that if you enjoy being a citizen of a Westminster-style democracy, you should be troubled by how these things are being done.
"the Government has ordered..."
The usual suspects will make their usual pooh pooh noises about this, but anybody who takes the rule of law seriously should be concerned by those words.
Note that -
1. The legislation that will implement the lockdown has not yet been made. That legislation will be subject to some form of parliamentary approval (probably a rubber stamp). Therefore, nobody "has ordered" anything in a legally enforceable way.
2. The Government in a Westminster style democracy governs through various mechanisms. It does not govern by simply giving orders.
It is worth restating that none of Johnson, Patel, Gove, Cummings etc has any demonstrated understanding of the UK Constitution or any interest in it. The Attorney General is a formerly obscure barrister of no eminence, selected for her party loyalty, who has repeatedly shown herself unable to fulfil her duty of giving independent legal advice to the Government. Whatever your view on how serious C19 is, I suggest that if you enjoy being a citizen of a Westminster-style democracy, you should be troubled by how these things are being done.
RSTurboPaul said:
How is mandatory testing of entire towns / cities legal?
It does not say testing is mandatory. It does however wrongly state they are accurate. IN addition it does not reference that they are keeping on file the DNA of all those tested. THAT should worry you as much as anything frankly.
Jasandjules said:
IN addition it does not reference that they are keeping on file the DNA of all those tested. THAT should worry you as much as anything frankly.
Do we have any evidence that is happening?I know the standard national security DNA retention period was extended but I’ve not seen any evidence that DNA from PCR tests is being retained, yet.
Jasandjules said:
It does not say testing is mandatory. It does however wrongly state they are accurate.
IN addition it does not reference that they are keeping on file the DNA of all those tested. THAT should worry you as much as anything frankly.
They are not even taking the DNA of everyone tested let alone keeping it. IN addition it does not reference that they are keeping on file the DNA of all those tested. THAT should worry you as much as anything frankly.
Johnson tends often to say the first thing that comes into his none too well stocked head.
I go to Jersey a bit. You get tested at the airport and get the result by email the next day. If a quicker test is now available, great, but my confidence in the UK Government's ability to organise a few friendly drinks of beer in a brewery is not all that high.
I go to Jersey a bit. You get tested at the airport and get the result by email the next day. If a quicker test is now available, great, but my confidence in the UK Government's ability to organise a few friendly drinks of beer in a brewery is not all that high.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff