The new "rule of six" -- and the absence of an SI
Discussion
I am not going to repeat many of the points made on other threads – merely raise one point for consideration.
The government announced earlier this week that the “rule of six” will apply from Monday 14 September such that it will be a criminal offence for more than six people to meet in a private dwelling. Its updated Covid guidance is now to the same effect.
Yet the Statutory Instrument that will make this so has not been made nor is even a draft available.
Presumably by saying that the new rules will apply on Monday, the government means from 0.01 am. Is it not extraordinary that at 12 noon on the Friday before, an interested person should not be able to find out precisely what this new criminal offence is? When will the SI be available?
The government announced earlier this week that the “rule of six” will apply from Monday 14 September such that it will be a criminal offence for more than six people to meet in a private dwelling. Its updated Covid guidance is now to the same effect.
Yet the Statutory Instrument that will make this so has not been made nor is even a draft available.
Presumably by saying that the new rules will apply on Monday, the government means from 0.01 am. Is it not extraordinary that at 12 noon on the Friday before, an interested person should not be able to find out precisely what this new criminal offence is? When will the SI be available?
Hard to disagree.
I can't get away from my feeling that a new law for this even a temporary one is a step too far. I think it is interesting that all the press reporting seems to talk of it as a rule rather than a law...As I understand it, this is different to everything that has come before.
If you separate it from the whole COVID thing, it must be the biggest attack on personal freedom / responsibility that I can think of - What has the world become when a UK Conservative government is creating a law banning small groups of people getting together.
I can't get away from my feeling that a new law for this even a temporary one is a step too far. I think it is interesting that all the press reporting seems to talk of it as a rule rather than a law...As I understand it, this is different to everything that has come before.
If you separate it from the whole COVID thing, it must be the biggest attack on personal freedom / responsibility that I can think of - What has the world become when a UK Conservative government is creating a law banning small groups of people getting together.
It is not. This change in the law requires either an amendment to the existing SI by a further SI or an entirely new SI.
It may be that the change is to be made merely by changing "30" to "6" in the current regulations, but that is not clear.
The basic principle is that the public is entitled to know in advance if conduct is criminal. How is that so if I cannot fund out at Friday lunchtime exactly what I am allowed to do by 0.01 am on Monday?
It may be that the change is to be made merely by changing "30" to "6" in the current regulations, but that is not clear.
The basic principle is that the public is entitled to know in advance if conduct is criminal. How is that so if I cannot fund out at Friday lunchtime exactly what I am allowed to do by 0.01 am on Monday?
fat80b said:
Hard to disagree.
I can't get away from my feeling that a new law for this even a temporary one is a step too far. I think it is interesting that all the press reporting seems to talk of it as a rule rather than a law...As I understand it, this is different to everything that has come before.
If you separate it from the whole COVID thing, it must be the biggest attack on personal freedom / responsibility that I can think of - What has the world become when a UK Conservative government is creating a law banning small groups of people getting together.
Admittedly I'm a simple man but these are the "facts" as I see them;I can't get away from my feeling that a new law for this even a temporary one is a step too far. I think it is interesting that all the press reporting seems to talk of it as a rule rather than a law...As I understand it, this is different to everything that has come before.
If you separate it from the whole COVID thing, it must be the biggest attack on personal freedom / responsibility that I can think of - What has the world become when a UK Conservative government is creating a law banning small groups of people getting together.
There is currently a worldwide pandemic
CV19 spreads as a result of people being in close proximity
The spread of CV19 is a negative on society
Stopping people from meeting in large groups to minimise Cv19 transmission makes sense
We have an Opposition and a Free Press - neither of whom are kicking up a strom about infringement of civil liberties
TL:DR Is it really that big a deal?
Valid point to an extent.
However everyone knows what the rule is and how it applies. It's been all over the telly and interwebs, and makes reasonable sense given we have a raising rate going into winter flu season.
The only real thing left is how firmly it can be enforced. Personal I hope reasonably firmly. I also hope for more clamping down on blatant piss taking on those not wearing masks in shops etc.
Daniel
However everyone knows what the rule is and how it applies. It's been all over the telly and interwebs, and makes reasonable sense given we have a raising rate going into winter flu season.
The only real thing left is how firmly it can be enforced. Personal I hope reasonably firmly. I also hope for more clamping down on blatant piss taking on those not wearing masks in shops etc.
Daniel
Could it be unconstitutional for the law to be whatever Boris Johnson or Matt Hancock says it is?
So we took the power off the Monarchy so King Boris can make it up on the hoof?
That's what happens in other Countries so what's the harm if the law is whatever Johnson, Cummings or Hancock happens to say it is?
If there's no SI isn't the rule of six just guidance?
So we took the power off the Monarchy so King Boris can make it up on the hoof?
That's what happens in other Countries so what's the harm if the law is whatever Johnson, Cummings or Hancock happens to say it is?
If there's no SI isn't the rule of six just guidance?
dhutch said:
Valid point to an extent.
However everyone knows what the rule is and how it applies. It's been all over the telly and interwebs, and makes reasonable sense given we have a raising rate going into winter flu season.
The only real thing left is how firmly it can be enforced. Personal I hope reasonably firmly. I also hope for more clamping down on blatant piss taking on those not wearing masks in shops etc.
Daniel
This is arrant nonsense. Unless and until the SI is available I do not know "what the rule is and how it applies" -- the general summary given thus far is non substitute for the SI itself. However everyone knows what the rule is and how it applies. It's been all over the telly and interwebs, and makes reasonable sense given we have a raising rate going into winter flu season.
The only real thing left is how firmly it can be enforced. Personal I hope reasonably firmly. I also hope for more clamping down on blatant piss taking on those not wearing masks in shops etc.
Daniel
This is not about whether the change is good or bad, but about how the law is made. I find it baffling that anyone can think a government can properly govern not by decree (at least then one could read the decree) but by prime ministerial statement.
There can be no excuse either: the announcement was made earlier this week and there has been plenty of time to lay the SI before Parliament.
Don't get me wrong, I think the government is doing a s
t job of the thing, including I'm sure not having the foundations place to implement this new 'rule of six' as well as that eat our to help out is likely doing as much harm as outside meetings large the six.
However it's also the words of a fool, to use your suggesting I am, to say the public don't know what the rule of six is!
Daniel
t job of the thing, including I'm sure not having the foundations place to implement this new 'rule of six' as well as that eat our to help out is likely doing as much harm as outside meetings large the six.However it's also the words of a fool, to use your suggesting I am, to say the public don't know what the rule of six is!
Daniel
dhutch said:
Valid point to an extent.
However everyone knows what the rule is and how it applies. It's been all over the telly and interwebs, and makes reasonable sense given we have a raising rate going into winter flu season.
The only real thing left is how firmly it can be enforced. Personal I hope reasonably firmly. I also hope for more clamping down on blatant piss taking on those not wearing masks in shops etc.
It will tend to be enforced through people shopping each other and the police knowing they then have to act.However everyone knows what the rule is and how it applies. It's been all over the telly and interwebs, and makes reasonable sense given we have a raising rate going into winter flu season.
The only real thing left is how firmly it can be enforced. Personal I hope reasonably firmly. I also hope for more clamping down on blatant piss taking on those not wearing masks in shops etc.
Remember too some people are exempt from wearing masks and the under 12's do not need any at any time.
On masks one of my worries about them has shown itself to be true in my area - they are littered everywhere. Not the nicest item to find wrapped around your shoe.
Wouldn’t it be nice if, just for once, people could just do what’s being asked of them without whining about it or picking holes in it or trying to find loopholes in it.
From Monday, don’t meet in groups of more than 6 people.
It’s pretty simple really.
The sooner folk do as they are told and stop taking this piss with this, the sooner we get normality back.
From Monday, don’t meet in groups of more than 6 people.
It’s pretty simple really.
The sooner folk do as they are told and stop taking this piss with this, the sooner we get normality back.
ESD1711 said:
Wouldn’t it be nice if, just for once, people could just do what’s being asked of them without whining about it or picking holes in it or trying to find loopholes in it.
When we're supposed to live in a democracy and we have a Constitution and have had one for quite a while it would be nice if people like Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock could follow established conventions rather than ignoring it and making it up as they go along because some new variant of the flu virus. Otherwise it could seem the virus is just being used as a convenient excuse to act unconstitutionally.
carinaman said:
Otherwise it could seem the virus is just being used as a convenient excuse to act unconstitutionally.
And for what possible benefit, politics or otherwise, would they be doing this?!Nobody want this. Not me, not you, not BoJo and not Hancock.
It doesn’t benefit anyone.
ESD1711 said:
Wouldn’t it be nice if, just for once, people could just do what’s being asked of them without whining about it or picking holes in it or trying to find loopholes in it.
From Monday, don’t meet in groups of more than 6 people.
It’s pretty simple really.
The sooner folk do as they are told and stop taking this piss with this, the sooner we get normality back.
I’d have agreed with you 6 months ago but will take this latest measure with an extremely generous pinch of salt.From Monday, don’t meet in groups of more than 6 people.
It’s pretty simple really.
The sooner folk do as they are told and stop taking this piss with this, the sooner we get normality back.
It’s totally inconsistent. I can meet with a close friend or relative but only if we leave an older child behind. 6 single people from different households can get together for an orgy but a single parent with enough offspring can’t have a parent or friend to visit.
I’m having dinner with a family friend and our children on Sunday but 12 hours later it’ll be illegible and punishable.
Meanwhile our children are all in school (as they should be) and there’s a government drive to get people back in offices.
I won’t be observing this one personally and I suspect a great number of other reasonable minded people will think the same.
We also won’t go back to anything approaching normality until there’s a wide acceptance of low risk, whether that’s in 6 weeks or 6 years time.
It will be interesting to see what happens come Christmas when people are told it’s illegal to see family etc.
People are not looking for ‘loopholes.’ They are simply looking for the actual legislation, rather than what a journalist thinks it might be. It isn’t yet available and that, in my opinion, is a valid criticism from
business owners and others who will be expected to follow the legislation from Monday. As usual, I expect the legislation to be published just a few hours before it’s in force. They are very likely busy drafting it at this moment in time (Friday afternoon).
The English legislation will eventually appear here:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi
business owners and others who will be expected to follow the legislation from Monday. As usual, I expect the legislation to be published just a few hours before it’s in force. They are very likely busy drafting it at this moment in time (Friday afternoon).
The English legislation will eventually appear here:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi
jondude said:
It will tend to be enforced through people shopping each other and the police knowing they then have to act.
Remember too some people are exempt from wearing masks and the under 12's do not need any at any time.
On masks one of my worries about them has shown itself to be true in my area - they are littered everywhere. Not the nicest item to find wrapped around your shoe.
Yes, first thing we did was buy 5 reusable washable masks each, one in each car, one by the door, two in the washing. But we have the £30 to hand and using eBay ordering was as easy as pie. Different if you're on the breadline or not an internet user. Remember too some people are exempt from wearing masks and the under 12's do not need any at any time.
On masks one of my worries about them has shown itself to be true in my area - they are littered everywhere. Not the nicest item to find wrapped around your shoe.
Local supermarkets are good, presumably due to the 16 stone bloke in security uniform by the door. Local store, not a mask in sight bar my own, staff say they have all but given up. Screwfix during my last visit appears to be the land of the chin mask.
Daniel
If it’s a law then how/who will enforce it?
Is it the police? Will it be left to local authorities to put Covid Enforcement officers on the streets?
Ultimately it is the public who will either obey or disregard depending on their attitude, as with mobile phone usage in cars.
Basically a sensible law but not easy to police well.
I can understand the desirability to change things due to the varying pandemic issues but would want proper scrutiny of keeping measures in check when no longer needed. Perhaps a cross party committee to oversee the process?
Is it the police? Will it be left to local authorities to put Covid Enforcement officers on the streets?
Ultimately it is the public who will either obey or disregard depending on their attitude, as with mobile phone usage in cars.
Basically a sensible law but not easy to police well.
I can understand the desirability to change things due to the varying pandemic issues but would want proper scrutiny of keeping measures in check when no longer needed. Perhaps a cross party committee to oversee the process?
How will they deal with groups of under 18's, walked past my local grammar school on Tuesday just as they came out for lunch. Groups milling about, chaotic queue at the kebab shop etc. As I understand it under 18's can not be issued with FPN so how will the authorities deal with that. Are we really going to have police patrols outside schools, colleges and universities.
W124Bob said:
How will they deal with groups of under 18's, walked past my local grammar school on Tuesday just as they came out for lunch. Groups milling about, chaotic queue at the kebab shop etc. As I understand it under 18's can not be issued with FPN so how will the authorities deal with that. Are we really going to have police patrols outside schools, colleges and universities.
Perhaps school pupils should remain on thier premises at lunchtimes, rather than spilling out into and hanging around local communities en-mass as you describe.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff