Read on Twitter
Quick note on the mysterious legal basis for the Leicester local lockdown. It seems:
- the restrictions that Leicester shares with the rest of England are enforceable by @leicspolice, but the special ones for Leicester are *not*
- this will change at the weekend.
- the restrictions that Leicester shares with the rest of England are enforceable by @leicspolice, but the special ones for Leicester are *not*
- this will change at the weekend.
When @MattHancock announced the Leicester local lockdown to the Commons on Monday evening, he promised a statutory instrument to give it effect. There is no sign of that statutory instrument yet.
Two key aspects of Leicester lockdown go beyond the England-wide one. First, schools are closed, except for key workers. But counsel for the government confirmed in court today that, as far as it's concerned, schools have been asked, not told, to close. https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1278698692632068102
Second, non-essential retailers are closed. But again, guidance is carefully framed: they've been "asked" to close. There's no legislation closing them so, I think, if a stubborn/reckless bookseller (say) wanted to open, @leicspolice would be hard pressed to do anything about it.
From Saturday, there will be further differences: the rules on gatherings and social contact in Leicester will stay the same, but the restrictions in the rest of England will be (largely) lifted. This, by contrast, is framed in mandatory language (eg bars "will not" reopen).
The government will need to enact a statutory instrument to lift restrictions in the rest of England from Saturday, so I expect that legally enforceable aspects of the Leicester lockdown will be dealt with at the same time.
The lockdown regulations can be terminated in part, so it may be as simple as saying the social contact restrictions are terminated everywhere but here. Additionally, the business closure aspects, which are currently advisory, may be made enforceable by these regs. /ends
Postscript: a minister suggests gvt has imposed the lockdown without regs, under the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984. This is not legally possible: the power to impose "restrictions or requirements" under that Act *is* a power to make regs.
https://twitter.com/JimBethell/status/1278702223996989441
https://twitter.com/JimBethell/status/1278702223996989441
