As trailed by Home Secretary last week there is now a fixed penalty notice of Ā£800 (or Ā£400 if you pay within 14 days) for participating in an gathering of over 15 people in a private residence
šØImportant changes to lockdown/self-isolation regulations from 5pm
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (All Tiers and Self-Isolation) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021
Ā£800 'house party' FPN & police can now access track & trace data
https://t.co/k9XCpVsXhC
As trailed by Home Secretary last week there is now a fixed penalty notice of Ā£800 (or Ā£400 if you pay within 14 days) for participating in an gathering of over 15 people in a private residence
Compare:
- Ordinary fixed penalty notice is Ā£200 or Ā£100 if paid in 14 days
- Holding or being involved in the holding of a gathering of over 30 people is Ā£10,000
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
Data says only a small proportion of people meant to be self-isolating are fully doing so. https://t.co/LcwKfQ6PVx
Very important that obvious failures with Track and Trace and self-isolation (study late last year said 18% of people complying https://t.co/dhJUZ7Pm0l) are not painted as an enforcement issue. Plainly not. Would just pass buck to police who have almost no capacity to enforce https://t.co/Eb4Kl5Ze0E
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) January 25, 2021
They are only permitted to use that data for the purposes of Covid rules enforcement - but will they?
- Can police resist the temptation of using the data for other criminal enforcement purposes?
- Do we want the police having this information at all?
- Is enforcement going to make things better? Or make people less willing to share info?
\U0001f6a8Just caught these. Will be super quick
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) September 27, 2020
New legal duty to self isolate if positive test OR told by contact tracing system (not by app) to self isolate
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Self- Isolation) (England) Regulations 2020https://t.co/KNcNYNgcgH
How should the COVID-19 regulations be policed?
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) January 10, 2021
(Thread)
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 Ā£1,750 and Ā£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...
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...
šØNew 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 Ā£ to spare please give to my @LawCentres fundraiser
They give free legal advice to people who need it
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
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 Ā£ to spare please give to my @LawCentres fundraiser
They give free legal advice to people who need it
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
More from Health
Before we get too far into 2021, I thought Iād write a thread recapping some of the research that came out of my lab in 2020. Most of this work was led by my talented team of graduate students, Kerrianne Morrison, @kmdebrabander, and @DesiRJones.
Back in January, a news story was published about Kerrianneās study showing improved social interaction outcomes for autistic adults when paired with another autistic partner.
A detailed thread about the study and a link to the paper can be found here (feel free to DM me your email address if youād like a copy of the full paper for this study or any of our studies):
Another paper published early in 2020 (it appeared a few months earlier online) showed that traditional standalone tasks of social cognition are less predictive of functional and social skills among autistic adults than commonly assumed in autism research.
Next, @kmdebrabander led and published an innovative study about how well autistic and non-autistic adults can predict their own cognitive and social cognitive performance.
Back in January, a news story was published about Kerrianneās study showing improved social interaction outcomes for autistic adults when paired with another autistic partner.
A detailed thread about the study and a link to the paper can be found here (feel free to DM me your email address if youād like a copy of the full paper for this study or any of our studies):
In our new paper out today, autistic adults held a \u201cget to know you\u201d conversation with an unfamiliar autistic or typically-developing (TD) person. We were curious: would social interaction outcomes differ when their partner was also autistic? THREAD https://t.co/4koqUKV9G1
— Noah Sasson (@Noahsasson) December 11, 2019
Another paper published early in 2020 (it appeared a few months earlier online) showed that traditional standalone tasks of social cognition are less predictive of functional and social skills among autistic adults than commonly assumed in autism research.
How well does social cognition predict functional and social skills in autism? Our new paper attempts to answer this question. This thread summarizes why we conducted the study, what we found, and why I think it\u2019s important. https://t.co/KB1nIpK0M2
— Noah Sasson (@Noahsasson) August 16, 2019
Next, @kmdebrabander led and published an innovative study about how well autistic and non-autistic adults can predict their own cognitive and social cognitive performance.
New by @kmdebrabander and our lab: Autistic adults don\u2019t differ from non-autistic adults in the accuracy of their self-assessment on general cognitive tasks but are less accurate on social cognitive tasks. This however was unrelated to social functioning https://t.co/0MrqMKKO0r
— Noah Sasson (@Noahsasson) September 20, 2020
You May Also Like
The first area to focus on is diversity. This has become a dogma in the tech world, and despite the fact that tech is one of the most meritocratic industries in the world, there are constant efforts to promote diversity at the expense of fairness, merit and competency. Examples:
USC's Interactive Media & Games Division cancels all-star panel that included top-tier game developers who were invited to share their experiences with students. Why? Because there were no women on the
ElectronConf is a conf which chooses presenters based on blind auditions; the identity, gender, and race of the speaker is not known to the selection team. The results of that merit-based approach was an all-male panel. So they cancelled the conference.
Apple's head of diversity (a black woman) got in trouble for promoting a vision of diversity that is at odds with contemporary progressive dogma. (She left the company shortly after this
Also in the name of diversity, there is unabashed discrimination against men (especially white men) in tech, in both hiring policies and in other arenas. One such example is this, a developer workshop that specifically excluded men: https://t.co/N0SkH4hR35
USC's Interactive Media & Games Division cancels all-star panel that included top-tier game developers who were invited to share their experiences with students. Why? Because there were no women on the
ElectronConf is a conf which chooses presenters based on blind auditions; the identity, gender, and race of the speaker is not known to the selection team. The results of that merit-based approach was an all-male panel. So they cancelled the conference.
Apple's head of diversity (a black woman) got in trouble for promoting a vision of diversity that is at odds with contemporary progressive dogma. (She left the company shortly after this
Also in the name of diversity, there is unabashed discrimination against men (especially white men) in tech, in both hiring policies and in other arenas. One such example is this, a developer workshop that specifically excluded men: https://t.co/N0SkH4hR35