Enforcement of the new rules on social distancing, unnecessary journeys etc.

[yorkie]

I live about 400m from a medium sized park in an area where almost every resident is either retired or currently working at home. Although I haven't been in the park for the last week, neighbours who have, told me that everybody is being reasonable and keeping a safe distance is no problem at all.

Meanwhile in York some parks have been closed. Some people have been campaigning for Rowntree Park to be closed (I despise such attitudes).

But in the places that you can walk, yes my experience is the same, everyone being sensible.

They all seem to have resisted the urge to drive to the Chilterns (mostly between 5 and 15 miles away) with their clear spaces and eyecatching views. Maybe it's a problem with Derby's population.

If I was only 5-15 miles from the Chilterns I would be cycling there! And there'd be no justifiable reason to stop me.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

It is not essential to drive to that area. Therefore you shouldn’t be doing it

Ok, it may not be essential, but is it illegal?

 

[Dr Hoo]

I live about 400m from a medium sized park in an area where almost every resident is either retired or currently working at home. Although I haven't been in the park for the last week, neighbours who have, told me that everybody is being reasonable and keeping a safe distance is no problem at all. They all seem to have resisted the urge to drive to the Chilterns (mostly between 5 and 15 miles away) with their clear spaces and eyecatching views. Maybe it's a problem with Derby's population.

Sadly the problem seemed to be with (a proportion of) the populations of South Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire, Cheshire, Manchester and Lancashire falling over themselves (literally in some cases) to drive to Derbyshire and clamber up Grindsbrook Clough [1] with some members of this forum and subsequently keep the Edale Mountain Rescue, Air Ambulance and NHS busy whilst emptying our local shops and filling stations.

[1] Popular but tricky route up Kinder Scout from Edale. (Other hazardous upland walks are available.)

 

[Tetchytyke]

Fines go into the Government's general funds that pay for all sorts of things.

Fines do, as do police PCNs. A FPN is not a fine. Revenue from an FPN is retained by the issuing body. That's why councils now prosecute littering with such gay abandon (not that I entirely disagree with that).

prosecute more of those who think that the law doesn't apply to themselves.

You mean like Derbyshire and North Yorkshire police forces?

Your dislike of the police seems to be clouding your judgement here

I have no particular dislike of the police unless they are trying to enforce "laws" which don't exist, or are vexatiously misusing stop-and-search rights, or who are buzzing people with drones in order to frighten them into leaving an area they are legally entitled to be in.

When the police think the law doesn't apply to them I do have a dislike of them.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Sadly the problem seemed to be with (a proportion of) the populations of South Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire, Cheshire, Manchester and Lancashire falling over themselves (literally in some cases) to drive to Derbyshire and clamber up Grindsbrook Clough

Is there any real evidence of this? Data not anecdote.

Derbyshire were clearly out to score cheap points with their drone and, even despite their very best efforts, could only show a car park with five vehicles in it and groups of two or fewer people photographing each other in blissful isolation.

Indeed Edale Mountain Rescue have just tweeted to say that they, alongside other Peak District teams, didn't need to respond to a single incident this weekend.

https://twitter.com/edalemrt/status/1244558093427650560

Pleased to report no incidents over the weekend for ourselves or any of the Peak District teams. Thank You

 

[C J Snarzell]

One of the aftermaths of Covid19 will be the possible revisal of the Human Rights Act.

I can see that a couple of the articles may have to be amended slightly to take into account what has happened in the last few weeks.

A couple of extremely anti-police people from my neck of the woods have actually been quoting HR legislation on social media saying the new police powers to stop & challenge people are clearly breaching their human rights.

There will definately be one idiot out there slapped with a new fine who will dispute it and refuse to pay, saying they were simply going from A to B, the journey was 'essential' and they have had their rights violated.

Very sad, but this is another example of how Covid19 will affect long term law and legislation for generations to come.

CJ

 

[ValleyLines142]

I do find it pretty ridiculous that Derbyshire Police tweeted to say that driving to the Peaks was unnecessary travelling, mainly because if somebody got injured out there it would cause a strain on the NHS, even though ROSPA have statistically proven that a person is more likely to have an injury from a domestic accident at home e.g. falling down the stairs or burning their hand on the oven/hobb. My only reasoning could be that it's more remote in the Peak District and subsequently makes it trickier for the emergency services to attend to a casualty but other than that I don't see the issue at all. People need their freedom. I've gone out for a walk every day around the block, but it's not curing my anxiety. I would LOVE to get in the car and drive to a remote location. Playing Devil's Advocate here, I would classify that as an essential journey to refrain certain people suffering from mental health/depression/anxiety from getting cabin fever. I read a post on Facebook from Devon & Cornwall police saying that they made a 50 year old woman turn around with her elderly mother, who were simply going to drive from their relatively remote settlement in one of Cornwall's many villages to the seaside and just open the window and absorb the sea air. I was really quite disheartened that the police simply shut this down, as the woman in question said her mother was a little unsteady on her feet (understandable at her age) and couldn't just 'walk around the block'.

Quite sad actually because through all of this, many of my closest friends have called me selfish because I'm a very strong mental health advocate and I know full well that if this lockdown extends, then mental health will rocket through, and that I essentially need to 'forget' about mental health and just concentrate on the virus which kills indiscriminately. Yes that is true, but I'm certainly not selfish; I'm just trying to find a balance between protecting both those vulnerable to the virus and vulnerable to mental health and depression.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Is there any real evidence of this? Data not anecdote.

Derbyshire were clearly out to score cheap points with their drone and, even despite their very best efforts, could only show a car park with five vehicles in it and groups of two or fewer people photographing each other in blissful isolation.

Indeed Edale Mountain Rescue have just tweeted to say that they, alongside other Peak District teams, didn't need to respond to a single incident this weekend.

https://twitter.com/edalemrt/status/1244558093427650560

I know that it is hard to keep up with a rapidly changing situation but it really isn't that complicated. (I have already posted a local perspective several times on different threads and don't intend to repeat every point.)

The 'busy weekend' was Saturday/Sunday 21 & 22 March. The Hope Valley was rammed with visitors. I live there, I know what it looks like in the summer, bank holidays and so forth.

This was at the start of the shutdown of pubs and cafes, and Mothering Sunday weekend. Those that visited couldn't go 'inside' so went for walks instead, including many who weren't used to or equipped for the outdoor environment. This was accompanied by a lot of dangerous parking.

Edale Mountain Rescue obviously 'deploys' at busy times, in readiness to attend any incidents promptly. (They aren't sprawled on the sofa at home, hoping that the phone doesn't ring.)

I drove to Leeds on the Sunday to take a trained medic who was volunteering for COVID duties there. So I saw what was going on. Ironically, whilst driving through Sheffield on the way it was possible to see that local 'parks' such as the Rivelin Valley and Hillsborough were very quiet - certainly less crowded than the Peak District.

Monday 23 March was the day that the current 'restrictions' were fully rolled out. I went to the local garage to discuss the timing of my MoT and discovered that they had sold out of diesel. I went to the local shop to obtain a normal amount of fresh and perishable items and discovered that practically everything had been purchased the previous day.

The earliest that I saw the drone video was on Tuesday 24 March, ISTR. I think that I know where it was shot but it was intended to show that some people were still driving out rather than had been driving out the previous weekend.

The Edale Mountain Rescue tweet was in grateful thanks to people for not coming out (again) on the weekend of 28 & 29 March and was not about the busy weekend.

The tweet was over a catchy slogan: "Stay Home. Save Lives." Not a bad idea to listen to the experts really.

 

[Meerkat]

Ok, it may not be essential, but is it illegal?

If it’s not essential and the NHS have asked us to only do essential travel why does it matter whether it is illegal?

ROSPA have statistically proven that a person is more likely to have an injury from a domestic accident at home

The roads must be more dangerous than walking round the block, which is the alternative to a road trip - you don’t say “well if I can’t go for a drive I am going to get the fryer out”

 

[111-111-1]

Yesterday due to the lack of suitable train service because of the restricted service to get me from home to work I had to drive to an alternative station, rather than walk 20 mins to my home station.

I needed to get fresh food so stopped on the way home at a Waitrose near the station but 25 miles from home. Leaving Waitrose there were police on the opposite side of the road stopping cars. I wonder what their opinion would have been if they questioned my actions. 25 miles from home is a long way to be going shopping but I had to be in the vicinity and actually Waitrose is far more civilised and better for keeping social distance from other shoppers than my local Tesco.

For info I am classed as an essential worker being a transport worker.

 

[DarloRich]

Yesterday due to the lack of suitable train service because of the restricted service to get me from home to work I had to drive to an alternative station, rather than walk 20 mins to my home station.

I needed to get fresh food so stopped on the way home at a Waitrose near the station but 25 miles from home. Leaving Waitrose there were police on the opposite side of the road stopping cars. I wonder what their opinion would have been if they questioned my actions. 25 miles from home is a long way to be going shopping but I had to be in the vicinity and actually Waitrose is far more civilised and better for keeping social distance from other shoppers than my local Tesco.

For info I am classed as an essential worker being a transport worker.

What would have happened is that you would have talked to them for less than 5 minutes explaining your situation and then been on your way.

 

[squizzler]

I watched a news report on ITV the other night where cops in the Met where out & about challenging people. What appalled me the most was that they accosted a woman sat on her own on a park bench watching the world go by & told her to go home. Another older lady who was not quite as mobile was sat in a public area on her own and she explained she lived alone in a high rise flat and was enjoying some fresh air & sunshine for half an hour. Both of these women were clearly being sensible and maintaining social distancing but yet being told to go back indoors!!!

Unfortunately the Met police commissioner did her own credibility no favours by ordering what the courts found to be unlawfully heavy handed policing of the Extinction Rebellion protests. Having been found guilty of unlawfully curtailing one enshrined right of assembly will only make it an uphill task to enforce another even if doing so might be rather more defensible.

 

[FGW_DID]

Perhaps people who think the Police are acting outside their remit or “above the Law” may want to read this link:

https://www.college.police.uk/News/College-news/Pages/Health-Protection-Guidelines.aspx

Snapshot

• Enacted on Thursday, 26 March 2020
• Allow closure of premises and businesses (Reg.4 and 5)
• Restrict movement and gatherings (Reg.6 and 7)
• Powers apply to England only (Wales, Scotland and NI expected to make similar arrangements)
• Non-compliance is not a recordable offence
• The power to impose a fixed-penalty notice does not apply to persons under the age of 18
• Enforcement of business closures or restrictions, will be through service of a prohibition notice
• It may not be safe for everyone to be at home. Consider whether there are any safeguarding issues at play
• Full public health regulations relating to enforcement

my bold.

 

[yorkie]

It's sad that a small proportion of the Derbyshire police force have acted in a manner that has brought them into disrepute and damaged relations by acting in a manner that was badly misjudged.

Perhaps people who think the Police are acting outside their remit or “above the Law” may want to read this link:

https://www.college.police.uk/News/College-news/Pages/Health-Protection-Guidelines.aspx



my bold.

Some police (a small minority but of course that is what the discussion is about) did go beyond their remit; that isn't a matter for debate, it's a fact.

If you think the police in question exercised good judgement, you may want to read this link:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-52055201 (many others are available)

...Former justice secretary David Gauke described it as "badly misjudged" and pointed out the people in the footage were maintaining a social distance....

My bold.

They would be better off dealing with certain groups of unruly teenagers who are not social distancing. I don't think it is appropriate to go for easy targets of people who are social distancing. It makes no sense. I can't see how anyone can defend this behaviour; it's bizarre to defend it.

 

[krus_aragon]

Some ridiculous and OTT reactions here.

You aren’t going to fall fowl of the law if you are doing your essential shop and you pop an Easter egg or two in with your shopping.

If you went to the shop however and just bought that one unnecessary item then yes you are effectively making an unnecessary journey.

the whole point is to minimise your visits to the shops!

On that note, when I go to town tomorrow to do a family food shop, I plan to call at the nearby hardware store for some paint and gardening supplies that my in-laws have asked after, seeing as I'll be walking past anyway.

 

[ashkeba]

Monday 23 March was the day that the current 'restrictions' were fully rolled out.

I thought that was when Boris announced them but they were not fully rolled out until days later. That was the second time he did that, both with similar results as idiots take last chances to go to pubs or BBQs or non-essential shopping. Why was he not excoriated for this repeated error?

 

[FGW_DID]

It's sad that a small proportion of the Derbyshire police force have acted in a manner that has brought them into disrepute and damaged relations by acting in a manner that was badly misjudged.
Some police (a small minority but of course that is what the discussion is about) did go beyond their remit; that isn't a matter for debate, it's a fact.

If you think the police in question exercised good judgement, you may want to read this link:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-52055201 (many others are available)

My bold.

They would be better off dealing with certain groups of unruly teenagers who are not social distancing. I don't think it is appropriate to go for easy targets of people who are social distancing. It makes no sense. I can't see how anyone can defend this behaviour; it's bizarre to defend it.

They have been dealing with youths, perhaps they could concentrate more on them if they weren’t also having to chase round seemingly normal sensible people who seem intent on finding / exploiting loop holes or pushing the boundaries to the extreme. Why do this, the guidelines are themselves very simple, what’s hard to understand about them?

UK civil liberties group Big Brother Watch

says it all really

 

[Meerkat]

It's sad that a small proportion of the Derbyshire police force have acted in a manner that has brought them into disrepute and damaged relations

Disrepute in your opinion, many support their actions.

Some police (a small minority but of course that is what the discussion is about) did go beyond their remit; that isn't a matter for debate, it's a fact.

It is not a fact, it is an opinion.

If you think the police in question exercised good judgement, you may want to read this link:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-52055201 (many others are available)

Since when have Ex-ministers been the definitive judgement?

 

[AndrewE]

Perhaps people who think the Police are acting outside their remit or “above the Law” may want to read this link:
https://www.college.police.uk/News/College-news/Pages/Health-Protection-Guidelines.aspx
my bold.

All those things in specified conditions, which their so-called college news completely ignores, giving little Hitlers a completely inflated and unjustified understanding of their powers.
Didn't anyone else hear the ex-Chief Constable of somewhere in N Wales on R4 at lunchtime? He was emphasising (if I understood it right) that in the UK policing is by consent, that we do not have a para-military armed police force, that there is no requirement whatsoever to tell anyone where we are going or why, or to carry any kind of identity card.
Perhaps I missed the words ''until now',' but he seemed to be saying that the arbitrary authoritarian stuff going on is over the top and unjustifiable, which seemed to be the line being taken on R4 at 6pm too.

 

[ainsworth74]

Perhaps people who think the Police are acting outside their remit or “above the Law” may want to read this link

I'm not sure anyone has said that they don't have the power to restrict movement but only within certain prescribed criteria?

Meanwhile Derbyshire Police have now admitted that they don't have the power to stop people going for a walk:

A police force criticised for filming Peak District hikers with a drone has admitted it is powerless to stop people from going walking in the countryside.

Derbyshire Police was accused of "shaming" those who headed to the beauty spot amid a UK-wide lockdown.

Former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption branded it "disgraceful", arguing officers had no power to "to enforce ministers' preferences".

Chief constable Peter Goodman has since admitted Lord Sumption was correct.

Mr Goodman said it was "right that there is no power to stop people going walking in the country".

Link

It is not a fact, it is an opinion.

Considering Derbyshire Police have now stated they don't have the power to stop people going for a walk I'm not sure that they agree?

 

[trainophile]

It would be helpful if in the daily briefings instead of appealing to people to stay indoors they said what the current official law about going out is, and what the penalties for transgression might be. They could easily clear up this confusion but they don't seem to want to appear heavy handed.

 

[island]

Perhaps people who think the Police are acting outside their remit or “above the Law” may want to read this link:

https://www.college.police.uk/News/College-news/Pages/Health-Protection-Guidelines.aspx



my bold.

I don’t think it, I know it.

What the law says is set down in the law books (search SI 2020/350 on legislation.gov.uk if you like), not in governmental, police, or quango proclamations.

The law does not say you may only go for exercise once a day, that you may only exercise within a certain radius of your house, nor that you may not drive somewhere to take exercise.

 

[Ianno87]

It would be helpful if in the daily briefings instead of appealing to people to stay indoors they said what the current official law about going out is, and what the penalties for transgression might be. They could easily clear up this confusion but they don't seem to want to appear heavy handed.

Problem is the actual wording of the law is relatively lenient.

Obviously they quite rightly want to people to restrict themselves more harshly than this in practice. The leniency in the wording of the law being intended for the people who really need it.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

If it’s not essential and the NHS have asked us to only do essential travel why does it matter whether it is illegal?

Because the role of the Police is to target people who are acting illegally. It is none of their business whether someone's activities are considered to be "non-essential".

 

[Bletchleyite]

Problem is the actual wording of the law is relatively lenient.

Obviously they quite rightly want to people to restrict themselves more harshly than this in practice. The leniency in the wording of the law being intended for the people who really need it.

Perhaps so, but the role of the Police is to enforce the law as written, not what they or anyone else happens to think it should be.

 

[ainsworth74]

Perhaps so, but the role of the Police is to enforce the law as written, not what they or anyone else happens to think it should be.

Agreed but I am personally quite happy for them to engage with anyone who maybe going against the guidance to make sure that that person is aware of the guidance and encouraging them to follow the guidance for the benefit of everyone. That would hopefully get quite a lot of people who are perhaps ignorant of the guidance or think "oh it doesn't apply to me!" to think again.

I'm just not happy for them to be trying to enforce what they or someone else thinks the law says rather than what it is. That seems like a rather bad avenue to be going down for multiple reasons.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed but I am personally quite happy for them to engage with anyone who maybe going against the guidance to make sure that that person is aware of the guidance and encouraging them to follow the guidance for the benefit of everyone. That would hopefully get quite a lot of people who are perhaps ignorant of the guidance or think "oh it doesn't apply to me!" to think again.

Yes, I'd agree with that. Engage with people and ask them if what they are doing is essential, and perhaps suggest otherwise if it really isn't. A lot of people will go "fair enough" and go home in such cases.

 

[yorkie]

How you interact with people is key.

I am sometimes in the position of finding young people doing something they are not supposed to be doing and if I want good results I know exactly how to communicate and how not to. I'm sure the vast majority of police officers do too.

I think the (small number of) people who are disagreeing with me on this thread may struggle to get the same results, but I know that either going beyond your remit and/or going in all guns blazing just isn't advisable unless someone is doing something seriously wrong.

 

[Jona26]

I don’t think it, I know it.

What the law says is set down in the law books (search SI 2020/350 on legislation.gov.uk if you like), not in governmental, police, or quango proclamations.

The law does not say you may only go for exercise once a day, that you may only exercise within a certain radius of your house, nor that you may not drive somewhere to take exercise.

In England it is certainly the case there is no 1 per day limit in the legislation but I understand this may not be the same in other parts of the UK.

EDITED TO ADD...

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2020/353/regulation/8/made

Restrictions on movement and gatherings during the emergency period
8.—(1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need—

(a)to obtain from any business listed in Part 4 of Schedule 1 —

(i)basic necessities, including food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons;

(ii)supplies (including money) for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person;

(b)to take exercise, no more than once a day, either alone or with other members of the household

 

[ValleyLines142]

The roads must be more dangerous than walking round the block, which is the alternative to a road trip - you don’t say “well if I can’t go for a drive I am going to get the fryer out”

I fail to see that personally, but respect your view.