What travel is currently allowed by the legislation?

[Butts]

@Butts I really have no idea how much of that was permitted and how much wasn't (if any); it may depend on the dates, and when the legislation changed, and whether you were based in England or Scotland.

But this thread is asking if the legislation restricts public transport specifically, and we can clearly state there are not any such restrictions, and the detail of your journey goes well beyond that question!

The rules in Scotland are different to England, but I am not aware of any requirements to carry letters and/or ID in Scotland.

Maybe, but there are other threads to discuss this.

Yes, I apologise if I went slightly off topic

 

[richw]

Having had this discussion with many misinformed people, you may take unlimited travel for any reason permitted in law, which includes But not limited to outdoor recreation, exercise, mental and emotional wellbeing.
Government advise is “where possible” avoid public transport. Where possible avoid, doesn’t meant do use it. And it’s exactly that, advise.
If your mental health is suffering being stuck in and your a train or bus enthusiast, having a day travelling by those methods would almost certainly improve your mental health, perfectly acceptable by law.
Catch a train or bus a couple of hours each way, take a walk at destination and go home. Perfectly acceptable within law as a walk is exercise, and unlimited travel to carry out that exercise is permitted as long as you return home to sleep overnight.

A local (Autisic) bus spotter to me was on receiving end of abuse for posting bus photos every few days since march. All were taken within 1 hour walk of his house, all he’d done was take his daily exercise walk and snapped photos whilst walking. This was always acceptable in law, but social media police knew better!

 

[LowLevel]

Having had this discussion with many misinformed people, you may take unlimited travel for any reason permitted in law, which includes But not limited to outdoor recreation, exercise, mental and emotional wellbeing.
Government advise is “where possible” avoid public transport. Where possible avoid, doesn’t meant do use it. And it’s exactly that, advise.
If your mental health is suffering being stuck in and your a train or bus enthusiast, having a day travelling by those methods would almost certainly improve your mental health, perfectly acceptable by law.
Catch a train or bus a couple of hours each way, take a walk at destination and go home. Perfectly acceptable within law as a walk is exercise, and unlimited travel to carry out that exercise is permitted as long as you return home to sleep overnight.

A local (Autisic) bus spotter to me was on receiving end of abuse for posting bus photos every few days since march. All were taken within 1 hour walk of his house, all he’d done was take his daily exercise walk and snapped photos whilst walking. This was always acceptable in law, but social media police knew better!

Autists I can understand why they might struggle. We are currently having a bit of a running battle with a boy of about 10 who, having been under lockdown, had taken to standing in his garden next to the railway doing that stupid flushing the bog style hand gesture that railway enthusiasts of a certain sort do when they want the train driver to blow the horn.

Unfortunately, he has memorised the train and crew diagrams so if the crew don't respond he has taken to storming up to the station and haranguing the driver through the cab window. Being a young lad who is clearly autistic he is being tolerated but if he had been allowed to hang out at the station for an hour as usual (it is surrounded by whistle boards) the problem might not have arisen. If he continues it is sadly likely that some sort of action will be taken against him because child or not we don't come to work to have people shouting through the window for not blowing the horn.

 

[Qwerty133]

Autists I can understand why they might struggle. We are currently having a bit of a running battle with a boy of about 10 who, having been under lockdown, had taken to standing in his garden next to the railway doing that stupid flushing the bog style hand gesture that railway enthusiasts of a certain sort do when they want the train driver to blow the horn.

Unfortunately, he has memorised the train and crew diagrams so if the crew don't respond he has taken to storming up to the station and haranguing the driver through the cab window. Being a young lad who is clearly autistic he is being tolerated but if he had been allowed to hang out at the station for an hour as usual (it is surrounded by whistle boards) the problem might not have arisen. If he continues it is sadly likely that some sort of action will be taken against him because child or not we don't come to work to have people shouting through the window for not blowing the horn.

Autistic or not his parents should be preventing a child of that age from making it to the station at the current time. Sounds like it'd be a good idea for a couple of BTP officers to make a trip to the household and have a chat with the parents about appropriate behaviour.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Autistic or not his parents should be preventing a child of that age from making it to the station at the current time. Sounds like it'd be a good idea for a couple of BTP officers to make a trip to the household and have a chat with the parents about appropriate behaviour.

That was my first reaction - why are the parents not in control of whether a 10 year old is out or not in any circumstances?

Having said that, it's quite possible that they too are driven to distraction - it mustn't be easy to be a parent of an autistic kid in this situation (or to be that kid).

 

[LowLevel]

At least one or both parents are generally visible somewhere on the station if he is there, but not always. At present they've taken to camping out on the platform sunning themselves with another child in a pushchair while he runs from one end of the station to the other asking both the driver and guard to blow the bloody horn for him.

He has been around for quite a while and has mostly just attracted a wry grin from us, it only seems to me to have been since the lockdown that his behaviour has deteriorated.

I am very well aware that for some autistic children trains are just about the only thing that makes them tick - I used to give one lad I know my green flag and let him wave it and despite being totally non verbal his face used to light up. I don't want to put negative connotations on to something for someone so young so we for now are just hoping he settles down with lockdown easing.

 

[yorkie]

That can't be allowed to continue, but discussion of strategies for handling such behaviour would be for a separate thread.

 

[yorksrob]

I gather that there will be some sort of crystallising of the latest round of guidance today. It will be intersting to see if anything different comes of it in relation to travel by public transport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I gather that there will be some sort of crystallising of the latest round of guidance today. It will be intersting to see if anything different comes of it in relation to travel by public transport.

I'm sure the Press will have thoroughly leaked whatever it is by lunchtime. (I was surprised that track and trace wasn't leaked - everything else has been!)

 

[yorkie]

I gather that there will be some sort of crystallising of the latest round of guidance today. It will be intersting to see if anything different comes of it in relation to travel by public transport.

Yes there are some further relaxations due soon, so let's pause this thread until the legislation is updated.

As for the guidance regarding transport modes, I can't see any material change for many months, in that people will be asked to cycle or walk wherever practicable, while for longer journeys those who have cars will continue to be encouraged to use them. For journeys where none of these modes are possible or practicable, public transport can be used and that's not going to change.

I do hope the way this advice is worded is communicated better going forward, but I am not counting on that.

If anyone has anything they'd like to add to this thread before the legislation is updated, feel free to click the report button, and let us know what post you'd like to make and we will consider opening it before then.

 

[Mag_seven]

The new government (English) regulations have now been published

The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020

These Regulations require the closure of businesses selling food or drink for consumption on the premises, and businesses listed in Part 2 of Schedule 2, to protect against the risks to public health arising from coronavirus, except for limited permitted uses. Restrictions are imposed on...

www.legislation.gov.uk

In the context of this thread the restrictions on movement are as follows:

Restrictions on movement
[F176.—(1) No person may, without reasonable excuse, stay overnight at any place other than the place where they are living.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), the circumstances in which a person (“P”) has a reasonable excuse include cases where—

(a)P needs to stay elsewhere to attend a funeral, as—
(i)a member of the deceased person’s household,
(ii)a close family member of the deceased person, or
(iii)if no-one within paragraph (i) or (ii) is attending, a friend of the deceased person;
(b)P is an elite athlete, a coach of an elite athlete, or (in the case of an elite athlete who is under the age of 18), a parent of the elite athlete, and needs to stay elsewhere for the purposes of training or competition;
(c)P needs to stay elsewhere while moving house;
(d)it is reasonably necessary for P to stay elsewhere—
(i)for work purposes, or for the provision of voluntary or charitable services;
(ii)to provide care or assistance to a vulnerable person, including relevant personal care within the meaning of paragraph 7(3B) of Schedule 4 to the Safeguarding of Vulnerable Groups Act 2006;
(iii)to provide emergency assistance;
(iv)to avoid injury or illness, or to escape a risk of harm;
(v)to obtain medical assistance;
(e)P needs to stay elsewhere to fulfil a legal obligation or participate in legal proceedings;
(f)P is a child that does not live in the same household as their parents, or one of their parents, and the overnight stay is necessary to continue existing arrangements for access to, and contact between, parents and children;
(g)P is unable to return to the place where P lives, because—
(i)it is not safe for P to live there,
(ii)P may not lawfully travel there, or is required by law to stay in another place, or
(iii)the place where P is living is not available to P for any other reason.
(3) Paragraph (1) does not apply to any person who is homeless.

(4) For the purposes of paragraph (1), the place where a person is living includes the premises where they live together with any garden, yard, passage, stair, garage, outhouse or other appurtenance of such premises.]

 

[yorkie]

Effectively this means there is no restriction on travel, except for staying overnight (subject to the exceptions detailed in the legislation)

If anyone wishes to make any suggestions that the legislation be changed, this thread is not for that purpose and any such discussion should take place in a suitable thread.

This thread is purely to discuss what is allowed by the legislation and not for any other purpose please.

Obviously there advice is that we are all encouraged to continue to walk or cycle as much as possible; where that is not possible for any given journey, the advice is to travel by car, if you have access to a car; and if none of the above are possible, travel by public transport.

The following threads may also be of interest;

Long term social distancing: Impact on public life & public transport?

Social and physical distancing (e.g. being at least 2 metres away from the next person at all times) could be here to stay for the next 2+ years, or until a vaccine / effective drug treatment for Covid-19 is developed. I think it's becoming increasingly clear that even once the current...

www.railforums.co.uk

Could Byelaw 13 be used to restrict train travel to specific groups of people e.g. Keyworkers?

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/what-travel-is-currently-allowed-by-the-legislation.204411/ Firstly, there is nothing in legislation that states only key workers are allowed to use public transport (and, incidentally, key workers are no different from anyone...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Huntergreed]

Is there a document that outlines the Scottish legislation? I'm wanting to know what the rules are here and how they differ from the English but I can't see anything in the 'routemap'/exit strategy document.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Rules in Wales are more restrictive than those in England.
In particular there is a "stay local" rule which limits travel to 5 miles from home without good reason.
So that more or less rules out optional travel across the border, unless you happen to live in border towns like Saltney, Chirk, Montgomery, Knighton, Hay or Chepstow.
Many "hotspots" are also still closed, or their car parks and facilities are. "Residents Only" is a common sign.
TfW is also still running a limited service based on the thin Sunday schedules.

 

[Starmill]

A crime to stay "overnight" - and no definition of what overnight means in the Regulations. Bizarre.

 

[Starmill]

I would add that all of the same doubts about whether these Regulations are lawful as before still apply, particularly that the Secretary of State doesn't have the power to actually make them in this way under the Health Protection Act, that they haven't been approved by Parliament or even laid before Parliament before they came into force and that no notice more than one day was given. They may now also contravene Article 8 of the Convention Rights, by restrictions on private activities which would otherwise be lawful, not in the pursuit of one of the reasons laid out by the Convention to remove those Rights.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Personally I wouldn't get too het up about the current laws guidelines as I expect them to be only temporary for a couple of weeks. Once non-essential shops and tourist attractions are allowed to open on 15 June, how can the government seriously try to prevent non-essential travel? Discourage it, maybe but not prevent it!

 

[Ianno87]

A crime to stay "overnight" - and no definition of what overnight means in the Regulations. Bizarre.

If you stay across midnight (between 2359 and 0001)?

Provided you arrive after 0200 or leave before 0300?

Provided you don't sleep?

Lots of interpretations!

 

[richw]

Personally I wouldn't get too het up about the current laws guidelines as I expect them to be only temporary for a couple of weeks. Once non-essential shops and tourist attractions are allowed to open on 15 June, how can the government seriously try to prevent non-essential travel? Discourage it, maybe but not prevent it!

If you read the guidelines there is no mention to essential travel anywhere in government documents. This is a term being misused everywhere.
however Some bus operators who set their own T&Cs have added it to conditions of travel

 

[Huntergreed]

If you read the guidelines there is no mention to essential travel anywhere in government documents. This is a term being misused everywhere.
however Some operators who set their own T&Cs have added it to conditions of travel

Are operators allowed to do this and add extra rules and guidelines into their terms and conditions at will? I wouldn't assume so but it's been occurring plenty over the last few months.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A crime to stay "overnight" - and no definition of what overnight means in the Regulations. Bizarre.

Better that it's not defined (so a Court can decide reasonableness), because otherwise it becomes a curfew and we don't want that nor is there any need for it. Nor do we want to fine people who stop for a kip at the motorway services for an hour in preference to driving tired.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are operators allowed to do this and add extra rules and guidelines into their terms and conditions at will? I wouldn't assume so but it's been occurring plenty over the last few months.

Bus companies can add anything they like, provided it isn't racist, sexist etc, as they are wholly private businesses and can therefore decline any business of their choosing with or without giving a reason.

TOCs - well, I'm not sure what deal has been agreed with the Government?

 

[Luke McDonnell]

Regarding the new regulations they now seem to say that gatherings of up to 6 persons are permitted in public or private outdoors but interestingly and perhaps more significant from a railway or train travel point of view it also implies that gatherings indoors between 2 or more persons (who do not live together) in private or public are prohibited unless with reasonable excuse (e.g. for work reasons). The legislation seems to define indoors in a public context as an enclosed public space as defined by the smoking ban legislation and AFAIK stations and other railway property are technically private property? Can anyone clarify that it is technically a breach of the regulations now to travel by train or public transport with someone you don't live with?? It mentions gatherings between 2 or more persons but what would be and not be a gathering? Would it technically be OK to travel on a train e.g. with a friend or family member who you don't live with if you travel in separate coaches on a train or in a different part of the carriage but not sit together or opposite each other at a table seat for example? And then there is the issue with train spotters as well as passengers at stations - does this mean that you are not technically permitted to spot with a friend or fellow spotter at a major station with a roof even if you are 2 metres apart? Shopping too - presumably now we are allowed to meet a friend or family member who we don't live with out of doors but shopping centres, bus stations and of course I would imagine at least enclosed major railway stations are off limits? I don't think the BTP would be enforcing this otherwise a lot of spotters might not be to happy or people wanting to travel places with friends and family I hope these regulations don't last to long I would not want to see a situation with the BTP asking if you live with the person you with if that is the case we would be moving towards a police state but I don't think it would happen like that can anyone clarify?

Luke

 

[LowLevel]

Luke - trainspotting at stations is neither here nor there as it has always been possible to forbid it with no more than a say so from the designated person in charge.

Numerous locations, notably Doncaster of the popular ones, have barred trainspotting on a temporary basis.

 

[Starmill]

Better that it's not defined (so a Court can decide reasonableness), because otherwise it becomes a curfew and we don't want that nor is there any need for it. Nor do we want to fine people who stop for a kip at the motorway services for an hour in preference to driving tired.

This is certainly not true. It leaves Police Forces and Crown Prosecution Service in an impossible position if laws are written this way. It would normally never be done, or would be rare, and subject to criticism. Criminal behaviour should be generally understood and understandable, and only where necessary defined in law by precedent,and never left to allow for allegations or charges against hundreds before judges even see it. This leads to people being charged and pleading guilty, leaving someone with a criminal record, when in fact the behaviour wasn't an offence and both the prosecutor and the suspect just didn't know it.

To prove that this is still true, a legal definition has very been belatedly added to the Regulations for 'gathering'.

The defenition is missing because of poor drafting, which is endemic throughout all of the Regulations we've seen from Hancock. Legal drafting has been genuinely miserable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Laws are very often written with the intention of being interpreted "by the man on the Clapham omnibus".

What would you propose as a definition that would be all-encompassing? The only one I can think of is an actual curfew, which I would oppose, not least because it could cause issues for e.g. those going for a very early morning run who by choosing to do so (and avoiding crowds) are making a good choice, not a bad one, or, as I said, criminalising someone who stopped for a quick kip at the services before he fell asleep at the wheel, or homeless people.

I genuinely can't think of a way to do it. I'm sure we all have a decent idea what we're not meant to do (basically to have a proper night's kip somewhere other than home), but it is incredibly difficult to fully codify it.

 

[Starmill]

Laws are very often written with the intention of being interpreted "by the man on the Clapham omnibus".

Precisely! That's why important words are defined sensibly. Unless their dictionary definition leaves no possible room for doubt of course, which clearly does not apply to these offences.

What would you propose as a definition that would be all-encompassing?

A question to be answered by lawmakers who believe the behaviour ought to be criminalised. I am vehemently opposed, personally.

Perhaps if they didn't come up with such implausible offences in the first place, easier drafting would be possible...

 

[Skymonster]

I am somewhat perturbed and very disappointed at the messaging displayed on the EMR website when any attempt is made to buy a ticket.



I have a particular problem with the second bullet “My travel is essential because I am a key worker, or a worker not able to work from home.” This seems to be a case of EMR making up rules for itself and not adapting to the latest situation, as the current laws and guidelines do not prohibit travel by public transport, even for leisure purposes, if using other forms of transport is not viable. It is also concerning that lying - ticking all of the boxes when they don’t all apply - could be used against a passenger should it ultimately be proven that they [for example] are not a key worker.

 

[Huntergreed]

I am somewhat perturbed and very disappointed at the messaging displayed on the EMR website when any attempt is made to buy a ticket.

View attachment 78913

I have a particular problem with the second bullet “My travel is essential because I am a key worker, or a worker not able to work from home.” This seems to be a case of EMR making up rules for itself and not adapting to the latest situation, as the current laws and guidelines do not prohibit travel by public transport, even for leisure purposes, if using other forms of transport is not viable. It is also concerning that lying - ticking all of the boxes when they don’t all apply - could be used against a passenger should it ultimately be proven that they [for example] are not a key worker.

Indeed, yet another example of a TOC making up the rules. Shapps and the DfT must be aware of this and turning a blind eye to it, presumably because it keeps people off, but when more shops and businesses on the 16th, there’s going to have to be a rethink sooner or later.

 

[yorksrob]

Has anybody sent EMR the latest guidance:

National lockdown: Stay at Home

Coronavirus remains a serious threat across the country. Find out what you can and cannot do.

www.gov.uk

"
1.13 Can I use public transport if I’m seeing friends in a park or going to my parents’ garden?

You should avoid using public transport if you can. You should cycle, walk or drive wherever possible. Consider all other forms of transport before using public transport. If you need to use public transport, use should follow the safer travel guidance for passengers.

"