DePiffle the ex-PM - wish he would shut up about guidance

Maybe the idiots in MSM and who were questioning him should know this

I asked the UK’s Government Legal Department about social distancing, guidelines being law and enforceable or not and below is what they answered

They have some very dubious reasoning to justify themselves.

Highlighting mine:

1 – the legislation that states the social distancing is a legal requirement and has the force of law and is not just “guidance”

Their answer:

The term “social distancing” is not used in legislation. However, some restrictions which form part of the concept of social distancing are included in legislation as set out below:

– The prohibition on gatherings of two or more people (unless an exemption applies) and the requirement to have a reasonable excuse to leave the house are set out in The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (All Tiers) (England) Regulations 2020 (SI 1374/2020).

The advice relating to the distance to be maintained from others (which is one aspect of social distancing) is not set out in law and is instead set out in guidance.

So does not really explain all the road and footpath closures, signs blotting the landscape and officials acting like jack-booted Nazis when dealing with businesses and the public about having social distancing signs etc in their premises, making customers wait outside and so on does it?

2 – the legislation that states anything with the words “guidance” or “guidelines” in the title is anything other than advice or a recommendation and has the force of law the allows it to be enforced if not followed.

Their answer:

There is no legislation on the legal status of guidance or guidelines. In some instances social distancing guidance advises and informs on the application of the law. Other elements of guidance are produced to inform the public, business and other organisations how they should operate to minimise the risk and spread of COVID-19. The guidance published by the government relating to the COVID-19 pandemic can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/coronavirus. It is not an offence to not comply with guidance but individuals, businesses and other organisations should act in accordance with the guidance produced. You may find this report by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments useful in considering the relationship between legislation and guidance.

https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/4492/documents/45243/default/

So they state that it is not an offence to comply with guidance but businesses etc should act in accordance to guidance – contradictory or what?

I’ve browsed through the report they linked to and cannot find anywhere where it states guidance must be followed as it’s law and legally enforceable.

But one interesting is section 3.3:

The Committee asked the Department for Health and Social Care to confirm that the “rules” relating to limited exercise, local travel, social distancing and shopping only for basic necessities amount to non-statutory advice or guidance that is not legally enforceable. In a memorandum published at Appendix 3, the Department confirms that this is the case. The Committee remains concerned that guidance continues to be used in the context of the emergency pandemic response in a way that appears to purport to impose more severe restrictions than are imposed by law. The “new rules” were widely reported before the Regulations were published and have been the focus of public and media attention. The Committee is concerned that many readers will not readily appreciate the distinction in rule of law terms between provisions of regulations and paragraphs in government guidance; and a statement such as “the law will be updated to reflect these new rules” is likely to add to the confusion by suggesting exact correspondence between the “rules” (which are not in fact rules but guidance) and the law. The Committee considered it important to have confirmed on the record that a number of specific provisions of the guidance, despite being described by Ministers as “rules” and using imperative language, are in fact no more than guidance , and accordingly reports the Regulations for requiring elucidation, provided in the Department’s memorandum. (their highlighting)

So even the committee overseeing the legislation says guidance cannot be enforced and ministers should stop trying to say it is law.

But as was the norm the Committee were ignored and the UK Government carried on being disingenuous with the truth.