On @BBCr4today @pritipatel was asked if a family of 4 stoping and chatting with another family of 4 on the way to the park was "mingling" which was banned.

She suggested it was - people listening will think 'mingling' on the way to the park is banned.

This is *wrong* [thread]
The ban on mingling has a specific context and definitely does *not* apply to two families meeting on the way to the park.

It is about events organised by charities/businesses/public authorities where 'qualifying groups' (households up to 6) must not mingle with each other /2
People walking to the park must not form a 'gathering' of more than 6. But that has a different definition

A gathering is where people are "present together... in order to engage in any form of social interaction..."

I doubt people accidentally bumping into each other... /3
.... saying 'hi' would meet that definition as they are not there 'in order' to socially engage, they have bumped into each other unintentionally.

There is no definition of "mingling" though Patel offered one as "people coming together". That is probably wrong - too wide /4
You can read the full regulation 5 here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/684/regulation/5/made

It is really disappointing that the Minister who signed these regulations into law doesn't understand them herself. The government should urgently correct her /5
This is what happens when you draft criminal laws in secret, spring them on country 20 minutes (yes really) before they come into force, make them increasingly complex and unworkable. Reg 5 (gatherings) has ballooned from 850 to over 2,000 words - PM said it was "simplifying" /6
And the idea that people should stop basic social interaction, added to policing minister's plea yesterday for people to report each other, is terrible for social cohesion - we are in the middle of a pandemic and we can strengthen social ties whilst physically socially distancing
More here https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1305276954816503808?s=20
Am I being unfair on Priti Patel? You may say, well this is a pretty vague law anyway and she did eventually say something to the effect of people should wear masks and socially distance. ...
... But there has been a theme throughout the pandemic of complex laws being drafted in secret and released shortly before coming into force. This has been the cause of huge public and police confusion, exacerbated by ministers not really understanding law before explaining it.
A fair response might be - well, Covid cases are increasing, we need to make it clear (through law and/or guidance) that people can't go about their everyday lives unless they mitigate risk. But, I can't see how unclear laws passed by diktat and not well understood help that.
I am not saying there should be no criminal laws around the lockdown - I am not a behavioural scientist, I am a lawyer. But I have the strong sense that they could be done differently and better - treating the public more like adults, and helping police - than at present.
Here’s the clip https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/1305802978406944768/video/1
You can follow @AdamWagner1.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: