Lockdown 3.3 – Changes later on 5 March.

Closure of Premises.

GC 2021/0041 replaces the former provisions dealing with closure of premises. Comparing it with its immediate predecessor, there are no changes to the main body of the text, but changes to two parts of the schedule which outlines conditions under which particular sorts of premises may open.

The conditions surrounding construction work – perhaps only construction work carried out otherwise than by the DoI and MuA (this point remains unclear) – are tightened up, in particular by the creation of new limits on the number of persons who may work together. “Building and other trade sites which are worked on by more than two persons are closed”. Work carried out wholly outdoors must be carried out alone, or by a maximum of two persons, and only with “full mitigations in place following clear risk assessments”. Indoor work may be carried out in vacant premises which are not occupied by the normal residents, again by a maximum of two persons with full mitigations.  

The category defined as “Professional practices including legal, accounting, financial, insurance, estate agency and banks or banking services” now appears to be defined as “Financial Services”. Banks may remain open for cashier service, but all other Financial Services – by which I take to mean the rest of this category –must implement work from home measures, and comply with the general rules of para 6, “other than the minimum number of staff required to maintain essential operations”. This cross-reference to para.6, which lays down the conditions that apply to every premises, is not very clear. Para 6(f) allows premises to have a minimum number of staff to maintain essential operations; this part of the Schedule appears to exempt Financial Services from this part of 6(f). What is intended by an exemption to an exemption – does it mean Financial Services may not have the minimum number of staff required to maintain essential operations? Or that in order to maintain essential operations Financial Services (but not other premises) may have more than the minimum number of staff.

Freedom of movement.

GC 2021/42 replaces the former provisions restricting freedom of movement. There are a small number of changes to specific circumstances justifying leaving home, but the most important changes are new, overarching, conditions which must be met for every circumstance, laid down in para.4.

Paragraph 4 provides that a person may only leave their home for one of the specific purposes if “it is not reasonably practicable to achieve the purpose from the person’s home” (para 4(a)). This has potentially very wide implications. For instance exercise remains a valid reason to leave home (now in para.5(1)(d)). In what circumstances is it not reasonably practicable to achieve the purpose of exercise without leaving home? The paragraph also requires that the person leaving home complies with Regulations, Directions, guidance published on www.gov.im; specific conditions associated with particular purposes allowing the leaving of hom; and “must take all reasonable steps to mitigate any risks associated with leaving the person’s home” (para. 4(c)). This is a very important change, making leaving home very much more conditional than in previous iterations.

Turning to specific grounds:

One restriction is linked to the change in child care facilities. Formerly, a good reason to leave home was for a vulnerable person or child to go to a place to be cared for; this has now been restricted to a vulnerable person or “a child of a person who provides an essential service” (para. 5(1)(g)).  The provision allowing a person to leave home to take their child for child care by family members, or other usual carers, so that they may attend a workplace is subject to an important new restriction. This is now usable only where “no other children attend that residence or household, other than children who ordinarily reside there” (para. 5(1)(z)(iii)). Reading these together, children of essential workers only may be taken to another household to be cared for (because they may not leave the house to be cared for unless their parent is an essential worker), but not if any children except those who already live there will be present. So a grandparent who would otherwise care for two different sets of grandchildren to allow their parents to carry out essential work will no longer be able to.

The attending work justification has been greatly simplified, the only requirement remaining being that no more persons are present at any one time than is necessary for the effective operation of the business (para.5(1)(k)).

As may be expected, with the closure of educational institutions, there are knock on effects. The right of a student to leave home to attend an educational institution has been removed. The list of essential services, which continue to allow a person to leave home to deliver, now excludes education and child care, but otherwise is unchanged.

Finally, I had suggested in relation to gathering rules that funerals of more than 10 people may be permitted on a risk assessment of premises, rather than each event individually. This is confirmed by a change to the attending funeral ground, which allows attendance of a funeral provided “in respect of the premises at which the funeral is held” a risk assessment has been agreed (para.5(1)(j)).