I am grateful to Daphne Caine MHK for letting me have the GCs signed on the 1st of April, but not published on the normal website until 5th April. I have revised this blog to link to the documents there.
Closure of premises.
GC66 was made on the 1st of April, but does not come into effect until the 6th of April, when the previous GC dealing with closure of premises expires. The changes are all in the Schedule.
There is a change to the detail of the list of persons who a tourist premise may open for, with a former reference to persons described in Part 2 para4(r) and 4(t) in the Prohibition Notice on Movement being replaced with a reference to persons described in part 2, para5(1)(s) and (u) (see below for my comment on reordering in this paragraph). There is no substantial change.
The instances when construction work is permitted has expanded. The former GC stated that “Building and other trade sites which are worked on or occupied by more than two persons are closed”; this has now been deleted. Formerly, even outdoor construction work was limited to a maximum of two persons, and even then they were required to “work with full mitigations in place following clear risk assessments” – these limits have now been removed. Outdoor work is not limited to two workers at a location, and there is no need for a risk assessment or “full mitigations”. The general duties – applicable to all premises under para. 6 – to maintain social distancing and adequate hygiene, and to adopt any measures reasonably practicable to reduce the risk of infection remain. Indoor work, on the other hand, has a new restriction. Two persons may work together in a premises consisting of only one room (such to full mitigations etc), but if there is more than one room, only one person may work in each room. Thus, jobs requiring two persons to carry out are permitted if the premises is one (small) room, but not if it is two (large) rooms.
Garden Centres are given more flexibility, amounting to nearly complete opening. Formerly they were required to minimise public access to the premises. This limit is now gone, and although a garden centre café may not serve food or drink for consumption on the premises, it can sell it for consumption off site.
I mentioned earlier that it was odd to have childcare rules in the premises GC, but the provision of the national Childcare Hub has been retained here, and the scope changed.
Formerly, Part 2 of the Schedule dealt with provision of childcare for DHSC workers only. Although deliberately not publicised, the Hub was at one point operated for DHSC workers only. This has now been amended to “critical workers”. This continues to include DHSC workers, but has been expanded to employees, contractors, or agents for the Department of Home Affairs – “including for the avoidance of doubt any person employed or stationed with the Isle of Man Constabulary”. Otherwise, the legal framework for provision of a national Childcare Hub at the NSC is unchanged.
Child care and education.
GC 67 was made on the 1st of April, but does not come into effect until the 6th of April, when the preceding GC dealing with child care service providers expires. There are no changes (the only change not concerned with dates is the addition of a full stop at the end of a paragraph).
GC 68 was made on the 1st of April, but does not come into effect until the 6th of April, when the preceding GC dealing with educational institutions expires. There are no changes (the only change not concerned with dates is the remove of an accurate, but not necessary, paragraph identifier).
Movement and gatherings.
GC 69 was made on the 1st of April, and came into effect at 00:01 on 2nd of April – some days before it was published to the general public required to abide by it. GC69 deals with restrictions on movement, and replaces GC 64, which would otherwise have run until the 6th of April.
Category A,B, and C persons – the reference to permission to leave in accordance with para.5(1)(t) is changed to 5(1)(u), as part of a general renumbering required as noted below..
The existing right to leave home to exercise alone or with your household remains, but there is a new right “in order to gather in an outdoor place for exercise, recreation, or leisure” (new para.5(1)(e)). Because this was added to the middle of the list, this changes the numbering of later grounds (necessitating the two changes noted above). Additionally, an explicit right has been removed. Formerly, members of Tynwald could leave home “to undertake essential constituency duties”. This has now been deleted. Members of Tynwald remain, however, defined as “Key public services” in the Schedule, and so entitled to leave home “to perform the duties of his or her office or employment in the provision of an essential service” (para.5(1)(b)).
So this GC allows you to leave home to gather outdoors for exercise, recreation, or leisure. As might be expected, we have a new gathering GC, GC 70, made on the 1st of April and taking effect at 00:01 on 2nd of April – again some days before published to the general public required to abide by it. There are two significant changes.
Firstly, there is a new paragraph dealing with gathering in an outdoor place for exercise, recreation, or leisure. Under para.10 this gathering may consist of 10 persons or fewer, from an unlimited number of households, in an outdoor place “where other persons may be present” (para.14). The other persons referred to must be a reference to those not in the 10 person gathering (you could, for instance, exercise with your household where others were present already). So could 10 groups of 10 people lawfully gather on – for a wild hypothetical – a beach? The answer is not deliberately. If you agree for a group of 10 to gather on the beach, and there happen to be other groups of 10 that have had the same idea, then the separate gatherings of 10 people are lawful. If you have arranged with the other groups to all be there, that is a gathering of 100 people (not 10 gatherings of 10 people), and so unlawful.
This right is subject to some specific conditions. The outdoor place must not have been closed under the PHR (para.14.1), no person who is part of the gathering may be restricted by self-isolation requirements or other restrictions (para.14.2), the general conditions in part 4 must be complied with (para.14.3), and – in a striking piece of drafting – “social distancing (being no closer in proximity than two (2) metres to another person) is maintained at all times by all persons present other than members of the same household and the wearing of face coverings is strongly advised” (para.14.4).
The section in bold, surely, has no legal force. For guidance to have legal force under this GC it must, per Part 4, be “published on www.gov.im”. If the intention is for persons exercising this new right to be required to wear face coverings, that could be mandated in the law. If that is not the intention, it should not appear in the body of a legal rule, violation of which can result in criminal prosecution and imprisonment. The section in bold should be deleted as soon as possible.
The other change is more straightforward. Construction sites will, from the 6th of April, be able to operate with unlimited numbers of persons working outdoors. This GC has been amended by a new para.26 to allow them to gather at such sites.
Peter Edge's Law Blog. 