Flights from coronavirus hotspots continue to land in Britain!

Arrivals at Heathrow - Not being screened or checked for temperature

By Derek Pattison

Brian Bamford (Bammy), has cast doubt ("April Fool's Day comment on airports), on the validity of comments that I posted from Nicola Grundy, on Northern Voices, regarding the situation at Heathrow Airport. He seems to think that her comment is somewhat misleading and doesn't reflect the true situation at Heathrow Airport. While I cannot see that that in her comment, Ms Grundy claims that it's " business as usual' at Heathrow, since posting her comment, I have also checked further. 

Screening for coronavirus began in January in other airports around the world, but in the UK, it was simply ruled out as being ineffective. Public Health England said, "airports have been provided with leaflets and posters." Surely, this is like applying a sticking plaster to a gaping wound?

On the 30th and 31st March 2020, the Sun newspaper gave the following report about the situation at Heathrow Airport.

"Flights from coronavirus hot spots were still landing in Britain on Monday with thousands of passengers not being checked for symptoms. Planes from Italy, America, and Spain, all touched down at Heathrow yesterday morning with passengers simply walking through arrivals and onto public transport. Although many had masks, there were queues at arrivals and departures and there appeared to be barely any social distancing between travellers. One traveller posted an alarming video on Twitter showing dozens of passengers queuing up at check-in with no social distancing. He wrote:

'Unfortunately the penny has not dropped. While millions of people are in lockdown to help our brave NHS, this is what is going on at London Heathrow. Someone needs to get a grip.'

Around 12,000 passengers passed through Heathrow yesterday and although this was way down on the usual 213,000 a day and landings and takes off were down to one every fifteen minutes - as opposed to one every 45 seconds it still meant regular traffic all day."

If passenger arrivals at Heathrow Airport, can still at this late hour, walk straight onto the streets of Britain without any screening, even temperature screening, when they may have come from a high-risk country, then what is the point of police roadblocks, police drones, and telling people to stop at home, when people are still flying into the UK who may be contagious and possibly spreading the virus to other members of the public? This is tantamount to pissing in the wind.

First person in UK to be prosecuted under Coronavirus Act, has conviction quashed!

Marie Dinou - First Person in UK to be prosecuted under Coronavirus Act

A 41-year-old woman from York, who is the first person in Britain to be prosecuted under the Coronavirus Act 2020, has had her conviction quashed after it was found by legal experts that the British Transport Police (BTP), the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), and North Tyneside magistrates court, had bungled the case because she had been found guilty, using the wrong legislation.

Marie Dinou, from York, was arrested by BTP last Saturday after being found "loitering between platforms" at Newcastle Central Station and charged with failing to comply with the requirements of the Coronavirus Act 2020. She was the first person in Britain to be prosecuted for allegedly breaching Britain's coronavirus lockdown. On Monday, at North Tyneside magistrates' court, she was fined £800 after she was found guilty of "failing to provide identity or reasons for travel to police, and failing to comply with requirements under the Coronavirus Act."

According to the charge sheet, Ms Dinou, was prosecuted under Schedule 21 of the Coronavirus Act 2020. This clause is intended to force people to self-isolate or be tested for coronavirus, if they're suspected to have the virus and are endangering the public by being out of the house. But the prosecution began to unravel when BTP later confirmed that they didn't believe Ms Dinou was ill at the time of her arrest, nor did they ask her to self-isolate, or to be screened.

Legal experts, including Kirsty Brimelow QC, Chairwoman of the Bar Human Rights Committee, quickly established that the case had been bungled by BTP, the CPS, and the magistrates court, because Ms Dinou had been found guilty using the wrong legislation. Her conviction was then quashed and BTP later apologised. Ms Brimelow told 'The Times':

"Powers under the Coronavirus Act do not relate to a direction to provide identity or reason for a journey. So it seems that she (Ms Dinou), has been prosecuted and convicted for an offence which does not exist under this act."

Critics have warned that Ms Dinou's case demonstrates how the police may try to treat anyone out during the lockdown as suspect, who are 'potentially infectious', to carry out arrests. Silkie Carlow, of 'Big Brother Watch', has accused police forces of going to far. He said:

"The Coronavirus Act gives the police huge powers to police, to arbitrarily fine, detain and punish, anyone in this country. The new law defines 'potentially infectious persons so loosely, as to be meaningless and capture the entire British public...These emergency powers are the most draconian ever seen in peacetime Britain...These breath-taking powers can even be used to detain and isolate our children."

Police officers now have the powers to fine parents £60 for failing to stop a child going out. 

The failed prosecution of Ms Dinou, is yet another blow for the police, who have been accused of being over-zealous and desirous of nudging the UK towards a police state. The 'National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC), have issued guidance which states that under the act, police officers have no powers to 'stop and account' or force someone to explain themselves. The guidance spells out that officers can remove a youngster from the streets and anyone with them if they refuse to go home. It also says that checks on every vehicle are 'disproportionate' and the public should not be punished for travelling a reasonable distance to exercise.

Despite the NPCC urging officers "to make sensible decisions and use enforcement as a last resort", police forces in areas such as North Yorkshire, Devon and Cornwall, have put road blocks into place or deployed high visibility patrols, to quiz motorists about their plans. Derbyshire Police, were also heavily criticised for using drones to spy on fell walkers in the Peak District. 

Yesterday, the 'Independent' reported that police in the Isle of Man, had taken into custody a person "for failing to adhere to the new legislation requiring him to self-isolate." It is believed that the person arrested, had recently returned to the Isle of Man, following a trip to Spain.

Lord Sumption slams Derbyshire police for 'disgraceful' behaviour!

Lord Sumption - Supreme Court Judge, 2012-2018

A FORMER Supreme Court Judge has accused Derbyshire Police of 'disgraceful behaviour' for the way in which, they have approached restrictions on public movement, during the 'lockdown' over the Coronavirus epidemic.

Lord Sumption, who was a Supreme Court Judge between 2012-2018, told Radio 4's World At One, that the use of drones by Derbyshire Police to film walkers in the Peak District was "disgraceful" and "Shamed our policing traditions." He likened Derbyshire Police's approach to the restrictions on public movement, as akin to living in a "a police state."

The force was heavily criticised after posting some of the footage on social media last week.  Derbyshire Police said they had deployed drones in the Peak District following "public outrage" when crowds defied government advice to stay indoors and that their actions, were in line with national government advice.

But Lord Sumption, told World At One, that their efforts to dissuade people from "travelling to take exercise in the open country" were excessive.  He said such behaviours "are not contrary to the regulations simply because ministers have said that they would prefer us not to."  He added:

"The tradition of policing in this country is that policemen are citizens in uniform, they are not members of a disciplined hierarchy operating just at the government's command...The police have no power to enforce ministers' preferences but only legal regulations which don't go anything like as far as the government's guidance."

Although Derbyshire Police have said they were acting in accordance with government advice on overcrowding and "echoed what people in our communities were saying", Lord Sumption said that the efforts to dissuade people from "travelling to take exercise in the open country" were excessive.  He told the Radio 4 programme:

"I have to say that the behaviour of Derbyshire Police in trying to shame people into using their undoubted right to travel to take exercise in the country and 'wrecking beauty spots' in the fells so people don't want to go there is frankly disgraceful...This is what a police state is like. It's a state in which the government can issue orders or express preferences with no legal authority and the police will enforce ministers' wishes. I have to say that most police forces have behaved in a thoroughly sensible and moderate fashion. Derbyshire Police have shamed our policing traditions."

In response to the criticism of "wrecking beauty spots" by dyeing the water at the Blue Lagoon near Buxton, Derbyshire Police said the tactic had "been deployed since 2013" and had received "high levels of local public support."

Since the lockdown measures were introduced in March, there have been questions asked about whether the actions of the police are in accordance with the currant law or whether their actions are of dubious legality, and merely arbitrary. Evidently, Lord Sumption, a former Supreme Court Judge, believes that Derbyshire Police have overstepped the mark and have acted in a way that exceeds their powers and that they are merely enforcing "ministers' preferences," and not the current law.  He argues that the public have an "undoubted right" to travel to the country and that this is "not contrary to the regulations."

What seems to have complicated matters is that the police now seem to have introduced this idea that there is some kind of difference between "essential and non-essential activity" which implies some kind of illegality, and it is highly questionable, as to whether this dichotomy,  has any basis in current English law or makes any sense at all.  For instance, is it non-essential activity, to take your dog or goat for a walk, or go for a jog, or have a walk, or ride your bicycle, or take your kids out for a walk to the local park?

In my view, any response to fighting this virus should be proportionate and applied with common sense.  If you want people's co-operation, you won't get it by alienating people or getting their backs up. That will only lead to a backlash. Hopefully, with the co-operation of the British people, we will get to grips with this virus and get life back to normal as soon as possible.

Following recent criticism, the government have now called on police forces to be 'consistent' on lockdown powers.

 

Is Britain becoming a police state under Boris Johnson?

Police drone footage of Peak National Park

THE outbreak of Coronavirus in Britain is a serious matter, and I fully understand the need to introduce measures to contain and control the spread of the virus. Other countries in Europe and elsewhere, have introduced similar measures including the United States and Australia. But if social distancing is be enforced throughout Britain, then it must be done with proportion and common sense, and it is not clear that the British police can be trusted to do this.

Last week, I was stopped by two police officers in a van while I was walking home. They wanted to know where I had been and where I was going. I told them that I had been out shopping and had called to see a friend and that I was now making my way home. I was told that I shouldn't visit anyone at their home and that I faced imminent arrest if I didn't have a reasonable excuse for being out and about. The police officers said that this had all been ordered by the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson. I was also told that I wasn't permitted time out of doors to undertake exercise. I told them that I knew nothing about these measures and that it sounded to me like we were now living in some kind of police state, in Britain. I told them that I shopped and looked after a vulnerable adult, and I was then allowed to complete my journey. A friend also told me that he'd been stopped one morning by the police while he was on his way to do shopping, while also on foot.

As I write, in the area where I live, Greater Manchester, care workers are still visiting homes, taxi drivers and bus drivers are still carrying passengers about and staff are working in the supermarkets. The dustbins are also being emptied and the post is being delivered. Currently local parks and takeaways are still open for business. Pubs, clubs and restaurants are closed but many shops and banks remain open. And yet, the police are driving about stopping people in the street to see if they've got a reasonable excuse to be out and about and are threatening to arrest people and could fine them, if they haven't. 

When the Prime Minister announced the lockdown on 23 March, he said people would only be able to leave their homes for shopping, one form of exercise a day, any medical need, or to provide care or help for a vulnerable person, or to go to work. Johnson also banned  gatherings of more than two people under the emergency measures.

So when a party of 20 people, gathered for a barbecue in Foleshill, a suburb of Coventry, after the imposition of the lockdown, they were shocked when local police - who'd smelled food being cooked outside - raided the house and tipped over the grill, bringing the party, to a sudden and abrupt conclusion.  The police tweeted:

"Unbelievably, we've just had to deal with 20+ people having a BBQ!! Please listen to government advice else this will get worse and will last longer!! They finished the message, '#RIPBBQ', before attaching a photo of a tipped over grill, with abandoned sausage rolls laying on the ground.

While the actions of the Coventry police may appear to have been justified in this particular case, under the current situation, the police nevertheless, appear to be also cracking down on what is deemed 'non-essential' - and by implication illegal - activity, by the authorities. In less than a week, Britain has become something of a police state, with millions of people effectively under house arrest, and the police being given blanket powers to enforce largely arbitrary rules.

It has been reported that Derbyshire police are using drones to spy on people going on 'non-essential walks' in the Peak District National Park, during the coronavirus lockdown. A video that has been made public, shows police drone footage of unsuspecting members of the public hiking, walking their dogs and watching the sunset. All totally harmless behaviour which is now deemed 'non-essential'. Although the Peak District could hardly be more sparsely populated, and there is little danger of spreading the virus to anyone, Derbyshire Police are warning the public to stay away from the Peak District.

In other parts of the country it is being reported that police are setting up checkpoints on Britain's roads demanding to know where motorists are going. In Cornwall, police threatened to search car boots to check whether drivers were off to the seaside.  In Cumbria, the police have warned members of the public, that they risk being fined if they visit the area, warning: "The Lake District is Closed."

Silkie Carlo, the director of Big Brother Watch, said: "These are chilling powers that create a serious risk of arbitrary policing. Authorities are right to take robust measures to protect public health, but in truth the only way we can control the spead is through well-informed community co-operation, not just criminalisation. Basic safeguards are missing from these extraordinary powers and I'm afraid more draconian powers still are to come from the Coronavirus Act."

Under Boris Johnson, Britain's is creeping towards becoming a police state. Not many weeks ago, Johnson was telling us that there was nothing to worry about because everything was under control and there were contingency plans in place. It was all bollocks  as usual. They hadn't a clue. While football matches were cancelled along with other events, the Cheltenham horse-racing festival went ahead.

What Boris Johnson's Conservative government have managed to do is to panic and spook people and that's why they're panic buying in the shops and supermarkets. They should have also taken effective measures much earlier. Instead, Johnson preferred to toy with the idea of "herd immunity" -  that is letting the virus take it course to a large degree.

As for medical assistance, most of us have been thrown under a bus, because you ain't going to get any or it's going to take forever for you to get to see a doctor. The reason there are fewer deaths in Germany is because they've got a much better health care system than Britain - which has suffered from years of Tory austerity policies since 2010 - and they treat people. But you can bet your bottom dollar, that Prince Charles and Boris Johnson are getting first class medical treatment. Both of them managed to get immediately tested for the virus  when thousands including doctors are denied it. When asked why Prince Charles was able to get tested when others could not - including NHS front-line staff - Health Minister, Edward Argar, told Sky News, that the heir to the British throne's symptoms and conditions, "met the criteria."

How long this lock-down is likely to last is a moot point. Some health professionals have suggested that it might take as long as six months for Britain to get back to normal, Let's hope is doesn't take too long to get back to normal life and not too many lives are lost to the virus.