DOCSLIB.ORG

Loielo V Giles [2020] VSC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Loielo V Giles [2020] VSC IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted AT MELBOURNE COMMON LAW DIVISION JUDICIAL REVIEW AND APPEALS LIST S ECI 2020 03608 MICHELLE LOIELO Plaintiff v ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR MICHELLE GILES (in her capacity Defendant as Deputy Public Health Commander as authorised to exercise emergency powers by the Chief Health Officer under section 199(2)(a) of the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic)) --- JUDGE: Ginnane J WHERE HELD: Melbourne DATE OF HEARING: 28-29 September, 1-2 October 2020 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 2 November 2020 CASE MAY BE CITED AS: Loielo v Giles MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: [2020] VSC 722 --- JUDICIAL REVIEW – COVID 19 Pandemic – State of emergency – Directions by authorised officer – Stay at Home Directions - Whether power to impose Curfew – Whether plaintiff had standing - Whether authorised officer acted at the direction or behest of the Premier – Whether Curfew decision unreasonable, irrational or illogical – Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 ss 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 111, 197, 198, 199, 200. HUMAN RIGHTS – COVID-19 Pandemic - Stay at Home Restrictions – Curfew – Right of freedom of movement – Right to liberty – Whether restrictions on rights proportionate – Whether less restrictive means reasonably available – Whether act of imposing Curfew incompatible with human rights – Whether proper consideration given to human rights in making Curfew decision – Plaintiff’s standing to bring Charter claims – Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 ss 7(2), 12, 21, 38, 39. --- APPEARANCES: Counsel Solicitors For the Plaintiff Mr M Clarke QC with Ms V Plain and Dr NOH Legal J Harkess For the Defendant Ms K Walker QC, Solicitor-General for Victorian Government the State of Victoria with Mr J Pizer QC, Solicitor’s Office Mr E Nekvapil, Ms S Fitzgerald and Mr T Wood Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 2 The plaintiff’s case ......................................................................................................................... 9 Legislation .................................................................................................................................... 11 Background to the making of the Curfew Direction .............................................................. 14 Mr Andrews’ statements about the curfew ............................................................................. 19 Media Conference 10 September 2020 ..................................................................................... 21 Associate Professor Giles appointed to consider Directions ................................................ 21 Associate Professor Giles decides whether to make the Curfew Direction ........................ 23 The plaintiff commences the proceeding and the curfew is revoked .................................. 25 Associate Professor Giles’ evidence about how she made the Directions .......................... 25 The email chain between Lynch, Sutton and Giles ................................................................ 28 The amendments to the Directions ........................................................................................... 31 Giles’ knowledge of the Premier’s statements ........................................................................ 33 Associate Professor Giles’ reasons for signing the Curfew Direction ................................. 36 Was there power to order a curfew? ............................................................................................. 42 Consideration of submissions about s 200............................................................................... 47 The plaintiff’s standing .................................................................................................................. 50 Consideration of submissions about standing ........................................................................ 53 Ground 1 – Did Associate Professor Giles act under direction? ............................................. 54 Legal principles ........................................................................................................................... 55 The plaintiff’s submissions about ground one........................................................................ 56 Defendant’s submissions on ground one ................................................................................ 58 Consideration of ground one .................................................................................................... 60 Ground 2 – Unreasonableness ....................................................................................................... 62 Consideration of ground two .................................................................................................... 63 Ground 3 – Irrationality / Illogicality ........................................................................................... 65 Consideration of ground three .................................................................................................. 68 Ground 4 – Breach of Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities ................................. 69 Section 39 ...................................................................................................................................... 69 Relevant Charter provisions ...................................................................................................... 70 Plaintiff’s submissions ................................................................................................................ 71 Defendant’s submissions ........................................................................................................... 71 The rights engaged ...................................................................................................................... 72 Which limbs of s 38(1) were engaged? ..................................................................................... 74 Charter questions – The first limb of s 38(1) ........................................................................... 75 Summary of Charter advice received by Associate Professor Giles .................................... 75 Plaintiff’s submissions ................................................................................................................ 79 Defendant’s submissions ........................................................................................................... 80 Consideration of the first limb – Acts incompatible with human rights ............................ 82 Plaintiff’s submissions ...................................................................................................... 85 Defendant’s submissions .................................................................................................. 85 Consideration of second limb - Proper consideration of human rights .............................. 86 Declaratory relief ......................................................................................................................... 88 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 88 SC: 1 JUDGMENT Loielo v Giles HIS HONOUR: Summary 1 This proceeding concerns the legality of a 9:00pm to 5:00am curfew, binding all people living in ‘greater Melbourne’,1 imposed by a Direction made to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. It was contained in the Stay at Home Directions (Restricted Areas) (No 15), which was one of eleven Directions, signed by the defendant, Associate Professor Michelle Giles, an authorised officer and senior medical adviser in the Department of Health and Human Services (‘the Department’) on 13 September 2020. It was made under statutory powers exercisable only when a State of Emergency is in effect in Victoria. The effect of the Curfew was that residents of the Restricted Areas could not leave their home between those hours, except for specified purposes under penalty of a significant fine. I will call the Directions, the Curfew Direction, because, although the Directions contained a number of restrictions, the plaintiff, Ms Michelle Loielo only challenges the Curfew, which on her case, was ‘a step too far’. An 8:00pm to 5:00am Curfew had been introduced on 5 August at the peak of the second wave of COVID-19 infections, so the Directions of 13 September contained a modification of that initial Curfew, as well as a lessening of other restrictions. It is necessary to keep in mind that the Curfew was only one part of the Stay at Home Directions and there were other restrictions, such as the four permitted reasons for leaving home and the ‘ring of steel’ between greater Melbourne and the rest of Victoria. 2 The Curfew was a major restriction of human rights and liberties of the free people of Victoria. No instance of a curfew being imposed in Victoria by the Executive exists in living memory. Curfews are normally imposed to control civil disturbances and widespread outbreaks of lawlessness. 3 This proceeding was given an urgent hearing and was listed to commence on Monday, 28 September. The day before, on the Sunday, at a media conference, the Premier of Victoria, Mr Daniel Andrews, announced the end or revocation of the Curfew with 1 ‘Greater Melbourne’ included 28 Cities and three Shires, one of which was Mornington Peninsula Shire. See Court Book, Loielo v Giles
Load more

Recommended publications
  • COVID-19 Outbreaks in Residential Aged Care Facilities
    COVID-19 and other viral respiratory illness outbreaks in Residential Aged Care Facilities Toolkit to support planning, preparedness, and response We acknowledge and respect Tasmanian Aboriginal people as the traditional owners and ongoing custodians of the land on which we work and live and pay respect to Elders past and present. For around 40 000 years, Aboriginal people have lived on lutruwita/Tasmania, within strong and resilient communities. We acknowledge that as we work to strengthen resilience against respiratory illness across Tasmania. Version 7.1 20 August 2021 Respiratory Illness Outbreaks in Residential Aged Care – Toolkit – Version 7.1 Contents Abbreviations 1 Contacts 1 Introduction 1 Scope and purpose of this document 1 Background 1 Preparedness 4 Prevention 6 Implement hygiene measures 6 Restrict entry to your facility 6 Identification of respiratory illness in an RACF 7 Assessment of staff with fever or respiratory illness 9 Case and Outbreak Management 10 Information sharing 10 COVID-19 10 Other Respiratory illnesses 10 Roles and responsibilities in an outbreak of COVID-19 or other respiratory illness 12 The Outbreak Management Coordination Team 13 Key actions for the RACF in a COVID-19 outbreak 14 Models of care, including place of care 14 Key Resources 16 Appendix 1: Summary of testing process for COVID-19 and other respiratory illnesses in RACF 17 Appendix 2: COVID-19 Outbreak management Plan 18 Appendix 3: PPE Indications for use and purchasing guidance 20 Personal protective equipment for COVID-19 20 Estimating the quantity of PPE required 21 PPE purchasing guidance for COVID-19 22 Appendix 4: Personal protective equipment for contact and droplet precautions.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Health and Wellbeing Board, 07/12
    Public Document Pack AB HEALTH AND WELLBEING BOARD MONDAY 7 DECEMBER 2020 1.00 PM Venue: Peterborough City Council's YouTube Page Contact:: Paulina Ford, Senior Democratic Services Officer at [email protected], or 01733 452508 AGENDA Page No 1. Apologies for Absence 2. Declarations of Interest 3. Minutes of the Health and Wellbeing Board Meeting held on 25 February 3 - 8 2020 4. Peterborough Epidemiology Data Update – Verbal Presentation 5. NHS Cambridgeshire And Peterborough NHS Health Inequalities Strategy 9 - 74 6. Peterborough Community Resilience Group (CRG) Hub And Outbreak 75 - 82 Management Update 7. Report Of The Covid-19 Health Inequalities Recovery Working Group 83 - 110 8. BMI Can Do It: Programme To Support Obesity And Diabetes Inequalities - 111 - 124 December Update Observers may view the meeting online at the Peterborough City Council’s YouTube Page Recording of Council Meetings Any member of the public may film, audio-record, take photographs and use social media to report the proceedings of any meeting that is open to the public. A protocol on this facility is available at: http://democracy.peterborough.gov.uk/documents/s21850/Protocol%20on%20the%20use%20of%20Recording.pd f Did you know? All Peterborough City Council's meeting agendas are available online or via the modern.gov app. Help us achieve our environmental protection aspirations and view this agenda online instead of printing it. 1 Board Members: Cllr J Holdich (Chairman), Dr G Howsam (Vice Chairman), Charlotte Black, Alison Clarke Cllr W Fitzgerald,
    [Show full text]
  • Symptoms of a Broken System: the Gender Gaps in COVID-19 Decision-­ Making
    Commentary BMJ Glob Health: first published as 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003549 on 1 October 2020. Downloaded from Symptoms of a broken system: the gender gaps in COVID-19 decision- making 1,2 3 2 Kim Robin van Daalen , Csongor Bajnoczki, Maisoon Chowdhury, Sara Dada,2,4 Parnian Khorsand,2 Anna Socha,3 Arush Lal,2 Laura Jung,2,5 6 7 8,9 Lujain Alqodmani, Irene Torres , Samiratou Ouedraogo, 10,11 2 12 3 Amina Jama Mahmud, Roopa Dhatt, Alexandra Phelan, Dheepa Rajan To cite: van Daalen KR, A growing chorus of voices are questioning Summary box Bajnoczki C, Chowdhury M, the glaring lack of women in COVID-19 et al. Symptoms of a broken system: the gender gaps decision- making bodies. Men dominating ► Despite numerous global and national commit- in COVID-19 decision- leadership positions in global health has long ments to gender- inclusive global health governance, making. BMJ Global Health been the default mode of governing. This is COVID-19 followed the usual modus operandi –ex- 2020;5:e003549. doi:10.1136/ a symptom of a broken system where gover- cluding women’s voices. A mere 3.5% of 115 iden- bmjgh-2020-003549 nance is not inclusive of any type of diversity, tified COVID-19 decision- making and expert task be it gender, geography, sexual orientation, forces have gender parity in their membership while Handling editor Seye Abimbola race, socio-economic status or disciplines 85.2% are majority men. within and beyond health – excluding those ► With 87 countries included in this analysis, informa- Received 27 July 2020 tion regarding task force composition and member- Revised 22 August 2020 who offer unique perspectives, expertise and ship criteria was not easily publicly accessible for Accepted 24 August 2020 lived realities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Following Is a Draft Translation of the Summons by Jeroen Pols and Willem De Engel Seeking an Immediate End to the Lockdown Measures
    (The following is a draft translation of the summons by Jeroen Pols and Willem de Engel seeking an immediate end to the lockdown measures. Pol and de Engel are part of the group Viruswaanzin) Introduction 1. On 27 February 2020, the first contamination of COVID-19 was detected in the Netherlands. After the WHO classified the outbreak as a pandemic on 11 March 2020, all countries worldwide proceeded to take drastic measures on an unprecedented scale in modern history. In the Netherlands, the outbreak led to strict measures whereby social traffic was virtually shut down due to the closure of schools, universities, libraries, museums, cinemas, restaurants, cafes, gyms, and barbershops. In addition, heavy restrictions have been placed on the freedom of movement of the population, which means that even the non-closed part of society is limited to a very small number of people and can only function to a limited extent. The use of emergency ordinances has been used to enforce these social restrictions and everyone has been urged to stay at home as much as possible. Recreational areas and sports facilities have also been closed or made inaccessible.After more than two months of measures, the official death toll in the Netherlands is 5,830 (persons who died with COVID-19, up until 25 May 2020). Although the actual number that have died with COVID-19 is significantly higher, it has now been established that the virus has only contributed substantially to the cause of death in a few cases. The elderly with underlying health conditions were particularly susceptible to the virus.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Agenda Package
    AGENDA MIDDLESEX-LONDON BOARD OF HEALTH Thursday, September 17, 2020, 6:30 p.m. Citi Plaza Boardroom and Microsoft Teams MISSION - MIDDLESEX-LONDON HEALTH UNIT The mission of the Middlesex-London Health Unit is to promote and protect the health of our community. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH Ms. Maureen Cassidy (Chair) Ms. Aina DeViet (Vice-Chair) Mr. John Brennan Ms. Kelly Elliott Ms. Tino Kasi Ms. Arielle Kayabaga Mr. Ian Peer Mr. Bob Parker Mr. Matt Reid SECRETARY-TREASURER Dr. Christopher Mackie DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST APPROVAL OF AGENDA MINUTES Approve: July 16, 2020 Board of Health July 29, 2020 Special Meeting of the Board of Health September 10, 2020 Special Meeting of the Board of Health Receive: September 10, 2020 Finance & Facilities Committee 1 Item Item # Delegation Recommendation Information Link to Report Name and Number Overview and Lead Additional Information Reports and Agenda Items To provide an update of the September Finance & Facilities Committee September 10, 2020 10, 2020 Finance & Facilities September 10, 2020 Agenda Committee meeting. 1. X X X Meeting Summary Minutes (Report No. 040-20) Lead: Ms. Kelly Elliott, Chair, Finance & Facilities Committee To provide an update on the monitoring of population-level indicators to enable the Health Unit to assess the impact of Monitoring Impacts of the the pandemic and its related public COVID-19 Pandemic and Related Appendix A health measures on the health and well- 2. X Public Health Measures being of the Middlesex-London Appendix B community, and help inform policy and (Report No. 041-20) decision-making. Lead: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Pan American Health Organization Response to Covid-19 in the Americas
    PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION RESPONSE TO COVID-19 IN THE AMERICAS 17 January to 31 August 2020 PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION RESPONSE TO COVID-19 IN THE AMERICAS Contents Introduction....................................................................................................1 El Salvador .............................................................................................71 Epidemiological Situation Analysis ................................................................3 French Departments in the Americas .....................................................72 Region .............................................................................................................4 Grenada ..................................................................................................73 North America subregion ...............................................................................6 Guatemala ..............................................................................................75 Central America subregion ............................................................................6 Guyana ....................................................................................................77 South America subregion ...............................................................................6 Haiti ........................................................................................................79 Caribbean subregion ......................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance for Preventing and Controlling COVID-19 Outbreaks in New Zealand Aged Residential Care
    Guidance for preventing and controlling COVID-19 outbreaks in New Zealand aged residential care v5, 14082020 This document is based on guidance developed by the Communicable Diseases Network Australia (CDNA) and adapted for New Zealand. The document incorporates guidelines from various health authorities including the World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention andContents guidance from the New Zealand Ministry of Health. The guidance provided is based on the available evidence at the time of completion. Guidance is not intended to be a substitute for advice from other relevant sources, such as health professionals, your local district health board (DHB), public health units (PHU), or the Ministry of Health. Clinical judgement and discretion may be required in the interpretation and application of guidance. Health and disability providers should regularly review the Ministry of Health guidelines for health professionals relating to the management of COVID-19 in New Zealand health and disability settings. PHARMAC is publishing updates on supply and other medicine issues on its website: COVID-19: PHARMAC’s response. General guidance for the public is available on the Government COVID-19 website and in the New Zealand National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan. You can also subscribe to the National Health Coordination Centre updates. Contact your local DHB for advice about local support and procedures being put in place to support continuity of care for those receiving aged residential care services. For specific questions about a resident’s or staff member’s health related to COVID-19, call Healthline on 0800 358 5453. It operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
    [Show full text]
  • Governing the Pandemic the Politics of Navigating a Mega-Crisis
    Governing the Pandemic The Politics of Navigating a Mega-Crisis Arjen Boin · Allan McConnell · Paul ’t Hart Governing the Pandemic Arjen Boin · Allan McConnell · Paul ‘t Hart Governing the Pandemic The Politics of Navigating a Mega-Crisis Arjen Boin Allan McConnell Department of Political Science Department of Government and Leiden University International Relations Leiden, The Netherlands University of Sydney Darlington, NSW, Australia Paul ‘t Hart School of Governance Utrecht University Driebergen-Rijsenburg, Utrecht The Netherlands ISBN 978-3-030-72679-9 ISBN 978-3-030-72680-5 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72680-5 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2021. This book is an open access publication. Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • WRR-–-Vulnerability-And-Resilience.Pdf
    Note Vulnerability and resilience WRR reflections on the long-term consequences of the COVID-19 crisis Note Vulnerability and resilience WRR reflections on the long-term consequences of the COVID-19 crisis Vulnerability and resilience. The wrr’s reflections on the long-term consequences of the coronavirus crisis has been written and prepared by: Bart Stellinga (staff member) Marthe Hesselmans (staff member) Josta de Hoog (staff member) Catrien Bijleveld (council member) WRR reflections on the long-term consequences of the COVID-19 crisis 4 Preface The covid-19 pandemic is having major social, political and economic consequences and we will continue feeling these effects for some time to come. In the long term there is a strong likelihood that the crisis will lead to changes in the way we view the world and in the choices we make as a society. Dutch society now faces the challenges of building on what has gone well, learning lessons where improvements are possible, and responding to the changes that are coming down the line. In this report, the wrr provides suggestions and ideas for the government and for parliament as they tackle the consequences of the coronavirus outbreak in the Netherlands. Although many things have gone well in this country during the current crisis, the pandemic has also revealed a number of important vulnerabilities. As we will point out, the economic and health risks are falling disproportionately on people who are already in a difficult situation, business has found it hard to absorb the shock of this crisis, globalization has proven to be fragile, and international cooperation has been difficult.
    [Show full text]
  • Staging Science: Authoritativeness and Fragility of Models and Measurement in the COVID-19 Crisis
    Staging Science: Authoritativeness and Fragility of Models and Measurement in the COVID-19 Crisis Wouter Van Dooren University of Antwerp Mirko Noordegraaf Utrecht University Published in: Public Administration Review, Volume 80, Issue 4. July/August 2020. Pages 610-615 https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13219 Abstract: In the COVID-19 crisis, society pins its hopes on science to play an authoritative role in reducing uncertainty and ambiguity. But is science up to the task? This is far from self-evident. The demands on science in times of crisis run counter to the values of good, normal science. Crisis science needs to be fast, univocal, personalized, and direct, while normal science is slow, contentious, collective, and sensitive to complexity. Science can only play its atypical role if it is staged in the public arena. Some patterns of staging stand out: personalization, visualization, and connection to lived experiences. So far, the staging of science has been successful, but it is fragile. The COVID-19 crisis shows the potential of well-staged forms of alliance between science and policy, but when the general assumption is that scientists will “solve” societal “problems,” the staging of science has gone too far. Evidence for Practice • The COVID-19 crisis shows that science matters, despite populist tendencies, “fake news,” and “post-truth” leadership. • The normal functioning of science is different from what is expected in crisis mode. • The role of science in a crisis is fragile; science can inform, but it cannot solve societal problems. “Sober, reassuring, nuanced.” These were the words of Paul Waugh of the Huffington Post on March 3, 2020 (Waugh 2020).
    [Show full text]
  • Bundel16.Pdf
    ‘Niet stoffig, toch?’ 2 ‘Niet stoffig, toch?’ Terugblik op het kabinet-Rutte III Redactie: Jan Schinkelshoek en Gerrit Voerman Met bijdragen van: Joop van den Berg, Bert van den Braak, Caelesta Braun, Anjo Harryvan, Jan van der Harst, Alexander van Kessel, Tom Louwerse, Simon Otjes, Jan Schinkelshoek en Gerrit Voerman Deel 16 van de Montesquieu-reeks 3 Het Montesquieu Instituut is een multifunctioneel onderzoeks- en onderwijsinstituut voor vergelijkende parlementaire geschiedenis en constitutionele ontwikkeling in Europa. Het werkt samen met andere wetenschappelijke instellingen in Nederland en in Europa. Partners van het Montesquieu Instituut zijn: − de Campus Den Haag en de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden − de Capaciteitsgroep Publiekrecht van de Universiteit Maastricht − het Centrum voor Parlementaire Geschiedenis verbonden aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen − het Documentatiecentrum Nederlandse Politieke Partijen van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen − het Parlementair Documentatie Centrum van de Universiteit Leiden. Het Montesquieu Instituut publiceert een maandelijkse electronische nieuwsbrief, De Hofvijver, waar u zich via de site op kunt abonneren; ook publiceert het Montesquieu Instituut naast de Hofvijver en de Montesquieu Reeks, policy papers en tal van blogs. Policy papers en blogs worden via de site gepubliceerd. Voor zijn werk hoopt het Montesquieu Instituut op uw steun te kunnen rekenen: we zien dan ook graag donaties tegemoet op IBAN NL27 INGB 0004921799 ten name van het Montesquieu Instiutuut onder vermelding van ‘donatie’. Al het materiaal uit deze bundel mag zonder toestemming vooraf en zonder vergoeding gebruikt en gereproduceerd worden voor zover dat gebeurt voor niet- commerciële doeleinden. Bij dit gebruik dient de auteur, de titel van de bundel en het Montesquieu Instituut als bron vermeld te worden.
    [Show full text]
  • Southampton Covid-19 Outbreak Management Plan
    Southampton COVID-19 Local Outbreak Management Plan: Prevention & Control Southampton City Council, Public Health and EPRR www.southampton.gov.uk Document Control Name of document Southampton COVID-19 Outbreak Management Plan First published 20th June 2020 Version and date Version 1.3 – April 2021 Owner SCC Director of Public Health Author SCC Public Health and EPRR Team Next review due This plan will be continually reviewed as: • local protocols and processes are developed through task and finish groups, • changes to national guidance occur, and • lessons are identified from testing the plan and real-life events. Version Control Plan Date Remark(s) Reviewer(s) Version 1.0 29/06/2020 Finalised and published first version post HPB approval ELD/AMc/DC/ SCC PH Team 1.1 13/7/2020 Legal & enforcement: Updated terminology & inclusion of Acts ELD/AMc Testing: Updated diagram Addition of in/OOHs departmental contacts directory University Action Card Update to OEB accountability Mass Gathering updated guidance Amend plan review dates to monthly 1.2 05/02/2021 Section 1: Reference to SCC COVID-19 dashboard. ELD/AMc Section 2: Figure 1: Governance arrangements and updates to text including additional COVID-19 specific working groups and national and local oversight arrangements. Section 4: Updated and additional definitions, roles and responsibilities, and recent changes to legislation. Section 5 – Inclusion of National Escalation Categories & National Action Cards. Section 7: Includes references to the national action cards, updated text on higher risk settings, includes advice on events. Section 9: Updated on all Testing streams and Contact Tracing inc local. Section 11: Covid Marshalls and Covid Champions Section 3: Vaccination Programme update Annex 1: Reference to exercise testing including cross border.
    [Show full text]