Mark Andrews on Saturday: quarantine, strange justice, and the hunt for a sensible name

I can just about understand why the Government introduced quarantine regulations on holidaymakers returning from mainland Spain, even if the way it has done it is a little abrupt, to say the least.

The infection rate in Spain is more than double that of the UK. Granted, it's much lower in the tourist hotspots of the south, but it is also stratospherically high in the north. And we all know there are plenty of loonies around who might go for a drive to test their eyesight.

What I don't understand is why the Canary Islands is included. Their infection rates are lower than in the UK, and while the islands may technically be under Spanish jurisdiction, they are actually in Africa. It would be like the Spaniards banning folk from Gibraltar because of the risk in Leicester.

* * *

Owen Jones, the simpering Guardian columnist who sees everything as a game of Top Trumps in victimhood, is not really my cup of tea. Buy he is entitled to his view like everybody else, and certainly should be allowed to go safely about his business without fear of violence.

So I have no sympathy with far-right football hooligan James Healy who has just been jailed for 32 months after admitting a violent attack on Mr Jones outside a pub.

What is odd, though, is that Mr Jones's politics appear to have been a material factor in the sentence. Healy claimed he didn't know who Mr Jones was – and let's be honest, he doesn't sound like a Guardian reader – but the judge dismissed this, saying the attack was motivated by the campaigner's left-wing views.

But why does it matter? I'm pretty sure being beaten up because you bumped into someone in a pub, as Healy claimed, is just as painful as being beaten up because of your take on economics and transgender rights.

Had the judge believed Healy's version of events, would he have got a lesser sentence? And why should an innocent party have to prove a political motive to get justice? A vicious, unprovoked assault is a vicious unprovoked assault. Full stop.

That's the problem when you have a hierarchy of victimhood. It makes life harder for real victims.

* * *

A new survey reveals the names parents most regret giving their children, with Hunter top of the list for boys.

Now while I've never met anyone with Hunter for their first name, I can see why parents might regret choosing that one. Why would you? Are Hunter's parents big fans of the television show Gladiators? Or maybe it's after David, the smarmy hotel boss out of Crossroads. Or the small family car made by Hillman in the 1970s.

Still it could be worse. When David and Mary Sheldon registered the birth of their newborn son, even the registrar was concerned about the name they had chosen. They decided to call him Lucifer.

I don't know whether they will regret their choice of name. But I'm pretty sure he will.