Coronavirus

[GaryH]

I have no sympathy towards the government for lack of PPE. They knew this was coming, they could see what was happening yet didn't prepare. They had nearly 2 months before this hit.

And due to the decline in manufacturing in the UK we have to source our PPE from China of all places. They should have approached UK companies from the very start of this to get them producing PPE.

 

[RoyJess]

 

[Mr Pearse]

So just briefly taking from what he just mentioned in the briefing that next week they will let people know when certain things will attempt to reopen. But it’s just that line he said that could be interesting that he don’t want a big influx of people in one area or something along those lines. So next week we could know when the tourism industry could restart.

 

[Matt N]

I think next week, we will certainly begin to have a more clear-cut vision of the future than we have currently.

I must admit, there's also something greatly reassuring about seeing Boris Johnson back on the lectern speaking. As much as I was a Labour supporter throughout the election, I think he's very motivational in how he speaks, and is very positive in how he presents himself, which I like. I also found some of the data they presented very interesting.

 

[imanautie]

I think next week, we will certainly begin to have a more clear-cut vision of the future than we have currently.

I must admit, there's also something greatly reassuring about seeing Boris Johnson back on the lectern speaking. As much as I was a Labour supporter throughout the election, I think he's very motivational in how he speaks, and is very positive in how he presents himself, which I like. I also found some of the data they presented very interesting.

Norris certainly knows how to put on a good persona, I might hate him politically but at this time politics isn't really relevant.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[BeccaH]

I'm looking forward to hearing what the plan is going forward. I think for a lot of people (including myself) the uncertainty is really hard to deal with.
It'll be interesting to see what opens first and how/in what capacity they open, and will hopefully help us see what the future will be like.

 

[Islander]

Spent a bit of time the other day looking into New Zealand's response, and in particular their lockdown and plans on easing it (because, y'know, what else is there to do? ).

Really interesting to look at their Alert Level system - it's so clear, precise and laid out. I love it. I think it'd be great to be a New Zealander at the minute, you have a pretty clear idea of what's going on... "OK so we're at Level 3 and these are our restrictions... at Level 2 the restrictions will be dropped to this, I'll be able to do x, y and z but still have restrictions on a, b and c. Likely we'll drop to Level 2 when these conditions are met..."

It's great. Such a shame our government is nowhere near that competent.

 

[speedy]

Spent a bit of time the other day looking into New Zealand's response, and in particular their lockdown and plans on easing it (because, y'know, what else is there to do? ).

Really interesting to look at their Alert Level system - it's so clear, precise and laid out. I love it. I think it'd be great to be a New Zealander at the minute, you have a pretty clear idea of what's going on... "OK so we're at Level 3 and these are our restrictions... at Level 2 the restrictions will be dropped to this, I'll be able to do x, y and z but still have restrictions on a, b and c. Likely we'll drop to Level 2 when these conditions are met..."

It's great. Such a shame our government is nowhere near that competent.

Indeed, I feel a lot of confusion and frustration could have been avoided had the government clearly communicated the restrictions and specifically told people what they are allowed to do and what they aren't, rather than giving "advice"

 

[Tim]

I feel the reason they only gave us advise was because opinions were split on if we should be attempting heard immunity or lockdown. I suspect that a group of people in parliment wanted some of us us to break the rules so that people were still getting infected and lockdown wouldn't become a permanent solution.
Take Greece for example. They've had a very strict lockdown and been very sucessful at keeping cases to a minimum. But the danger is as soon as they remove the lockdown they are as likely to get infected as the rest of the world was several months ago. They've effectively forced themselves into permanent lockdown.

 

[jon81uk]

Indeed, I feel a lot of confusion and frustration could have been avoided had the government clearly communicated the restrictions and specifically told people what they are allowed to do and what they aren't, rather than giving "advice"

I still don't think that what we were told we could and could not do was difficult to understand.

Go out only to shop for essentials (food or DIY equipment for repairs), work (if you can't work from home) or one daily exercise. Its the people who drove for an hour to get to somewhere for exercise who took the piss, you shouldn't need to be told not to stretch the rules.

 

[imanautie]

I still don't think that what we were told we could and could not do was difficult to understand.

Go out only to shop for essentials (food or DIY equipment for repairs), work (if you can't work from home) or one daily exercise. Its the people who drove for an hour to get to somewhere for exercise who took the ****, you shouldn't need to be told not to stretch the rules.

The advice wasn't actually the same as the rules, that's part of the problem, they legislated one thing but said something substantially different-its why they had to clarify a few things around autistics for example as the advise is more restrictive then law.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[jon81uk]

The advice wasn't actually the same as the rules, that's part of the problem, they legislated one thing but said something substantially different-its why they had to clarify a few things around autistics for example as the advise is more restrictive then law.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

I understand that for some people there are specific reasons (such as autism, or joint custody of a child.) that the advice is different. But for the majority it was incredibly clear. Stay home unless doing one of those things.

 

[imanautie]

I understand that for some people there are specific reasons (such as autism, or joint custody of a child.) that the advice is different. But for the majority it was incredibly clear. Stay home unless doing one of those things.

The general advise was clear but not what the legislation said.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[jon81uk]

The general advise was clear but not what the legislation said.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

But the majority of people don't need to read the legislation. Most people haven't read the Homicide Act 1957 but know they shouldn't go out killing people.

 

[imanautie]

But the majority of people don't need to read the legislation. Most people haven't read the Homicide Act 1957 but know they shouldn't go out killing people.

Yep but I think there would have been less conflict between police and the public if the advise for both groups matched.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[jon81uk]

Yep but I think there would have been less conflict between police and the public if the advise for both groups matched.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

But as you said, due to autism you needed to do something against the advice. If the law matched the advice the police could have then fined you. That's why it was left for the police to be able to sensibly interpret what a "reasonable excuse" was rather than being too prescriptive. Basically it was follow the advice unless there is a significant reason that you could explain to the police not to follow it. Autism would be a good reason, escaping a partner who is causing you harm would be another good reason. Driving to the beach is not a reasonable excuse. Telling people all these reasons would have lead to even more people trying to bend the rules and potentially lying about having a condition that they think gives them an excuse to be out. So having clear advice on what to do, but giving the police the leeway to decide is reasonable.

 

[imanautie]

But as you said, due to autism you needed to do something against the advice. If the law matched the advice the police could have then fined you. That's why it was left for the police to be able to sensibly interpret what a "reasonable excuse" was rather than being too prescriptive. Basically it was follow the advice unless there is a significant reason that you could explain to the police not to follow it. Autism would be a good reason, escaping a partner who is causing you harm would be another good reason. Driving to the beach is not a reasonable excuse. Telling people all these reasons would have lead to even more people trying to bend the rules and potentially lying about having a condition that they think gives them an excuse to be out. So having clear advice on what to do, but giving the police the leeway to decide is reasonable.

Police would still have had some degree of flexibility regardless.
I suppose this shows that we can't really trust the public not to try bending the rules as far as possible.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[speedy]

I still don't think that what we were told we could and could not do was difficult to understand.

Go out only to shop for essentials (food or DIY equipment for repairs), work (if you can't work from home) or one daily exercise. Its the people who drove for an hour to get to somewhere for exercise who took the ****, you shouldn't need to be told not to stretch the rules.

I didn't think it was difficult to understand either. However based on previous discussion here, some people seem unwilling to follow "advice", will get angry at police who enforce government given advice because "it's not the law" etc

 

[jon81uk]

I didn't think it was difficult to understand either. However based on previous discussion here, some people seem unwilling to follow "advice", will get angry at police who enforce government given advice because "it's not the law" etc

Although as the law is worded that you should not go out without reasonable excuse, they can't really say "its not the law", just "my excuse is reasonable!".

 

[Poisson]

I don't understand how people can not realise that most of humanity is terrible. A plague. The stupid, selfish behaviour displayed by screaming brats/toddlers is not something that's lost as we age, it's just the thin veneer called society tries to make us hide it and act "civilised". This is why any major event sees this veneer dropped and the moron emerges in everyone, just in different ways. Of course humanity will push the rules, as the toddler inside likes to push boundaries until they're firmly enforced, we just see it as "freedom"