Coronavirus

[Danza91]

I think it's a case of mix messages, Boris was only saying the other day that there is no room to flex the rules, two girls got fined for taking a walk to exercise because they drove 5 miles to exercise, and the government website doses say the following "Stay local means stay in the village, town, or part of the city where you live".

If those at the top don't set a good example, them you will get the Dominic Cummings effect

The fines were, rightfully, withdrawn and the police apologised. Someone cycling outdoors a mile from home or 10 miles away won't make a difference to case rates. Let people exercise how they want.

My local park is heaving from 9am on a weekend so I can also see why some would rather drive a few miles down the road for a quieter spot.

 

[RoyJess]

The fines were, rightfully, withdrawn and the police apologised. Someone cycling outdoors a mile from home or 10 miles away won't make a difference to case rates. Let people exercise how they want.

My local park is heaving from 9am on a weekend so I can also see why some would rather drive a few miles down the road for a quieter spot.

I'm not saying that people can't go out and drive locally (5 to 10 miles?). The criticism is the mix messages sent by the government. Matt Handcock initially supported the actions of the police.

With out direct clear messages, and it something that this government has failed on repeatedly through out this pandemic, it just leaves us all confused and undermines the rules.

 

[Skyscraper]

And how do they do this when people will just say they are exempt but aren't required to carry proof with them? Unless it's a 'no mask, no entry' rule then it's still pointless.

Most people who are genuinely exempt on medical or disability grounds will have some form of ID on them to reduce the risk of confrontations (which could cause me distress). Both me and my mum (who is also exempt) have one of these;

 

[Islander]

Most people who are genuinely exempt on medical or disability grounds will have some form of ID on them. Both me and my mum (who is also exempt) have one of these;

The problem being, it is so, so easy for those who do not have a genuine reason not to wear a mask to acquire such an ID, or the near-infamous sunflower lanyard. who's symbolism has been somewhat destroyed by the wide proliferation of them.

 

[Danza91]

I'm not saying that people can't go out and drive locally (5 to 10 miles?). The criticism is the mix messages sent by the government. Matt Handcock initially supported the actions of the police.

With out direct clear messages, and it something that this government has failed on repeatedly through out this pandemic, it just leaves us all confused and undermines the rules.

Yep, I agree with that. By there being some rules/restrictions which are 'law' and some 'guidance' I can understand how confusing it is.

For me, the clearest it has been was back in March. There are many more subjective things now, such as is a scotch egg a substantial meal? The police describing a coffee and a walk as a 'picnic' did make me laugh.

 

[BarryZola]

This is from a different forum

As a simple example, a rape victim may not be able to wear a mask because it brings back traumatic memories of the time the attacker had a hand over their mouth.

Easy, wear a visor. People have had months to source a cheap visor now. Unless someone just doesn't want to wear a visor either because it will ruin their make-up or street-cred?

 

[Skyscraper]

SAGE is now urging Boris to increase social distancing to 3 metres. How the heck that would work I don't know!

 

[Rob]

SAGE is now urging Boris to increase social distancing to 3 metres. How the heck that would work I don't know!

It would work by staying further away from other people!

It could also mean that supermarkets and the like have to further restrict the numbers of people they allow in, which would not be a bad thing at all.

 

[Craig]

SAGE is now urging Boris to increase social distancing to 3 metres. How the heck that would work I don't know!

Please, please, please quote sources for your information unless it's factual statistics, otherwise this thread just becomes a lot of speculation and shock headlines . After a quick Google, this seems to have come from the Daily Mail (urgh) front page today. It quotes "leading members of the SAGE advisory panel", but this does not mention names or feature in any currently released minutes from their meetings. In the story, it's said that they are recommending 2 metres plus, so 2 metre rule where mitigation measures are present (i.e. a supermarket), but 3 metres elsewhere such as when queueing.

Realistically, 3 metres is unlikely to be the case in most places, it'd simply be a case of wear a mask when you're queuing to get into a supermarket or having an increased 2 metre distance on a bus instead of the 1 metre at present. That said, the government have said it's unlikely social distancing efforts will change at present anyway.

 

[John]

It could also mean that supermarkets and the like have to further restrict the numbers of people they allow in, which would not be a bad thing at all.

My local Aldi inadvertently did that yesterday, the traffic light system on the door wasn't working properly and it stayed on red even though the store was almost empty. Waiting in the rain for no reason wasn't fun, but the in-store experience was much better.

 

[DistortAMG]

That's incorrect, genuine exemptions will still be allowed. They're cracking down on those who are perfectly capable of wearing a mask but just refuse to.

I stand corrected. Either way it is a step in the right direct to crack down on non mask wearers.

 

[Dave]

BBC are reporting that football teams and their governing bodies have been told patience is wearing thin after the FA cup scenes this weekend. Players and managers not following any distancing rules and the crowds gathering outside stadiums is getting idiotic.

It baffles me how these games are still allowed when so many far more important activities are curtailed. I get that for many football is an enjoyable spectators sport but tough, if people can’t follow the rules it should be banned until things improve.

 

[Danza91]

BBC are reporting that football teams and their governing bodies have been told patience is wearing thin after the FA cup scenes this weekend. Players and managers not following any distancing rules and the crowds gathering outside stadiums is getting idiotic.

It baffles me how these games are still allowed when so many far more important activities are curtailed. I get that for many football is an enjoyable spectators sport but tough, if people can’t follow the rules it should be banned until things improve.

This is why I, and a lot of people I work with within football, are frustrated at seeing these scenes because footballers won't suffer if it stops, financially at least, it'll be a large of number of people who work in the industry. Most people are freelance/self employed and so are not entitled to support should this happen. The FA need to get tougher and start properly punishing players and docking points for blatant breaches, such as the many parties we saw over Christmas and New Year.

 

[RoyJess]

Also we still have those anti-lockdown protests taking place over the weekend despite the fact that covid is on the brink of bringing the NHS to it knees.

You just can't quarantine stupidity

 

[Rob]

I know it is impossible for so many reasons, but I would deny free health care to anyone who is going out of their way claiming that it is all a conspiracy; whether that be by protesting, filming 'empty' hospitals or circulating crap online. These people are pretty much the lowest of the low.

 

[Craig]

BBC are reporting that football teams and their governing bodies have been told patience is wearing thin after the FA cup scenes this weekend. Players and managers not following any distancing rules and the crowds gathering outside stadiums is getting idiotic.

It baffles me how these games are still allowed when so many far more important activities are curtailed. I get that for many football is an enjoyable spectators sport but tough, if people can’t follow the rules it should be banned until things improve.

Yup having watched football since the restart, it's clear that from a team perspective things are getting much, much more lax on and off the pitch. Managers and backroom staff shaking hands, celebrations from players etc. Yes, there's still contact in the sport when playing the game, but any other time that contact should be kept to an absolute minimum. Yes teams are in a bubble, but they're not impervious as shown by the numbers of new cases from testing each week. Both from a health perspective, and to set an example to those spectators watching contact should be for absolutely essential reasons only.

 

[GaryH]

If I drive 7 miles to exercise then I could be given a fine. Reason being if I were in a road accident then hospitals are already stretched, so best keep unnecessary journeys to a minimum which is understandable.

If I cycle 7 miles to exercise then I dont get a fine. However, if I were in a road accident, then I would probably come off much worse than someone in a car and may need HDU or ICU more. Yet cycling is ok.

Personally, I dont really care either way, but it needs to be a consistent message for everyone.

 

[Benjsh]

Going for a walk with one other person is the countryside, whether that's 3 miles or 20 miles away, where there were no other people around isn't what's making Covid spread. I feel sorry for those 2 girls who got fined even thought it has since been rescinded.

It's the people going in shops and getting too close to others, people going in and out of other people's houses when they shouldn't be and on some forms of public transport which is what's causing it to spread.

 

[jon81uk]

Going for a walk with one other person is the countryside, whether that's 3 miles or 20 miles away, where there were no other people around isn't what's making Covid spread. I feel sorry for those 2 girls who got fined even thought it has since been rescinded.

It's the people going in shops and getting too close to others, people going in and out of other people's houses when they shouldn't be and on some forms of public transport which is what's causing it to spread.

I agree and disagree. Those two girls met up with the main reason to get coffee and have a chat. The purpose of going out was not exercise, I think the fine is justified.

But I do agree with you that in general outdoor activity where there is good ventilation (as its outdoors) is not a major issue, its indoor close contact that is causing spread.

 

[Craig]

Personally I think that's where the government would be better off amending the rules. I think there does need to be a consideration for mental health after all this time, pandemic or not. It'd be much better to say something along the lines of:

• If alone, you can meet up with one other person outdoors once per day for exercise/a walk
• Specify a distance as to what is classed as local in law
• If you enter a shop to buy essentials, you must shop alone except where you are with a carer

That allows people to still catch up with someone, it's outdoors in a much safer environment, and limits to exposure within the more at risk indoors settings.

If you prevent people from meeting up with one other person outdoors, you're just going to push that socialising to shops or elsewhere indoors, where the risk is far higher.