Face coverings compulsory on public transport in England from 15 June

[Darandio]

There seem to be lots of supporters of mask wearing posting, so I'll ask again. If it's needed to make public transport safer, why have we not introduced it today rather than wait until the 15th?

Because we seem hell bent in doing it all in reverse, it's been that way since Jan/Feb.

 

[Journeyman]

There seem to be lots of supporters of mask wearing posting, so I'll ask again. If it's needed to make public transport safer, why have we not introduced it today rather than wait until the 15th?

Supposedly because that's the day a wide range of businesses will reopen in England, hence making it likely there will be a surge in public transport use.

 

[ashkeba]

It’s true they fewer people were using public transport, but it’s also true that there isn’t much evidence that mask wearing in public makes much difference to transmission - indeed the WHO doesn’t seem to think it does.

The WHO position is shifting as they evaluate the latest test evidence: https://mobile.twitter.com/WHO/status/1268927569065324547

"In light of evolving evidence, WHO advises that governments should encourage the general public to wear masks where there is widespread transmission & physical distancing is difficult, such as on public transport, in shops or in other confined or crowded environments"-
@DrTedros

 

[ashkeba]

There seem to be lots of supporters of mask wearing posting, so I'll ask again. If it's needed to make public transport safer, why have we not introduced it today rather than wait until the 15th?

To give people time to buy or make masks? Nothing to stop you starting early.

 

[Starmill]

There seem to be lots of supporters of mask wearing posting, so I'll ask again. If it's needed to make public transport safer, why have we not introduced it today rather than wait until the 15th?

A good reason doesn't present itself. That decision was made by Ministers. It doesn't, in itself, challenge the evidence supporting the idea of coverings in general.

It is a good justification for criticism of Ministers, though, which is something I have done.

 

[westv]

The WHO position is shifting as they evaluate the latest test evidence: https://mobile.twitter.com/WHO/status/1268927569065324547

Presumably they aren't now just following the crowd.

 

[Starmill]

Which is why it is particularly dismaying that MPs are effectively silent on all these issues - are they all that meek,

The government ones most certainly are. Sycophancy was almost a criteria for the Whip. The Opposition ones have made many criticisms of the overall approach, but they need to be very careful. Being more critical would be risky because it opens up a huge flank that this unscrupulous, unscientific government could spear them in, and they're too clever to go for it.

The Opposition have broadly supported the Government because, broadly speaking, the public overwhelmingly demands intervention.

But I again maintain that a temporary requirement to cover your face while on public transport isn't really a notable civil liberties issue at all. Staying at home was, and that went down easier with this crowd than face coverings.

 

[baz962]

Have it your way. Masks have been mandated, good luck with getting on a train without one.

Probably be easy enough. I was chatting to the gateline person earlier and he said . I will not be stopping anyone , mask or not , I won't even try.

 

[Starmill]

If it's the right time to loosen lockdown then masks are unnecessary.

This is certainly wrong because a suite of measures which are slightly less costly to society should be and probably will be used to replace so-called 'lockdown'. Coverings on faces is one such.

 

[Weekender]

Prejudice, laziness and selfishness. It is very unlikely that there are other reasons.

Can I ask which of these groups you consider asthmatics fall into?

 

[baz962]

I agree. When their jobs go due to the imminent recession their views may change. By then it will be too late!



Likewise. Although, one things for sure, I won’t be wearing one at work.



Just a thought, but those restraints could be lifted without mandating masks.

Nor will I. I'm still wondering if it will be platforms too , because if I have to wear one to even change ends , then I could be delaying my train. I don't get on with hat's even , I sweat and itch and can get a rash.

 

[Starmill]

Can I ask which of these groups you consider asthmatics fall into?

I would argue that they wouldn't fall into the original question, which was opposed to the policy as it stands, on grounds of health? Is there a specific criticism of the allowable exceptions from people who would be considered 'asthmatic'?

 

[MarkyT]

There seem to be lots of supporters of mask wearing posting, so I'll ask again. If it's needed to make public transport safer, why have we not introduced it today rather than wait until the 15th?

Practically it gives organisations the time neccessary to change rules, have it checked over properly by lawyers etc, and post notices. It also gives the public time to equip themselves. Nothing stops those wanting to wear from starting to wear immediately, as recommended nationally and strongly requested already by TfL.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There seem to be lots of supporters of mask wearing posting, so I'll ask again. If it's needed to make public transport safer, why have we not introduced it today rather than wait until the 15th?

Because people need time to get one/make one?

Interestingly, the WHO seem to have come out in favour now, it's on the BBC live feed (which doesn't link very well).

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Take a good drink before boarding and you will not need another before arriving unless you have a medical condition relating to this. Tube journeys (unless you're riding laps of the Circle Line for a laugh) are simply not long enough for you to dehydrate to a dangerous extent if you were properly hydrated before you boarded.

Problem with this, for some people, is that if you drink a lot before boarding and find the toilets are out of order, where do you go for a pee?

People with diabetes and kidney disorders often need to pee more than regularly and can't just "hold it in".

Perhaps those people should wear disposable nappies like the Queen's Guard...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Problem with this, for some people, is that if you drink a lot before boarding and find the toilets are out of order, where do you go for a pee?

People with diabetes and kidney disorders often need to pee more than regularly and can't just "hold it in".

Perhaps those people should wear disposable nappies like the Queen's Guard...

Or perhaps the majority of people are just reasonable about it, and leave the exceptions to those who need exceptions?

 

[markymark2000]

I think that this measure is going to lead to us having the same amount of people travelling as at the peak because a good chunk of passengers won't wear them and I even know drivers who are refusing to use them. We will have 100% service with 1% passengers and I can see the bus operators giving the gov an ultimatum. More funding (to cover the fact services will be around 100% but fewer people will be travelling as a result of the rules so more losses) or drop the mandatory face masks.

 

[markymark2000]

If (as stated) they are doing it through the conditions or carriage, it won't apply to people who brought tickets before the change.

Don't mind me, just off to buy an annual ticket haha

 

[High Dyke]

Shouldn't this be in the covid sub forum? Also, will the toc provide staff with masks? if mask isn't available can you refuse to work?

My wife works for a TOC. They've supplied masks for them to wear, she wore one for about 30 seconds before it started to cause a skin irritation. Luckily she has a scarf that she can wear instead. We were both discussing the enforcement of this earlier today. She wondered if it was going to be mandatory for the staff to wear a face covering when working, otherwise how could the instruction be enforced if the public see one rule for them and a different rule for everyone else.

 

[High Dyke]

Problem is that all these things are setting up serious potential confrontation issues. Would you want to be the only person getting into a carriage unmasked with 50 masked, nervous people, who have been told for months you may be bringing almost certain death upon them?

You could always try to lighten the mood by apologising and saying that you didn't realise it was that sort of party.

 

[Trainfan2019]

After my first week back on the trains I have seen hardly any toc or station staff wearing masks. Wonder if this will change when it becomes compulsory.

 

[sjpowermac]

Probably be easy enough. I was chatting to the gateline person earlier and he said . I will not be stopping anyone , mask or not , I won't even try.

Do as you wish, I can understand your stance. It’s definitely not for me to judge anyone who doesn’t wear a mask. As a passenger I’ve been told to wear a mask. I need to use the train to get to work. I’ll wear a mask. That’s it.

 

[sjpowermac]

Masks are not going to be around for long. Either the government will drop it or the public will drop it. When the good weather returns, does anybody think that the hordes heading to Bournemouth and Southend are going to be bothering with masks?

Who knows what will happen? We can revisit your post in a few weeks and see how it has all worked out.

 

[LOM]

After my first week back on the trains I have seen hardly any toc or station staff wearing masks. Wonder if this will change when it becomes compulsory.

Network Rail has already mandated all its staff at NR managed stations are to wear masks at all times. Apparently at the direct request of the RMT.

 

[sjpowermac]

I’ll have no choice - I don’t want to be fined/prosecuted. That doesn’t mean I agree with it!


Agreed - I stated as much above.



Again - if it was legally mandated, what choice would I have?



You’ve misimagined me there . Although I detect a hint of irony.

I’m pleased the irony wasn’t lost

 

[sjpowermac]

Johnson just comes out with whatever crap he thinks will get him elected. I've never seen such an unprincipled, incompetent charlatan in my life.

Agreed. But I’m not sure how it directly relates to face masks.

 

[sheff1]

Is it not obvious? Because currently many people without car access are being prevented from travelling further than they can walk in any circumstances, unless they are going to work perhaps.

It is not obvious to me that being prevented from travelling unless you are wearing specific items defined by the government is "getting back to normal".

It would not be "getting back to normal" if the dress specification had been imposed on the basis of convincing evidence and following debate/passing of specific legislation in parliament ... but imposing specific dress requirements, with associated penalties for non compliance, without proper parliamentary scrutiny on the basis that it "might help" is something that should not be normal in a democracy.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's more a case of "getting back to a situation that's reasonable to put up with for as long as it takes to get a vaccine or a treatment that turns it into an inconvenience i.e. by stopping it killing people", which is the "hammer and the dance" policy they seem to be following. The "dance" involves keeping R *only just* below 1 - you aren't looking to reduce cases with that policy, you are just trying to stop it exploding again. Indeed, you're very specifically looking to have it as close as possible to (but just under) 1, because that's maximising what you can have open and so minimising economic damage.

TBH, for this summer, I'll be pretty much happy if they can just get the beer gardens, hotels and campsites open and masks allow discretionary train travel again.

Indeed, I think the point of masks is to push down R a bit so they can push it back up a bit again by reopening something else - people are screaming for e.g. beer gardens and a slightly larger family group being allowed to meet. Oh, and a haircut.

 

[Starmill]

It is not obvious to me that being prevented from travelling unless you are wearing specific items defined by the government is "getting back to normal".

Seems totally reasonable to me. Sorry if you're struggling with it. As you know, it's within your rights to not go on the train if you'd prefer, or return to a state of far more strict "lockdown" for yourself.

 

[sjpowermac]

It's more a case of "getting back to a situation that's reasonable to put up with for as long as it takes to get a vaccine or a treatment that turns it into an inconvenience i.e. by stopping it killing people", which is the "hammer and the dance" policy they seem to be following. The "dance" involves keeping R *only just* below 1 - you aren't looking to reduce cases with that policy, you are just trying to stop it exploding again. Indeed, you're very specifically looking to have it as close as possible to (but just under) 1, because that's maximising what you can have open and so minimising economic damage.

TBH, for this summer, I'll be pretty much happy if they can just get the beer gardens, hotels and campsites open and masks allow discretionary train travel again.

Indeed, I think the point of masks is to push down R a bit so they can push it back up a bit again by reopening something else - people are screaming for e.g. beer gardens and a slightly larger family group being allowed to meet. Oh, and a haircut.

I agree with all you have put there.