Is it time to relax the 2m social distancing guideline? (WHO guidance is 1m)

[BJames]

If my bike round south Bucks this afternoon was anything to go by, lots of them are open...for takeaway, which is being consumed on any nearby grassland, basically meaning beer gardens have de-facto reopened, so might as well de-jure reopen too.

It all looked very civilised and a bit olde-worlde[1], to be honest, groups looking like families etc sitting around on cloths on the grass with a takeaway beer and a picnic, with plenty of bicycles around the place and very few cars about.

[1] The villages in the valleys around Chesham are very olde-worlde at the best of times - cricket greens etc - classic rich London commuterland and far posher than semi-detached Metroland.

We've got some open here for takeaway in North London too, had a little wander around today - the queues were a lot bigger than I was expecting! Great to see the initiative and making use of stock rather than having to bin it off and also getting the community together a bit.

 

[philosopher]

Really?
And where do you think they will get their tax duty from instead?
And I've seen no dislike from the Police.

If all the pubs close, drinking will just move to public parks or private homes, where it can’t be controlled and will lead to other problems such as litter and noise pollution. I am not sure the police will like that very much.

Today on my walk I saw what looked like a full blown party with tens of people taking place in park, with what looked like very little social distancing. If they reopen beer gardens then group sizes and social distancing can be more effectively controlled.

 

[Enthusiast]

If they reopen beer gardens then group sizes and social distancing can be more effectively controlled.

Not without additional and specific legislation it won't.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Reports this morning that the government is launching a review into reducing the two metre guideline, with a decision expected by 4 July when the pubs and restaurants are due to reopen.

Coronavirus: Boris Johnson launches review into 2m social distancing rule

There have been concerns the hospitality sector will struggle to be viable with the rule in place.

www.bbc.co.uk

"Boris Johnson has commissioned a review into the 2m (6ft) social distancing rule, following calls to scrap it.

Businesses and some of Mr Johnson's own MPs have warned that large parts of the hospitality industry will not be viable with the 2m coronavirus rule in place.

The review will aim to be completed by 4 July, when pubs and restaurants could open at the earliest in England.

But former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith questioned the need for a review, saying "the evidence is already there".



I'm with IDS on this one. Why the delay, why not reduce it to 1 metre from tomorrow when non-residential shops reopen?

 

[Huntergreed]

Reports this morning that the government is launching a review into reducing the two metre guideline, with a decision expected by 4 July when the pubs and restaurants are due to reopen.

Coronavirus: Boris Johnson launches review into 2m social distancing rule

There have been concerns the hospitality sector will struggle to be viable with the rule in place.

www.bbc.co.uk

I'm with IDS on this one. Why the delay, why not reduce it to 1 metre from tomorrow when non-residential shops reopen?

Because that's practically an admission that the government overreacted and that 1m would have sufficed throughout. By conducting a 'review', it looks like, in the public eye, the distance was not safe before but it is when the review is complete, and they'll come out with some scripted excuse around the 'science' to make them look like they've done the right thing.

 

[317 forever]

Because that's practically an admission that the government overreacted and that 1m would have sufficed throughout. By conducting a 'review', it looks like, in the public eye, the distance was not safe before but it is when the review is complete, and they'll come out with some scripted excuse around the 'science' to make them look like they've done the right thing.

They can then say that the transmission figures, death figures etc are low enough at that point to justify the reduction to 1 metre.

Mind you, it does now mean that they will put themselves in an awkward position if they do not reduce it to 1 metre at that point.

 

[Mag_seven]

But former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith questioned the need for a review, saying "the evidence is already there".

Even though you already know what the answer is it always looks better if it is shown to be the result of a "review" and communicated by the release of a fancy report with appendices, graphs etc.

 

[yorksrob]

I think that the route taken matters rather less than the destination in this case.

 

[Huntergreed]

It sounds like we can (almost) safely assume the distance will go to 1m on 4th July, unless something with this review goes drastically wrong or cases start to increase.

 

[yorksrob]

My main concern is that if hospitality is going to be opening on 4th July, it could do with knowing some time before then what the limit will be.

 

[thejuggler]

The 1m review story is just another dead cat thrown over the table by the No 10 PR machine. It take focus off other things.

We are in the middle of a national emergency. Are Government really saying up until this point they have not even been considering when a 1m social distance is acceptable?

 

[greyman42]

My main concern is that if hospitality is going to be opening on 4th July, it could do with knowing some time before then what the limit will be.

I would of thought 1 metre but in reality it is unenforceable.

 

[greyman42]

If all the pubs close, drinking will just move to public parks or private homes, where it can’t be controlled and will lead to other problems such as litter and noise pollution. I am not sure the police will like that very much.

Today on my walk I saw what looked like a full blown party with tens of people taking place in park, with what looked like very little social distancing. If they reopen beer gardens then group sizes and social distancing can be more effectively controlled.

This is getting more common. And regarding the use of parks and beauty spots, if there are no toilet facilities, people just go where ever they can.

 

[Chingy]

Coronavirus: No reduction in two-metre rule until next month, says Boris Johnson

The guideline will remain under review for 4 July - the date of the government's next planned phase for reopening the economy.

news.sky.com

 

[haggishunter]

Unless they are going to give significant advanced notice to change the distance under whatever circumstances, the distance rule either needs abolished or reduced to 1m. It will be easy enough to change markings from 2m to 1m spacing, if they go for 1.5m then everything pre-existing goes out the window!

 

[AM9]

If all the pubs close, drinking will just move to public parks or private homes, where it can’t be controlled and will lead to other problems such as litter and noise pollution. I am not sure the police will like that very much.

Today on my walk I saw what looked like a full blown party with tens of people taking place in park, with what looked like very little social distancing. If they reopen beer gardens then group sizes and social distancing can be more effectively controlled.

If that becomes a problem, the body responsible for the park can ban the consumption of alcohol in it. There's plenty of towns where alcohol has been largely removed from the streets and some open spaces (e.g. St Albans) so once the trouble starts, that can be fixed. Of course there will still be those who drink in private homes and gardens, but assuming theose aren't the cause of anti-social behaviour where neighbours copmplain, nobody cares.

 

[yorksrob]

If that becomes a problem, the body responsible for the park can ban the consumption of alcohol in it. There's plenty of towns where alcohol has been largely removed from the streets and some open spaces (e.g. St Albans) so once the trouble starts, that can be fixed. Of course there will still be those who drink in private homes and gardens, but assuming theose aren't the cause of anti-social behaviour where neighbours copmplain, nobody cares.

The better thing would be to not have all the pubs shut up shop forever, in the first place.

 

[AM9]

The better thing would be to not have all the pubs shut up shop forever, in the first place.

If social distancing is a mechanism for controlling infection, the very nature of pubs and the behaviour of their customers, - especially when alcohol reduces inhibitions, mean that there was no alternative. Apart from those whose living is derived directly from pubs and alcoholic consumption, nobody is actually harmed by a 3-6 month absence.

 

[yorksrob]

If social distancing is a mechanism for controlling infection, the very nature of pubs and the behaviour of their customers, - especially when alcohol reduces inhibitions, mean that there was no alternative. Apart from those whose living is derived directly from pubs and alcoholic consumption, nobody is actually harmed by a 3-6 month absence.

My view is that if they can't be reopened, support should continue until such a time as they can. There will be a considerable harm to society if a 3-6 month absence becomes permanent.

 

[BJames]

If that becomes a problem, the body responsible for the park can ban the consumption of alcohol in it. There's plenty of towns where alcohol has been largely removed from the streets and some open spaces (e.g. St Albans) so once the trouble starts, that can be fixed. Of course there will still be those who drink in private homes and gardens, but assuming theose aren't the cause of anti-social behaviour where neighbours copmplain, nobody cares.

Who will enforce this? My council is responsible from my park and they have such little staff that they don't even bother locking the park at the end of the day anymore.

I agree with the above, I've seen so many groups out and about, but in my local park I'd say on the whole, they are keeping about 1 metre away but not 2. Government might want to take note of the fact that people are basically already following this guideline and they should change it officially. But then, they've been about three weeks behind the general public with every major decision throughout the crisis.

 

[Busaholic]

It sounds like we can (almost) safely assume the distance will go to 1m on 4th July, unless something with this review goes drastically wrong or cases start to increase.

So the minority of cafes, pubs, restaurants that do find a way to reopen on 4th July having adopted the 2m rules will discover they needn't have invested all that time, money, effort, etc as it's all about to change again! Talking to a chappie who runs a small computer repair shop opposite me, reopening tomorrow, and he's been required to exhibit notices, place stickers, erect screens etc (ordered six weeks ago, and now four overdue) for a space that only ever fitted two people in 'old' days!

Denmark changed from 2m to 1m at the end of March (?) but then they haven't got a P.M. trying to save face all the time. The Downing Street spin machine indicated over a week ago that an announcement was 'imminent', even announcing that BJ was due to host the press conference on a particular day, implying that might be when the announcement came, but suddenly BJ didn't have a top scientific person on either side of him at the dais, a possible indication of unpreparedness of said advisers to go along with it. Johnson is prepared to sacrifice anything and anyone to retain power, much like Trump,and the populace can go to hell.

 

[yorksrob]

From listening to the oracle that is the Radio 2 Jeremy Vine show last week, there were quite a lot of people who were against reducing to 1m. There was even a virologist who was against it, citing that our infection rate was higher than other countries (and forgetting the fact that many of those other countries had 1m when their infection rate was higher than ours now). I don't know why our scientists seem to be so out of step with so many other countries, but I can understand why the Government is reluctant to be seen to reduce the distance straight away.

 

[317 forever]

I think that the route taken matters rather less than the destination in this case.

Let's just hope that unlike train users they don't get penalised if they take the wrong route lol

 

[yorksrob]

Let's just hope that unlike train users they don't get penalised if they take the wrong route lol

So long as it's reasonable !

 

[Busaholic]

So long as it's reasonable !

And essential!

 

[yorksrob]

And essential!

I prefer to say "in adhearance with the guidelines" !

 

[westv]

I'm assuming any change to the distancing advice won't change the advice to work from home if possible.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm assuming any change to the distancing advice won't change the advice to work from home if possible.

I doubt it.

That's the easiest thing to maintain.

 

[Enthusiast]

Apart from those whose living is derived directly from pubs and alcoholic consumption, nobody is actually harmed by a 3-6 month absence.

So just the 465,000 or so then (and that's just pubs, not including hotel bars, restaurants, etc.). Not too much of a problem then. I cannot believe that the livelihoods and future employment of so many people can be so casually dismissed.

Talking to a chappie who runs a small computer repair shop opposite me, reopening tomorrow, and he's been required to exhibit notices, place stickers, erect screens etc

Who has required him to do so?

 

[Scrotnig]

The rather laughable idea that people will simply refrain indefinitely from drinking and socialising because the government tell to still persists I see.

Good luck enforcing that. It's not happening. They either allow the pubs to reopen and have things done in a controlled manner, or people will make their own arrangements. What is not an option is everyone going out to work but then meekly sitting in their homes for the entirety of their leisure time.