Lockdown in England from Thursday 5 November until Wednesday 2 December

[C J Snarzell]

What happened in Manchester? Not seen anything about it in the news.

An anti-lockdown protest. A few police officers were assaulted.

CJ

 

[RPI]

Being at work is absolutely not a problem for the overwhelming majority of teachers.

As an aside, I suspect that the railway unions would be extremely vocal if their members were required to be in confined and poorly ventilated spaces with groups of 30 people all day long.

Errm since the relaxing of the first restrictions I've found myself repeatedly stood in a confined space (a 143 or a 150, depending which set im working) with well in excess of 30 people from all over the country in a poorly ventilated area, let's not forget that although as rule passenger numbers are down in most places, the summer in the southwest was as busy if not busier than a normal summer, I have no issues with it at all either and our unions were supportive of the majority of us that wanted to go to work.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2020 ==

Sorry I've not checked this thread for a couple of days so apologies if this has already been pointed out, but I do get the point about small businesses having to close in some cases with supermarkets staying open, but at least they can trade to a degree with click and collect etc, ive seen several shops displaying a number in their window to text/call to order and collect things and people using it.

 

[jtuk]

What happened in Manchester? Not seen anything about it in the news.

That wouldn't be a surprise, although if the allegations that police were assaulted were true, then they'd be all over it

 

[35B]

That wouldn't be a surprise, although if the allegations that police were assaulted were true, then they'd be all over it

I found something on the Manchester Evening News website. Characterised as “a few hundred”, and from the pictures, pretty much a rent a mob rather than the sort of demo that would get attention. Frankly, if that’s the best that opponents of lockdown can do, they’re better off without that demo (or the similar but more peaceful one in Liverpool on Saturday) featuring heavily in the news.

 

[Crossover]

I was in Leeds centre yesterday - quite a few people milling around, numerous with shopping bags. Rather weird seeing so many shops shut, but a number were doing click and collect and virtually every coffee shop/refreshment type business were open (Cafe Nero, Starbucks, George's, Greggs) for takeaway and the likes of Tesco Express were well stocked with food to go. Starbucks on the West bridge at Leeds was also open but neither of the other outlets on the bridge were.

 

[duncanp]

One or two people I've spoke to this weekend seem to feel this lockdown will continue beyond the 2nd December, regardless of Christmas. Yesterday's antics in Central Manchester are certainly not going to help to get the virus cases down.

CJ

I don't think the English lockdown will continue beyond 2nd December in it's current form, but there will be some form of restrictions.

The Welsh lockdown has finished today, but there are still restrictions on households meeting, a ban on travelling to England without a reasonable excuse, and people are being encouraged to voluntarily limit the number of people they meet.

If anything, the protest in Manchester yesterday will show the government the level of opposition to the lockdown.

If Boris tries to keep non essential shops and hospitality closed over Christmas, the size and frequency of these protests will only increase, and there is likely to be a large rebellion by Conservative MPs.

And people will just stick two fingers up at Boris if he tries to ban families from meeting over Christmas and the New Year.

 

[35B]

I don't think the English lockdown will continue beyond 2nd December in it's current form, but there will be some form of restrictions.

The Welsh lockdown has finished today, but there are still restrictions on households meeting, a ban on travelling to England without a reasonable excuse, and people are being encouraged to voluntarily limit the number of people they meet.

If anything, the protest in Manchester yesterday will show the government the level of opposition to the lockdown.

If Boris tries to keep non essential shops and hospitality closed over Christmas, the size and frequency of these protests will only increase, and there is likely to be a large rebellion by Conservative MPs.

And people will just stick two fingers up at Boris if he tries to ban families from meeting over Christmas and the New Year.

Yesterday's protest in Manchester. A few hundred protesters (the BBC report says 600), with police incurring minor injuries, and 4 public order arrests - that is hardly likely to persuade the government to change tack.

 

[221129]

Yesterday's protest in Manchester. A few hundred protesters (the BBC report says 600), with police incurring minor injuries, and 4 public order arrests - that is hardly likely to persuade the government to change tack.

It will as they gradually get bigger and more violent in nature.

 

[MikeWM]

I reckon a mixture of tier 2 and 3 (nowhere in tier 1). Some some sort of amendment to allow close family members and partners to meet together in homes over Christmas period to avoid tens of millions of people breaking the law.

One problem with that is that Tier 2 was highly destructive to hospitality, with eg. the requirement that you couldn't meet anyone outside your own household in a pub or restaurant.

I'm not sure how you'll convince somewhere like East Cambridgeshire, if it continues on its current path of having one of the lowest positive test rates in the country, that it needs to have *more* restrictions than it had before 'lockdown 2' started.

 

[sjpowermac]

Errm since the relaxing of the first restrictions I've found myself repeatedly stood in a confined space (a 143 or a 150, depending which set im working) with well in excess of 30 people from all over the country in a poorly ventilated area, let's not forget that although as rule passenger numbers are down in most places, the summer in the southwest was as busy if not busier than a normal summer, I have no issues with it at all either and our unions were supportive of the majority of us that wanted to go to work.

Are you claiming that it takes you an hour to get through the train? I notice that you’ve been selective in the points you have picked up on, choosing not to counter the point about teachers doing additional duties in comparison with normal times.

Anyhow, the trains I’ve seen in the past week have had passenger numbers in single figures. Immediately prior to lockdown 2.0 all the guards on the TPE trains were insisting on people sitting in the window seats only.

Feel free to continue arguing if you wish but later in my post I specifically mentioned ASLEF and was replying to someone who is a driver.

I did conclude my post by saying that I don’t personally feel that being in a school is a dangerous environment.

 

[duncanp]

One problem with that is that Tier 2 was highly destructive to hospitality, with eg. the requirement that you couldn't meet anyone outside your own household in a pub or restaurant.

Living in what was a Tier 2 area, it soon became apparent that there was no legal definition of "meeting someone" or "mixing with someone" with respect to pubs and restaurants.

In my local pub, you were able to talk to someone from another household providing you were a reasonable distance away (at least one metre) and they even put up screens on the tables, so that you could sit with someone from another household at the same table.

If a group of people came in, they were asked whether they were from the same household, but the staff had no way of telling whether people were telling the truth.

And of course no-one was checking the smoking area at the back of the pub.

So the government can come up with as many rules as they like with regard to "mixing", but unless they provide a legal definition of what constitutes mixing, how do they expect hospitality staff to enforce the rules?

It is a similar situation to the story I saw yesterday where the police said that they haven't issued fines for non essential travel, because it is not set down in law how far people can travel for exercise.

 

[Mag_seven]

It is a similar situation to the story I saw yesterday where the police said that they haven't issued fines for non essential travel, because it is not set down in law how far people can travel for exercise.

Exactly - the law states that exercise is one of the reasons you can leave your house. It states mothing more than that. Similarly you can meet outdoors with one other person. It does not state where outdoors you can meet so you can both travel anywhere you like in England to meet outdoors.

 

[MikeWM]

So the government can come up with as many rules as they like with regard to "mixing", but unless they provide a legal definition of what constitutes mixing, how do they expect hospitality staff to enforce the rules?

It is a similar situation to the story I saw yesterday where the police said that they haven't issued fines for non essential travel, because it is not set down in law how far people can travel for exercise.

Of course - this is part of the issue with trying to micro-manage every detail of our lives through legislation. A truly astonishing thing for a 'Conservative' government to attempt.

But even if the rules are effectively unenforceable, some establishments will understandably feel the need to try to enforce them; equally some people will be put off visiting in the first place due to the existence of the rules.

 

[RPI]

Are you claiming that it takes you an hour to get through the train? I notice that you’ve been selective in the points you have picked up on, choosing not to counter the point about teachers doing additional duties in comparison with normal times.

Anyhow, the trains I’ve seen in the past week have had passenger numbers in single figures. Immediately prior to lockdown 2.0 all the guards on the TPE trains were insisting on people sitting in the window seats only.

Feel free to continue arguing if you wish but later in my post I specifically mentioned ASLEF and was replying to someone who is a driver.

I did conclude my post by saying that I don’t personally feel that being in a school is a dangerous environment.

I have been selective, I picked up the point that I took issue with, at times during July/August yes I was in the train doing a ticket check for an hour or more as by the time I start my check leaving Exmouth I dont have time to stop until we are arriving into Paignton sometimes with a stop every few minutes and passengers joining and leaving the train constantly. I also don't think its a dangerous environment and don't feel unsafe but my point is I'm not hard done by and neither are teachers. What about supermarket workers who had to work through the entire first lock down with no PPE at first, having to deal with neanderthals fighting over bog roll and getting paid minimum wage for it.

 

[35B]

Exactly - the law states that exercise is one of the reasons you can leave your house. It states mothing more than that. Similarly you can meet outdoors with one other person. It does not state where outdoors you can meet so you can both travel anywhere you like in England to meet outdoors.

But the whole lot are subject to a test of reasonableness; I think that for someone living in Yorkshire to argue that it was reasonably necessary to visit Dartmoor for outdoor exercise.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2020 ==

It will as they gradually get bigger and more violent in nature.

Alternatively, the thuggery at protests like yesterday's will just encourage the government and police to be more rigorous in their enforcement.

 

[DB]

But the whole lot are subject to a test of reasonableness; I think that for someone living in Yorkshire to argue that it was reasonably necessary to visit Dartmoor for outdoor exercise.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2020 ==


Alternatively, the thuggery at protests like yesterday's will just encourage the government and police to be more rigorous in their enforcement.

There is nothing in the legisltation about distance, so provided the person is not staying somewhere overnight it's very unlikely to be enforceable.

I see with your comments of 'thuggery' you are showing your usual intolerance of anyone whoo objects to the government rules. Without knowing details (e.g. were thye provoked by the police?) I don't think it's reasonable to throw these sort of comments around. You also don't seem to realise that if the government and police become more 'rigorous' that's just likely to inflame things further. How about they tell us what their exit plan is, and how their restrictions contribute to that? People would be far more likely to comply if they could see the reason for what they were being asked to do. It's currently all stick and no carrot, with no indication at all that the government has any coherent plan.

 

[island]

Living in what was a Tier 2 area, it soon became apparent that there was no legal definition of "meeting someone" or "mixing with someone" with respect to pubs and restaurants.

Yes there was. Schedule 1, part 1, paragraph 11 (2) of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Local COVID-19 Alert Level) (High) (England) Regulations 2020 has it.

A gathering takes place when two or more persons are present together in the same place in order—

(a)to engage in any form of social interaction with each other, or

(b)to undertake any other activity with each other.

In my local pub, you were able to talk to someone from another household providing you were a reasonable distance away (at least one metre) and they even put up screens on the tables, so that you could sit with someone from another household at the same table.

Those people were breaking the law by engaging in indoor social interaction with others not from their households.

It is a similar situation to the story I saw yesterday where the police said that they haven't issued fines for non essential travel, because it is not set down in law how far people can travel for exercise.

There is indeed no law against ”non-essential travel”, by public transport or otherwise.

Exactly - the law states that exercise is one of the reasons you can leave your house. It states mothing more than that. Similarly you can meet outdoors with one other person. It does not state where outdoors you can meet so you can both travel anywhere you like in England to meet outdoors.

Not entirely. If you wish to meet one person from another household whilst not exercising, you must do this in a public outdoor place, defined as:
(4) A place is a “public outdoor place” if it is an outdoor place to which the public have, or are permitted, access (whether on payment or otherwise) and includes—

(a)land laid out as a public garden or used for the purpose of recreation by members of the public;

(b)land which is “open country” as defined in section 59(2) of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949(19), as read with section 16 of the Countryside Act 1968(20);

(c)land which is “access land” for the purposes of Part 1 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000(21) (see section 1(1) of that Act)(22);

(d)any highway to which the public has access;

(e)Crown land to which the public has access.

Most outdoor places will come under this, granted.

 

[35B]

There is nothing in the legisltation about distance, so provided the person is not staying somewhere overnight it's very unlikely to be enforceable.

I see with your comments of 'thuggery' you are showing your usual intolerance of anyone whoo objects to the government rules. Without knowing details (e.g. were thye provoked by the police?) I don't think it's reasonable to throw these sort of comments around. You also don't seem to realise that if the government and police become more 'rigorous' that's just likely to inflame things further. How about they tell us what their exit plan is, and how their restrictions contribute to that? People would be far more likely to comply if they could see the reason for what they were being asked to do. It's currently all stick and no carrot, with no indication at all that the government has any coherent plan.

I agree that it is unlikely to be enforced, but I'd suggest that the police would be perfectly well able to enforce it.

As for my reference to thuggery, I'm making no comment about the cause they're protesting about. If a small demo (and 600 is small) generates those arrests, then I'm afraid "thuggery" is the obvious term for what happened yesterday. As for enforcement, I read the tone of government announcements as making clear that trust in people to follow the regulations is a lot less than previously, because behaviour earlier in the year has shown that the public can't be relied upon to obey the rules without enforcement (e.g. signing in as M Mouse). While I agree entirely that an exit plan is essential, the amount of "stick" relative to carrot has actually been really low.

 

[DB]

I agree that it is unlikely to be enforced, but I'd suggest that the police would be perfectly well able to enforce it.

As for my reference to thuggery, I'm making no comment about the cause they're protesting about. If a small demo (and 600 is small) generates those arrests, then I'm afraid "thuggery" is the obvious term for what happened yesterday. As for enforcement, I read the tone of government announcements as making clear that trust in people to follow the regulations is a lot less than previously, because behaviour earlier in the year has shown that the public can't be relied upon to obey the rules without enforcement (e.g. signing in as M Mouse). While I agree entirely that an exit plan is essential, the amount of "stick" relative to carrot has actually been really low.

Are we looking at the same situation? I simply cannot see how you can possibly claim that there has been little 'stick' relative to 'carrot'. Apart from the pointless Eat Out scheme (and arguably the furlough scheme - although they had little option with that given that they were forcing a lot of businesses to close), there has been no carrot at all - it's all been stick! And claiming that the public didn't follow the rules early on is nonsense - back in March / April, compliance was exceptionally high. It's declined as more and more people have lost confidence in the government and can can see no opherent policy behind all these draconian restrictions.

As regards 'thuggery', again you cannot claim that without knowing the full details. Were you there? Can you confirm that they were not provoked by the police?

 

[packermac]

There is nothing in the legisltation about distance, so provided the person is not staying somewhere overnight it's very unlikely to be enforceable.

I see with your comments of 'thuggery' you are showing your usual intolerance of anyone whoo objects to the government rules. Without knowing details (e.g. were thye provoked by the police?) I don't think it's reasonable to throw these sort of comments around. You also don't seem to realise that if the government and police become more 'rigorous' that's just likely to inflame things further. How about they tell us what their exit plan is, and how their restrictions contribute to that? People would be far more likely to comply if they could see the reason for what they were being asked to do. It's currently all stick and no carrot, with no indication at all that the government has any coherent plan.

Well in lockdown 1 the police were stopping people off the Sandbanks ferry (before the company suspended the service) and turning them straight around if they had travelled a great distance for their "walk". Same in the Durdle Door area I believe.

 

[DB]

Well in lockdown 1 the police were stopping people off the Sandbanks ferry (before the company suspended the service) and turning them straight around if they had travelled a great distance for their "walk". Same in the Durdle Door area I believe.

The police were exceeding their powers a lot earlier this year - Derbyshire with their drones is another example.

 

[Mag_seven]

The police were exceeding their powers

Remember when that only used to happen in 3rd world dictatorships!

 

[35B]

Are we looking at the same situation? I simply cannot see how you can possibly claim that there has been little 'stick' relative to 'carrot'. Apart from the pointless Eat Out scheme (and arguably the furlough scheme - although they had little option with that given that they were forcing a lot of businesses to close), there has been no carrot at all - it's all been stick! And claiming that the public didn't follow the rules early on is nonsense - back in March / April, compliance was exceptionally high. It's declined as more and more people have lost confidence in the government and can can see no opherent policy behind all these draconian restrictions.

As regards 'thuggery', again you cannot claim that without knowing the full details. Were you there? Can you confirm that they were not provoked by the police?

A stick that has been used very lightly, and with a current lockdown that is far from rigorous. I agree that compliance has fallen, as is hardly surprising when a sprint has become a marathon - but that does not make what is happening now a case of heavy handedness or use of the stick. Oh, and there is a carrot - that the incidence of Covid is low enough that the need for restrictions is removed.

On restrictions on travel, I seem to recall that certain forces - Cumbria, Devon & Cornwall - did enforce restrictions during the spring, and were supported by both public opinion and the law in turning people around when travelling excessive distances for their exercise. While I agree with @island that there is unlikely to be enforcement of this, I think the default view that the exemptions in the SI apply wherever you go are optimistic.

As for Manchester yesterday, no, I wasn't there and can't say categorically that there was no police provocation. But I find the default assumption of provocation very depressing, if not heading into the territory of victim blaming. Such news stories as I have seen are very flat about how it was policed, and I've seen none of the usual noise that I'd expect to see when policing has been contentious. I'm therefore minded to take the accounts at face value, and to presume that the arrests were in line with the general approach of the British police to protest marches, and therefore an under-representation of the misbehaviour of the marchers. If you have any reports that suggest I'm wrong in my assessment, please do point me towards them. Meanwhile, I'll stand by my view that the noise of a few hundred marchers carting conspiracist placards is unlikely to lead to any great change in either public opinion or government policy.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2020 ==

Remember when that only used to happen in 3rd world dictatorships!

A myth - take a look at the Stephen Ward case...

 

[bramling]

A few observations from today.

Decided to drive to London today. My town (home counties) was fairly quiet, more so than over the weekend. Motorway to London was I'd say about 10% quieter than normal, though with a greater than usual proportion of dopey drivers on it so didn't make much difference to the overall experience - comparing disfavourably to the last lockdown when it was pretty much empty. The London suburbs were however as busy as ever, and particularly heavy around supermarkets, drive-thrus and the like. Underground about on a par with yesterday, which was quieter than Saturday which was quite busy. By no means empty, more like what I'd call 1980s daytime levels of usage rather than complete ghost town.

 

[DB]

Went into town at lunchtime. Quite quiet, but five plods hanging around, all wearing masks. Presumably they've not got anything better to do?

 

[greyman42]

Yesterday's protest in Manchester. A few hundred protesters (the BBC report says 600), with police incurring minor injuries, and 4 public order arrests - that is hardly likely to persuade the government to change tack.

I read on teletext that there was a protest at Trafalgar Square on Thursday night which resulted in 190 arrests. I find it astonishing that it did not make the national news.

 

[nlogax]

I read on teletext that there was a protest at Trafalgar Square on Thursday night which resulted in 190 arrests. I find it astonishing that it did not make the national news.

Shouldn't be a shock that another story took precedence during last week's TV bulletins. It did make it to major news outlets though. Surprise surprise I see the usual high profile nutjobs got involved to skew the message.

I was asked to include quotes..

https://www.itv.com/news/london/2020-11-06/more-than-100-people-arrested-at-protest-against-lockdown

Police have arrested 190 anti-lockdown protesters as hundreds of people marched through the streets of central London on the day tougher coronavirus rules came into force in England.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...march-demonstrators-gather-in-london-12125023

Arrests have been made after anti-lockdown protesters and "Million Mask March" demonstrators gathered in central London.

On the first day of England's new national lockdown, police urged people to go home after they took to the streets near the capital's Trafalgar Square on Thursday evening.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54842605

Police arrested 190 protesters during anti-lockdown demonstrations in central London.
Officers dispersed a large protest in Trafalgar Square at about 19:00 GMT on Thursday, with small pockets of protests continuing through the night.

 

[PeterY]

One of the local villages in Hertfordshire, near Hemel Hempstead, most of the shops were open except the one charity shop and the hairdressers. I was able to purchase and new hoover and a pair of hair clippers. The reason the electrical shop was open is because they sold light bulbs, which is classed as "hardware". It's a joke the lockdown rules.

 

[bramling]

One of the local villages in Hertfordshire, near Hemel Hempstead, most of the shops were open except the one charity shop and the hairdressers. I was able to purchase and new hoover and a pair of hair clippers. The reason the electrical shop was open is because they sold light bulbs, which is classed as "hardware". It's a joke the lockdown rules.

My neighbour went to a shop in the town to buy a couple of model boats as a Christmas gift. The shop was closed, however had moved as much stock as possible to be visible in the windows, and he was able to ring a phone number displayed in the window, and arrange a "kerbside collection", which just happened to be there and then on the shop's doorstep! No idea on the technical legalities of this, but he was most pleased with the arrangement!

 

[island]

That practice is permitted under the current regulations.