Life after the end of "lockdown" 2.0

[duncanp]

Meanwhile The Telegraph is reporting that MPs are growing increasingly restive about reports of tiers being "toughened", and extra restrictions being imposed.

I think the quote below sums up the their feelings and I wholeheartedly agree with it.

"We were promised and we voted for a second lockdown with reassurances that it would save Christmas, so they better bloody well save Christmas."

It has been a difficult year, and most people have tried to follow the rules, at least for some of the time. The one thing that has kept many people going, as well as businesses is the hope that there will be at least a semblance of normality at Christmas. If hospitality, entertainment and shops are closed at Christmas and New Year, it will push many people and businesses over the edge.

 

[bramling]

Meanwhile The Telegraph is reporting that MPs are growing increasingly restive about reports of tiers being "toughened", and extra restrictions being imposed.

I think the quote below sums up the their feelings and I wholeheartedly agree with it.



It has been a difficult year, and most people have tried to follow the rules, at least for some of the time. The one thing that has kept many people going, as well as businesses is the hope that there will be at least a semblance of normality at Christmas. If hospitality, entertainment and shops are closed at Christmas and New Year, it will push many people and businesses over the edge.

Am I the only one who’s sick of hearing all this focus on Christmas?

 

[trainophile]

Am I the only one who’s sick of hearing all this focus on Christmas?

No, but I suppose it does serve as a natural target date for some sort of normality to return, even if only temporarily.

 

[packermac]

Am I the only one who’s sick of hearing all this focus on Christmas?

I most certainly am. Whatever your views on what has happened this year seems strange to trash all the effort for a couple days of people meeting up.

 

[yorksrob]

I see that the BMA are suggesting banning travel between different lockdown tiers. I could imagine there would be difficulty in enforcing that, particularly given that the tiers seem to be allocated along quite arbitrary lines.

 

[Bantamzen]

Am I the only one who’s sick of hearing all this focus on Christmas?

No, but I suppose it does serve as a natural target date for some sort of normality to return, even if only temporarily.

I most certainly am. Whatever your views on what has happened this year seems strange to trash all the effort for a couple days of people meeting up.

For many people Christmas is a time of year they are able to catch up with family & friends that they don't always get to see at other times of the year. For many businesses Christmas is a very important source of revenue.

So that's why there is so much focus on it.

I see that the BMA are suggesting banning travel between different lockdown tiers. I could imagine there would be difficulty in enforcing that, particularly given that the tiers seem to be allocated along quite arbitrary lines.

I have to admit seeing Wales & Scotland starting to impose travel bans was worrying, it would be even more worrying if central government started to consider them. Such rules are not always easily given up, and would give governments new powers to impose them whenever they felt like it.

 

[yorksrob]

For many people Christmas is a time of year they are able to catch up with family & friends that they don't always get to see at other times of the year. For many businesses Christmas is a very important source of revenue.

So that's why there is so much focus on it.



I have to admit seeing Wales & Scotland starting to impose travel bans was worrying, it would be even more worrying if central government started to consider them. Such rules are not always easily given up, and would give governments new powers to impose them whenever they felt like it.

Yes, it really does seem to be the tighter the lockdown, the more lockdown restrictions one can expect at the end of it.

 

[Smidster]

Am I the only one who’s sick of hearing all this focus on Christmas?

Absolutely - And it isn't just because I find Christmas a really hard time of year.

I totally understand that Christmas is a big day for lots of people in the UK but equally it is only one day of the year out of 365 and is at pretty much the worst time of year when it comes to how a virus would spread if you have millions of people criss-crossing the country and then spending prolonged periods of time indoors at close range.

If the "cost" of a semi-regular Christmas is another lockdown in January / February then I would much much rather we sacrifice that one day for a little more freedom further down the line.

By all accounts we should be in a much better place next Spring - delay things until Easter when hopefully we can all have a really good time and it won't be dark at 3:30.

 

[duncanp]

By all accounts we should be in a much better place next Spring - delay things until Easter when hopefully we can all have a really good time and it won't be dark at 3:30.

But Easter (April 4th) is over 4 months away.

People's mental health, the viability of many businesses, and the prognosis for many non COVID-19 patients will be adversely affected if we carry on with the current lockdown until Easter.

We should have a lower level of national restrictions, somewhere in between the former Tier 2 and Tier 3, that people are more likely to be able to follow for a longer period of time.

If we are going to have a Tier system, there should be clear objective criteria for saying which area goes in which tier, and how you move up and down the tiers. If people know that, by following a set of rules for a short period of time, the infection rate will come down and the rules will be relaxed, that gives them more of an incentive to follow the rules in the first place.

At the moment, all the politicians will say is that the rules "may" be relaxed, or that "our hope and expectation" is that this lockdown will be sufficient. Then of course at the end of the lockdown the rules aren't relaxed, or are replaced by an equally strict set of rules.

We have seen this in Scotland, where the "circuit breaker" lockdown was meant to bring down cases, but it didn't.

 

[Smidster]

But Easter (April 4th) is over 4 months away.

People's mental health, the viability of many businesses, and the prognosis for many non COVID-19 patients will be adversely affected if we carry on with the current lockdown until Easter.

We should have a lower level of national restrictions, somewhere in between the former Tier 2 and Tier 3, that people are more likely to be able to follow for a longer period of time.

If we are going to have a Tier system, there should be clear objective criteria for saying which area goes in which tier, and how you move up and down the tiers. If people know that, by following a set of rules for a short period of time, the infection rate will come down and the rules will be relaxed, that gives them more of an incentive to follow the rules in the first place.

At the moment, all the politicians will say is that the rules "may" be relaxed, or that "our hope and expectation" is that this lockdown will be sufficient. Then of course at the end of the lockdown the rules aren't relaxed, or are replaced by an equally strict set of rules.

We have seen this in Scotland, where the "circuit breaker" lockdown was meant to bring down cases, but it didn't.

I am not for a minute saying we continue with the current level of restrictions until Easter - If anything I might opt for something like you can meet one household at home but actively encourage people into hospitality settings where you have much more control over things like social distancing.

My argument was about a relaxation of rules for Christmas with the prospect of another hard lockdown afterwards to pay for it - That would be far more damaging than having your simple set of rules to take us from (hopefully) December 2nd until March / April.

I also agree that it would be much better if we knew exactly what the criteria were for different stages - For the data geeks among us it would give us a nice dashboard to play with and for normal people a target to work towards.

 

[yorksrob]

My argument was about a relaxation of rules for Christmas with the prospect of another hard lockdown afterwards to pay for it - That would be far more damaging than having your simple set of rules to take us from (hopefully) December 2nd until March / April.

Yes, I agree with that approach. Not that we'll get it of course. We'll be lurching from one half-baked, counter-productive panick measure to the next.

 

[duncanp]

I am not for a minute saying we continue with the current level of restrictions until Easter - If anything I might opt for something like you can meet one household at home but actively encourage people into hospitality settings where you have much more control over things like social distancing.

My argument was about a relaxation of rules for Christmas with the prospect of another hard lockdown afterwards to pay for it - That would be far more damaging than having your simple set of rules to take us from (hopefully) December 2nd until March / April.

I also agree that it would be much better if we knew exactly what the criteria were for different stages - For the data geeks among us it would give us a nice dashboard to play with and for normal people a target to work towards.

I agree with you that we should not relax rules completely over Christmas and New Year, and then have another lockdown in January to pay for it. That, if anything, would be worse than carrying on with the current lockdown.

I also think that hospitality should be re-opened throughout the country from December 3rd, with a simple set of rules (eg face masks when not sitting down, contact tracing, table service, 1 metre + distancing, hand sanitiser, ordering via app where possible, contactless payment) that aim to mitigate, if not eliminate entirely, the chance of transmission of the virus. Closing time for pubs should be extended until 11pm, and the proportion of virus transmissions accounted for by hospitality settings should be monitored. Queuing outside pubs that are full up should be banned - if necessary pubs can allow people to book a table just for drinks at times they know are going to be busy. Local authorities should be given greater powers to take action against pubs and other hospitality venues that break the rules. If venues know that they are going to be caught and punished, they are more likely to follow the rules in the first place.

Other settings such as gyms, swimming pools, non essential shops and places of worship should also re-open, with sensible rules in place which make these places as COVID-19 secure as possible.

The more places that are open, the easier it will be to practise social distancing, which will play a big part in getting infection rates down.

The problem is that at lot of these measures are counter intuitive, which means that they are less likely to be adopted.

 

[yorksrob]

I agree with you that we should not relax rules completely over Christmas and New Year, and then have another lockdown in January to pay for it. That, if anything, would be worse than carrying on with the current lockdown.

I also think that hospitality should be re-opened throughout the country from December 3rd, with a simple set of rules (eg face masks when not sitting down, contact tracing, table service, 1 metre + distancing, hand sanitiser, ordering via app where possible, contactless payment) that aim to mitigate, if not eliminate entirely, the chance of transmission of the virus. Closing time for pubs should be extended until 11pm, and the proportion of virus transmissions accounted for by hospitality settings should be monitored.

Other settings such as gyms, swimming pools, non essential shops and places of worship should also re-open, with sensible rules in place which make these places as COVID-19 secure as possible.

The more places that are open, the easier it will be to practise social distancing, which will play a big part in getting infection rates down.

The problem is that at lot of these measures are counter intuitive, which means that they are less likely to be adopted.

And closing time should be "stop serving" rather than chucking out. That would allow people to disperse over more time.

All unlikely sadly. The lockdown brigade would never allow it.

 

[DustyBin]

I agree with you that we should not relax rules completely over Christmas and New Year, and then have another lockdown in January to pay for it. That, if anything, would be worse than carrying on with the current lockdown.

I also think that hospitality should be re-opened throughout the country from December 3rd, with a simple set of rules (eg face masks when not sitting down, contact tracing, table service, 1 metre + distancing, hand sanitiser, ordering via app where possible, contactless payment) that aim to mitigate, if not eliminate entirely, the chance of transmission of the virus. Closing time for pubs should be extended until 11pm, and the proportion of virus transmissions accounted for by hospitality settings should be monitored. Queuing outside pubs that are full up should be banned - if necessary pubs can allow people to book a table just for drinks at times they know are going to be busy. Local authorities should be given greater powers to take action against pubs and other hospitality venues that break the rules. If venues know that they are going to be caught and punished, they are more likely to follow the rules in the first place.

Other settings such as gyms, swimming pools, non essential shops and places of worship should also re-open, with sensible rules in place which make these places as COVID-19 secure as possible.

The more places that are open, the easier it will be to practise social distancing, which will play a big part in getting infection rates down.

The problem is that at lot of these measures are counter intuitive, which means that they are less likely to be adopted.

In general I agree with you, however I disagree with your comments regarding face masks and queuing. Face masks are very unpopular and therefore a nightmare to enforce in pubs (ask the staff!) and having people constantly touching them once inside is likely to do more harm than good. It was a silly rule when introduced and really needs to be dropped. In regard to queuing, what’s the problem? Finally, local authorities have all the powers they need to take action against pubs not following the rules, which is why the vast majority were.

 

[trebor79]

Am I the only one who’s sick of hearing all this focus on Christmas?

I most certainly am. Whatever your views on what has happened this year seems strange to trash all the effort for a couple days of people meeting up.

Indeed. I suspect the focus on Christmas is twofold:
1. It will be seen as a way of currying favour to "allow" a "sem-normal" Christmas.
2. People will meet up anyway, and if the restrictions are in place, that behaviour becomes normalised and compliance erodes going forward.

Personally I think it'll backfire. People will realise it's ludicrous to allow social activities for a few days - the coronaphobes will quite rightly point out it will increase transmission, and the more pragmatic will say "well why then and not now" and erode compliance anyway. They seem to have forgotten about New Year, so expect a further concession for a day or two for that, which will just further expose it all as the ludcrous charade that it is.
I was actually quite looking forward to a slimmed-down Christmas and not having the in-laws camped out here and overstaying their welcome. If we have a "normal" Christmas and then back to economy-destroying measures afterwards I'll be apoplectic.

I see that the BMA are suggesting banning travel between different lockdown tiers. I could imagine there would be difficulty in enforcing that, particularly given that the tiers seem to be allocated along quite arbitrary lines.

It's completely anathema to the desire to harmonise rules across the UK. If the rules are clear and consistent then traveling between different areas shouldn't make much difference. It's also impracticable. How far do you take it? Not out of your town, village, street, front door?

 

[Tomp94]

I hope the indoor mixing in tiers 1 and 2 are only applicable to private homes, and that COVID secure premises can open !

 

[Mag_seven]

Am I the only one who’s sick of hearing all this focus on Christmas?

Yes because allowing a "normal" Christmas appears to be driving government policy when they should actually be putting together a plan to get out of all of this for good and not just for Christmas.

 

[DustyBin]

Yes because allowing a "normal" Christmas appears to be driving government policy when they should actually be putting together a plan to get out of all of this for good and not just for Christmas.

Agreed, however they no doubt think they can distract the 'little people' by talking about Christmas and unfortunately there are plenty of people who'll fall for it!

 

[philosopher]

Indeed. I suspect the focus on Christmas is twofold:
1. It will be seen as a way of currying favour to "allow" a "sem-normal" Christmas.
2. People will meet up anyway, and if the restrictions are in place, that behaviour becomes normalised and compliance erodes going forward.

Personally I think it'll backfire. People will realise it's ludicrous to allow social activities for a few days - the coronaphobes will quite rightly point out it will increase transmission, and the more pragmatic will say "well why then and not now" and erode compliance anyway. They seem to have forgotten about New Year, so expect a further concession for a day or two for that, which will just further expose it all as the ludcrous charade that it is.
I was actually quite looking forward to a slimmed-down Christmas and not having the in-laws camped out here and overstaying their welcome. If we have a "normal" Christmas and then back to economy-destroying measures afterwards I'll be apoplectic.


It's completely anathema to the desire to harmonise rules across the UK. If the rules are clear and consistent then traveling between different areas shouldn't make much difference. It's also impracticable. How far do you take it? Not out of your town, village, street, front door?

The obession with trying to make one day of the year as normal as possible does annoy me. If it is choice between having the three tier system over Christmas but no lockdown in the New Year vs a somewhat normal Christmas and a New Year lockdown I would definitely pick the former.

The support and childcare bubbles does allow a limited amount of household interaction anyway for Christmas. For example it could be used for grandparents to see their grandchildren or someone living alone to visit their parents on Christmas Day. Plus the three tier system still allows non essential retail, most hospitality and gyms to remain open throughout.

 

[Bantamzen]

The obession with trying to make one day of the year as normal as possible does annoy me. If it is choice between having the three tier system over Christmas but no lockdown in the New Year vs a somewhat normal Christmas and a New Year lockdown I would definitely pick the former.

The support and childcare bubbles does allow a limited amount of household interaction anyway for Christmas. For example it could be used for grandparents to see their grandchildren or someone living alone to visit their parents on Christmas Day. Plus the three tier system still allows non essential retail, most hospitality and gyms to remain open throughout.

Its not a binary choice, we could chose to follow the data and stop with the lockdowns altogether instead of continually obsessing over them as a strategy which is clearly not working.

 

[duncanp]

In general I agree with you, however I disagree with your comments regarding face masks and queuing. Face masks are very unpopular and therefore a nightmare to enforce in pubs (ask the staff!) and having people constantly touching them once inside is likely to do more harm than good. It was a silly rule when introduced and really needs to be dropped. In regard to queuing, what’s the problem? Finally, local authorities have all the powers they need to take action against pubs not following the rules, which is why the vast majority were.

I am not all that keen on masks myself - I can't stand the wretched things and I question whether they are of any use in a pub.

However I am prepared to put up with them as a sop to the lockdown brigade/Professor Twitty/SAGE if it means that hospitality venues can re-open.

My comments about queuing were really in response to some reports of large crowds queuing outside pubs and clubs, late at night and without social distancing, whilst waiting to get into a venue that has already reached it's COVID secure capacity. I don't think there is a problem with queuing per se, but any queue should really be socially distanced, and if this is not possible it would be better to have a booking system. You know what the locktivist brigade are like - a photo of a queue outside a pub will find it's way onto Facebook or Mumsnet, and there will then be all these hysterical comments online, which will put pressure on government ministers to tighten the rules.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes because allowing a "normal" Christmas appears to be driving government policy when they should actually be putting together a plan to get out of all of this for good and not just for Christmas.

Absolutely.

Much as I'd love to be sat with the parents watching Talking Pictures TV and Midsomer Murders as normal this Xmas, it ain't gonna happen this year, whatever half baked plan SAGE and onion come up with. We've done our individual risk assessments and it's not worth it for them.

Government needs to be focusing on keeping things as normal as possible in the medium term, not shutting everything down to have five days, just to shut everything down again afterwards for God knows how long. I despaired when I saw the drivel being reported on the news. This five days "relaxation" will just be used as an excuse for lockdown through to March.

 

[DustyBin]

Absolutely.

Much as I'd love to be sat with the parents watching Talking Pictures TV and Midsomer Murders as normal this Xmas, it ain't gonna happen this year, whatever half baked plan SAGE and onion come up with. We've done our individual risk assessments and it's not worth it for them.

Government needs to be focusing on keeping things as normal as possible in the medium term, not shutting everything down to have five days, just to shut everything down again afterwards for God knows how long. I despaired when I saw the drivel being reported on the news. This five days "relaxation" will just be used as an excuse for lockdown through to March.

Further to my previous post and having watched the same drivel as you on the news today, I actually find it quite insulting that they think we can be bought off with a couple of days of normality! And, as you say, it will inevitably lead to further restrictions....

 

[bramling]

For many people Christmas is a time of year they are able to catch up with family & friends that they don't always get to see at other times of the year. For many businesses Christmas is a very important source of revenue.

So that's why there is so much focus on it.

Absolutely.

Much as I'd love to be sat with the parents watching Talking Pictures TV and Midsomer Murders as normal this Xmas, it ain't gonna happen this year, whatever half baked plan SAGE and onion come up with. We've done our individual risk assessments and it's not worth it for them.

Government needs to be focusing on keeping things as normal as possible in the medium term, not shutting everything down to have five days, just to shut everything down again afterwards for God knows how long. I despaired when I saw the drivel being reported on the news. This five days "relaxation" will just be used as an excuse for lockdown through to March.

Yes it’s madness to be obsessing over five days, and reality is people will do what they want anyway. It’s particularly galling for those us who will be working most of the period in question, so it’s all a load of fuss for nothing AFAIAC.

They’ve already created a problem that Christmas shopping is now going to be compressed once the non-essential shops open up. It would have been better just to keep them open.

 

[yorksrob]

Further to my previous post and having watched the same drivel as you on the news today, I actually find it quite insulting that they think we can be bought off with a couple of days of normality! And, as you say, it will inevitably lead to further restrictions....

It's all very depressing. I can't see anything improving unfortunately.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Nov 2020 ==

Yes it’s madness to be obsessing over five days, and reality is people will do what they want anyway. It’s particularly galling for those us who will be working most of the period in question, so it’s all a load of fuss for nothing AFAIAC.

They’ve already created a problem that Christmas shopping is now going to be compressed once the non-essential shops open up. It would have been better just to keep them open.

Yes, there's all of everyone crowding everything into a short period of time as well. All entirely counter-productive and unnecessary, but it has to be done so that the powers that be can seen to be implementing a "lockdown".

 

[NorthOxonian]

Absolutely.

Much as I'd love to be sat with the parents watching Talking Pictures TV and Midsomer Murders as normal this Xmas, it ain't gonna happen this year, whatever half baked plan SAGE and onion come up with. We've done our individual risk assessments and it's not worth it for them.

Government needs to be focusing on keeping things as normal as possible in the medium term, not shutting everything down to have five days, just to shut everything down again afterwards for God knows how long. I despaired when I saw the drivel being reported on the news. This five days "relaxation" will just be used as an excuse for lockdown through to March.

I've read that SAGE think we'd need five days of harsh restrictions for every day of relaxation. Like you say, it would be nice to have a normal Christmas, but it isn't worth it if it means a month of full lockdown, with all the misery that would cause.

 

[Richard Scott]

I've read that SAGE think we'd need five days of harsh restrictions for every day of relaxation. Like you say, it would be nice to have a normal Christmas, but it isn't worth it if it means a month of full lockdown, with all the misery that would cause.

So where did they get this number from? Sounds like unscientific twaddle. Afraid they are completely without credibility.

 

[duncanp]

It's all very depressing. I can't see anything improving unfortunately.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Nov 2020 ==


Yes, there's all of everyone crowding everything into a short period of time as well. All entirely counter-productive and unnecessary, but it has to be done so that the powers that be can seen to be implementing a "lockdown".

But even if you completely ban socialising over Christmas, and keep every restaurant and pub througout the UK closed unti January, that will only suppress demand, not cancel it. If restrictions are relaxed in January, all the parties etc. that would have happened over Christmas will just happen then.

It would be far better to have a limited relaxation of restrictions over Christmas, allowing families to meet (but advising to cut down on the numbers of people and different households at gatherings) and allowing all hospitality venues to open with a set of COVID secure rules.

Whatever your own views, people will meet up over Christmas and New Year, and it is far better that this is done in a controlled fashion.

I've read that SAGE think we'd need five days of harsh restrictions for every day of relaxation. Like you say, it would be nice to have a normal Christmas, but it isn't worth it if it means a month of full lockdown, with all the misery that would cause.

Earlier on today it was two days of restrictions for every day of "freedom". So what is the betting it will be up to 10 days of restrictions for every day of freedom by the end of next week. This is a not too subtle attempt by "SAGE" to scare the government into effectively continuing the lockdown.

 

[NorthOxonian]

So where did they get this number from? Sounds like unscientific twaddle. Afraid they are completely without credibility.

"SAGE modelling", aka entirely based on assumptions which could be tweaked to give just about any result.

 

[ChrisC]

Absolutely.

Much as I'd love to be sat with the parents watching Talking Pictures TV and Midsomer Murders as normal this Xmas, it ain't gonna happen this year, whatever half baked plan SAGE and onion come up with. We've done our individual risk assessments and it's not worth it for them.

Government needs to be focusing on keeping things as normal as possible in the medium term, not shutting everything down to have five days, just to shut everything down again afterwards for God knows how long. I despaired when I saw the drivel being reported on the news. This five days "relaxation" will just be used as an excuse for lockdown through to March.

I think the sensible approach is for individuals and indeed families to do a risk assessment. I’m certainly not pro lockdown in the way that things have been handled and are currently going but I do care about the health of some of my older relatives and friends. I think we just all need to take a sensible approach to how much we mix with others over Christmas, but so many people unfortunately won’t be sensible. I think we have to realise that this Christmas is going to be different and I can’t see the point of having to endure strict lockdowns until March or later just so that people can go wild for 5 days at Christmas. The longer the government keep us in strict lockdown before Christmas, the busier and more crowded the shops will be when they do open and surely that defeats the object of the current lockdown.