How much longer will social distancing go on for in the UK?

[yorksrob]

NHS Chief Sir Simon Stevens said today as things stand while he doesn't see a major lifting of restrictions soon, he doesn't think we'll be waiting till the autumn for them all to go.

Within the range of restrictions, lockdown is the extreme. It's my worry that various policy formers see lockdown as the go-to option, whereas they need to be managing with restrictions short of full lockdown.

 

[brad465]

There will come a point when we realise that we can't trash the economy any longer - and that will be well before the autumn.

Within the range of restrictions, lockdown is the extreme. It's my worry that various policy formers see lockdown as the go-to option, whereas they need to be managing with restrictions short of full lockdown.

Yes I do support much earlier easing than is being touted, I merely roughly quoted what he said on Andrew Marr this morning.

At the moment prominent anti-lockdown/restriction people are relatively quiet because to the dire situation the NHS appears to be in, but once the vaccination totals mount up and all other metrics go down, combined with elements of the upcoming budget providing a reality check, these people will struggle to be silenced.

 

[bramling]

No chance - the country will be bankrupt if they try that. The comments from Sunak recently indicates that he knows it, too.

It's also ridiculous to claim that 'inaction' led to this. The only measures which might have prevented it becoming endemic would have been closed borders and quarantine very early on. Given that the UK is a major transport hub, this was realistically never a possibility as it was already spreading from multiple sources far before anyone even thought of restrictions - likely to have been since at least December 2019, possibly even earlier.

Given how much some people have bleated on about foreign holidays, and how it’s quite clear quarantining has been leaky at best, I agree this just wouldn’t have worked. Incredibly, my town had schools going ahead with ski trips to Italy as late as early/mid March last year.

People wouldn’t have accepted the situation seen elsewhere of being forcibly incarcerated, though saying that people seem to have accepted other things we’d have thought would have been impossible to implement here, so who knows...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jan 2021 ==

Within the range of restrictions, lockdown is the extreme. It's my worry that various policy formers see lockdown as the go-to option, whereas they need to be managing with restrictions short of full lockdown.

It is absolutely imperative that all of us do our bit to quash at every opportunity this mindset of lockdown being the default go-to option. To at least some extent this is being fuelled by things like WFH and furlough. If we didn’t have furlough I’d say a lot of attitudes would be rather different.

If we don’t all make an effort to quash this we are going to get a clamour from some people to repeat it every winter. In terms of excess deaths we don’t seem to be doing horrendously worse than in some bad previous years. Sadly it’s almost inevitable we’re going to see an uplift over the next few years in deaths from other causes, cancer in particular being one to watch.

 

[DB]

It is absolutely imperative that all of us do our bit to quash at every opportunity this mindset of lockdown being the default go-to option. To at least some extent this is being fuelled by things like WFH and furlough. If we didn’t have furlough I’d say a lot of attitudes would be rather different.

The ending of the furlough scheme is going to be what will force the issue, as people will have no choice but to face up to reality, and employers will in many cases start getting tough - I suspect there are quite a lot of people who could be working but are furloughed because they've made such a fuss about being terrified (although not in a high risk category), and the employers simply don't want that battle at the moment. When the government stops paying the wages it'll be a different matter though.

 

[bramling]

The ending of the furlough scheme is going to be what will force the issue, as people will have no choice but to face up to reality, and employers will in many cases start getting tough - I suspect there are quite a lot of people who could be working but are furloughed because they've made such a fuss about being terrified (although not in a high risk category), and the employers simply don't want that battle at the moment. When the government stops paying the wages it'll be a different matter though.

The trouble is the scheme just never seems able to be shaken off. It must have been extended at least three times now?

Boris is too weak to put a stop to it. But even then there’s the home-counties work from homes. Many of these actively want to keep shifting the goalposts to the right in order to maintain their current lifestyle. They know that ultimately their destiny is out of their hands - it’s up to their employer - so again that provides an incentive for it to be “too dangerous to go to the office” for as long as possible, and the only way to keep that narrative going is to talk up the virus.

I am actually coming to the conclusion that the only way to end this is some kind of showdown as the issue gets forced. Boris is too weak to do this, every now and again he seems to walk the walk, but every time he bottles it at the last minute, partly because of the tail wagging dog syndrome involving Scotland and Wales, who are insulated from some the consequences of what they call for. A strong leader would be up for this fight, Boris isn’t that. It’s clear Sunak wants to push the issue, but he seems to be the lone voice, the rest of the cabinet are simply Boris puppets.

 

[C J Snarzell]

But he's not the one who will make the decisons (although doubtless he will try to influence them) - and along with Whitty, Vallence and Ferguson he is another Doomster.

Whitty, Vallance and Ferguson are 'cautionists' - everything they say or do in the press is 'air on the side of caution'.

Even when all the older folks have been vaccinated along with key workers, they will still be stressing the importance of social distancing and restrictions because its the cautious thing to do.

I can imagine Chris Whitty is cautious about everything he does in his private life - from what side of the bed he sleeps on to how much milk he puts on his weetabix.

CJ

 

[brad465]

It is absolutely imperative that all of us do our bit to quash at every opportunity this mindset of lockdown being the default go-to option. To at least some extent this is being fuelled by things like WFH and furlough. If we didn’t have furlough I’d say a lot of attitudes would be rather different.

If we don’t all make an effort to quash this we are going to get a clamour from some people to repeat it every winter. In terms of excess deaths we don’t seem to be doing horrendously worse than in some bad previous years. Sadly it’s almost inevitable we’re going to see an uplift over the next few years in deaths from other causes, cancer in particular being one to watch.

The upcoming budget revealing how much everything has cost so far is the best chance of trying to shake furlough off. While I'm left leaning, there are many vocal people on the left who I don't agree with when it comes to support measures staying on, where they argue it can be paid for by things like not renewing trident, a wealth tax, ditching HS2 (please don't create arguments we already know about how realistic this actually is) and/or clamping down on tax avoidance. I get on board with some of their suggestions for paying the debt off, but what I definitely don't agree with is their effective beliefs that because we have these apparently effective means of covering the furlough costs we should keep the scheme going.

The problem also is when the fallout from all this emerges, the pro and anti-lockdown groups will still be very split on what caused the fallout. Anti-lockdown groups will obviously say it's all the restrictions lasting too long, but I'm expecting the pro lot to argue it's all because the support wasn't enough. However when it comes to deaths from other causes further in the future how this is viewed by the pro groups is still open to interpretation.

 

[DB]

The problem also is when the fallout from all this emerges, the pro and anti-lockdown groups will still be very split on what caused the fallout. Anti-lockdown groups will obviously say it's all the restrictions lasting too long, but I'm expecting the pro lot to argue it's all because the support wasn't enough. However when it comes to deaths from other causes further in the future how this is viewed by the pro groups is still open to interpretation.

I rather doubt if the pro-lockdown camp will admin that the approach was wrong - you only need to look at how they approach restrictions: correlation always equals causation if something appears to work, but if it doesn't appear to work (or to have a negative effect) then that's because we need more restrictions.

 

[bramling]

I rather doubt if the pro-lockdown camp will admin that the approach was wrong - you only need to look at how they approach restrictions: correlation always equals causation if something appears to work, but if it doesn't appear to work (or to have a negative effect) then that's because we need more restrictions.

And this is what’s worrying, there’s no way out of this vicious cycle, for as long as we have politicians who pander to it.

We’d have already for sure have had civil disobedience if the restrictions we have now were actually enforceable / being enforced.

 

[brad465]

And this is what’s worrying, there’s no way out of this vicious cycle, for as long as we have politicians who pander to it.

We’d have already for sure have had civil disobedience if the restrictions we have now were actually enforceable / being enforced.

The lack of enforcement here might have something to do with past police cuts. I can't recall if France has seen unrest as a result of restriction enforcement but Italy definitely has.

As for weak politicians this is what happens when we've had the same Governing party for over a decade, the competent ones start to run out.

 

[HLE]

Some of you lot will love this. Article in today's Sunday Times suggests Sunak will extend the furlough and business loan schemes in March's statement. Doesn't state for how long.

 

[Scotrail12]

Some of you lot will love this. Article in today's Sunday Times suggests Sunak will extend the furlough and business loan schemes in March's statement. Doesn't state for how long.

He can't extend it - we'll be bloody broke if that wretched scheme continues.

 

[bramling]

He can't extend it - we'll be bloody broke if that wretched scheme continues.

There’s going to come a point when those still at work are quite literally going to have had enough of this. Certainly at my place fury continues to notch up. Perhaps that will be what triggers the civil disobedience.

 

[DB]

He can't extend it - we'll be bloody broke if that wretched scheme continues.

Hasn't stopped him so far!

Those calling for eternal lockdowns must be either completely ignorant of the econmic consequences, or don't think it will affect them (that probably means just retired people with plenty of money, as anyone in work could well be affected).

 

[Richard Scott]

As for weak politicians this is what happens when we've had the same Governing party for over a decade, the competent ones start to run out.

Unfortunately opposition are no better either, can't think of any current politician who would be any good. Only one had any confidence in over past few years is Ruth Davidson and she doesn't look likely to be coming to the fore any time soon.

 

[bramling]

Hasn't stopped him so far!

Those calling for eternal lockdowns must be either completely ignorant of the econmic consequences, or don't think it will affect them (that probably means just retired people with plenty of money, as anyone in work could well be affected).

The work from homes no doubt feel insulated from it. Quite possibly the pensioners too (and they no doubt will be).

If I were on furlough though I would definitely *not* be wanting this to continue, anyone in that situation who does is delusional.

Everyone else is straight under the bus.

 

[Bishopstone]

They’ll want to ease restrictions one by one, to ‘see how it goes’ and measure the impact on virus rates.

If the return of schools and higher education is the first easing - and it should be, because young people are bearing the brunt of this, and university students are currently paying £3k per term for a correspondence course - then that’s the late February easing.

Measuring impact requires at least three weeks as each easing beds down, which points to non-essential retail returning in mid-March, possibly grouped with personal care and the end of ‘Stay At Home’. Hospitality would follow in early April (Easter, or maybe after Easter, deliberately) on a restricted basis such as ‘meals only’ or the rule of six; and gyms, swimming pools etc would probably return at the same time.

This timeline pushes spectator sport; festivals and pub boozing etc back to very late spring. Nightclubs would stay shut until about 2027....

Looking at the much better virus data today - whilst accepting that hospitals are still in desperate difficulty because of the usual lags - then I can’t see the ‘baby steps’ release programme through until June being tolerated, or economically viable. Once the over-70s are jabbed and hospital bed occupancy is on a solid downwards trajectory, the bullet will need to be bitten and most of the restrictions lifted quickly.

 

[Bantamzen]

The upcoming budget revealing how much everything has cost so far is the best chance of trying to shake furlough off. While I'm left leaning, there are many vocal people on the left who I don't agree with when it comes to support measures staying on, where they argue it can be paid for by things like not renewing trident, a wealth tax, ditching HS2 (please don't create arguments we already know about how realistic this actually is) and/or clamping down on tax avoidance. I get on board with some of their suggestions for paying the debt off, but what I definitely don't agree with is their effective beliefs that because we have these apparently effective means of covering the furlough costs we should keep the scheme going.

The problem also is when the fallout from all this emerges, the pro and anti-lockdown groups will still be very split on what caused the fallout. Anti-lockdown groups will obviously say it's all the restrictions lasting too long, but I'm expecting the pro lot to argue it's all because the support wasn't enough. However when it comes to deaths from other causes further in the future how this is viewed by the pro groups is still open to interpretation.

The budget should be the watershed moment, like it or not we have to start thinking about how to balance the books after the incredible amount of additional debt we have racked up. My biggest fear is that what the Chancellor has in mind might not be palatable for the the rank and file, which could lead BoJo to bottle it and continue with furlough for some time.

 

[bramling]

The budget should be the watershed moment, like it or not we have to start thinking about how to balance the books after the incredible amount of additional debt we have racked up. My biggest fear is that what the Chancellor has in mind might not be palatable for the the rank and file, which could lead BoJo to bottle it and continue with furlough for some time.

What do we think Sunak has in mind?

 

[Bantamzen]

What do we think Sunak has in mind?

Well the big rumours are around increases in corporation tax, as well as reform of council tax and stamp duty. The former will not go down well in Tory Donor Land.

 

[bramling]

Well the big rumours are around increases in corporation tax, as well as reform of council tax and stamp duty. The former will not go down well in Tory Donor Land.

I suppose it’s a given pensioners will be completely unscathed.

The deciding factor will probably be at what point Boris decides to make his exit. My money’s still on late spring.

 

[DB]

They’ll want to ease restrictions one by one, to ‘see how it goes’ and measure the impact on virus rates.

If the return of schools and higher education is the first easing - and it should be, because young people are bearing the brunt of this, and university students are currently paying £3k per term for a correspondence course - then that’s the late February easing.

Measuring impact requires at least three weeks as each easing beds down, which points to non-essential retail returning in mid-March, possibly grouped with personal care and the end of ‘Stay At Home’. Hospitality would follow in early April (Easter, or maybe after Easter, deliberately) on a restricted basis such as ‘meals only’ or the rule of six; and gyms, swimming pools etc would probably return at the same time.

This timeline pushes spectator sport; festivals and pub boozing etc back to very late spring. Nightclubs would stay shut until about 2027....

Looking at the much better virus data today - whilst accepting that hospitals are still in desperate difficulty because of the usual lags - then I can’t see the ‘baby steps’ release programme through until June being tolerated, or economically viable. Once the over-70s are jabbed and hospital bed occupancy is on a solid downwards trajectory, the bullet will need to be bitten and most of the restrictions lifted quickly.

They can't drag it out too long, and cases will decline in spring whatever they do as this is a seasonal virus - and it would be rather ironic if they insisted on giving enough time to see what impact anything had, when they have repeatedly failed to do that before increasing restrictions again and again.

 

[Cdd89]

Well the big rumours are around increases in corporation tax, as well as reform of council tax and stamp duty. The former will not go down well in Tory Donor Land.

Don’t forget near certain changes (aka increases) to Capital Gains Tax

 

[HLE]

My thoughts on furlough remain the same as 6 months or more ago. It should support those who cannot work due to their business having to remain closed due to restrictions. Hospitality, events etc. How many on here would moan if they couldn't go to the football, rugby etc. because they'd gone bust.

I'd stop those companies who haven't been significantly affected by the restrictions and have the rest who are in the half way house assessed case by case. Or offer flexi furlough with a cap.

Some I work with moaned about furlough back then, but my point to them was your job has been partially funded by the state for years, and almost fully funded now. With demand set to free-fall compared to 2019, for the next few years at least, will we see redundancies?

 

[DB]

My thoughts on furlough remain the same as 6 months or more ago. It should support those who cannot work due to their business having to remain closed due to restrictions. Hospitality, events etc. How many on here would moan if they couldn't go to the football, rugby etc. because they'd gone bust.

Indeed - which is why they need to get rid of punishing restrictions such as distancing and masks as soon as possible so that businesses of this type can start to get back into operation again.

 

[brad465]

Well the big rumours are around increases in corporation tax, as well as reform of council tax and stamp duty. The former will not go down well in Tory Donor Land.

Yes given how many in such ranks aspire for us to be like Singapore Covid has certainly at the very least delayed that prospect.

The budget should be the watershed moment, like it or not we have to start thinking about how to balance the books after the incredible amount of additional debt we have racked up. My biggest fear is that what the Chancellor has in mind might not be palatable for the the rank and file, which could lead BoJo to bottle it and continue with furlough for some time.

While the Chancellor will need to come up with something, given he is rumoured to be eyeing the PM role I do wonder how much he'll actually put forward that won't go down well with the base that might put him in No.10. Coming up with some hard graft measures that are not popular though will amplify calls for restrictions to end so make the measures less severe overall.

 

[BJames]

I think Boris was pressured by these overzealous scientists and advisors into another lockdown, but without furlough extension thousands of businesses would have been lost. With the vaccine now rolling out in force, this cannot be allowed to happen again - someone needs to stand up against a furlough extension and once that is categorically ruled out, support for lockdown will suddenly start to decline. Those who go to work "fearfully" will realise after a couple of weeks that there is nothing to worry about, as the majority of people will have been vaccinated.

Indeed - which is why they need to get rid of punishing restrictions such as distancing and masks as soon as possible so that businesses of this type can start to get back into operation again.

Agreed. No point protecting everyone to the extent of no virus but no society left either!

 

[Richard Scott]

They’ll want to ease restrictions one by one, to ‘see how it goes’ and measure the impact on virus rates.

If the return of schools and higher education is the first easing - and it should be, because young people are bearing the brunt of this, and university students are currently paying £3k per term for a correspondence course - then that’s the late February easing.

Measuring impact requires at least three weeks as each easing beds down, which points to non-essential retail returning in mid-March, possibly grouped with personal care and the end of ‘Stay At Home’. Hospitality would follow in early April (Easter, or maybe after Easter, deliberately) on a restricted basis such as ‘meals only’ or the rule of six; and gyms, swimming pools etc would probably return at the same time.

This timeline pushes spectator sport; festivals and pub boozing etc back to very late spring. Nightclubs would stay shut until about 2027....

Looking at the much better virus data today - whilst accepting that hospitals are still in desperate difficulty because of the usual lags - then I can’t see the ‘baby steps’ release programme through until June being tolerated, or economically viable. Once the over-70s are jabbed and hospital bed occupancy is on a solid downwards trajectory, the bullet will need to be bitten and most of the restrictions lifted quickly.

No, just get on with it. After those most at risk have been vaccinated the risk to others is minimal so why would there be any need for restrictions. We've spent enough time being slaves to the paranoid. They need to rejoin the real world too, the one where most of us accept life comes with risks if we're to make the most of it.

 

[duncanp]

They’ll want to ease restrictions one by one, to ‘see how it goes’ and measure the impact on virus rates.

If the return of schools and higher education is the first easing - and it should be, because young people are bearing the brunt of this, and university students are currently paying £3k per term for a correspondence course - then that’s the late February easing.

Measuring impact requires at least three weeks as each easing beds down, which points to non-essential retail returning in mid-March, possibly grouped with personal care and the end of ‘Stay At Home’. Hospitality would follow in early April (Easter, or maybe after Easter, deliberately) on a restricted basis such as ‘meals only’ or the rule of six; and gyms, swimming pools etc would probably return at the same time.

This timeline pushes spectator sport; festivals and pub boozing etc back to very late spring. Nightclubs would stay shut until about 2027....

Looking at the much better virus data today - whilst accepting that hospitals are still in desperate difficulty because of the usual lags - then I can’t see the ‘baby steps’ release programme through until June being tolerated, or economically viable. Once the over-70s are jabbed and hospital bed occupancy is on a solid downwards trajectory, the bullet will need to be bitten and most of the restrictions lifted quickly.

I agree with your phasing of the easing of restrictions, but would like to differ slightly on the timings

My guess would be

• Schools and universities to return after the February half term, possibly in stages or on a part time basis until after the Easter holidays
• Non essential retail and leisure centres to re-open early March, perhaps to coincide with the budget on March 3rd, or shortly afterwards. The chancellor will need to say something to sweeten the impact of the tax rises he is going to announce, so he may announce a date for the re-opening of the hospitality sector on the day of the budget, as they do need a few weeks to prepare and order stock etc.
• Hospitality to re-open sometime between the anniversary of the first lockdown (March 23rd is a Tuesday this year) and Easter, but probably on a weekday this time rather than a Saturday. Restrictions will be similar to when the reopened last July, with no "meal only" requirement, but track & trace, table service only and 1 metre + social distancing.
• Crowds allowed back into sports stadiums from mid to late April, possibly on a limited capacity at first.

Other remaining restrictions could be progressively eased in the spring, with restrictions on internal travel within the UK lifted in time for the bank holiday at the beginning of May.

As ever, this is all speculation, or perhaps even wishful thinking, but by the beginning of March we should have a better idea of the impact of the vaccination program, and the extent to which vaccines prevent transmission as well as give immunity from the disease.

 

[Bantamzen]

I suppose it’s a given pensioners will be completely unscathed.

The deciding factor will probably be at what point Boris decides to make his exit. My money’s still on late spring.

If Sunak pushes through a harsh budget, then it is almost certainly the beginning of the end for Boris.

Don’t forget near certain changes (aka increases) to Capital Gains Tax

Indeed.

Yes given how many in such ranks aspire for us to be like Singapore Covid has certainly at the very least delayed that prospect.

While the Chancellor will need to come up with something, given he is rumoured to be eyeing the PM role I do wonder how much he'll actually put forward that won't go down well with the base that might put him in No.10. Coming up with some hard graft measures that are not popular though will amplify calls for restrictions to end so make the measures less severe overall.

I don't doubt for a second that his eyes are fixed firmly on the big prize. But he still has to push Johnson out of the way by winning over enough of his party, which with all the covid-phobia is no mean task.