Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Data comes in daily, but given we're seeing restrictions being lifted on Mondays, you'd want to allow a full week of 'easing' to occur (to the weekend, particularly later stages at hospitality opens), a further week or so for the cases to move from infection to positive tests being reported, and then time for the trend to be established to a reasonable degree of confidence. Like you say, we were told several times that it takes several weeks for changes to have an impact, so adding one week for full impact of easing to be reached, and then time at the end for decisions to be confirmed, communicated and businesses allowed to prepare. I've no doubt that they can turn the data around pretty quickly when they get it, it's actually getting it that's the issue...
As per what you quoted, JBC (Joint Biosecurity Centre) are to determine what the measures are. Hospitalisations are the obvious 'critical' one, but case rates and vaccinations (amongst others) will no doubt be monitored (and plugged into models) to help monitor the situation
The joint biosecurity centre does not decide what measures are, that is the job of the Government, who must weigh them properly against the harms they cause.
(Although arguably there were delays on the way up, but not publicised. Politicians don’t like to say “I delayed the decision to lockdown to be sure it was needed, turns out it was, and as a result many more of you will die”)
He highlights several key areas in the link above where the modelling used is overly pessimistic including vaccine rollout speed, vaccine infection/hospitalisation/death reduction, and vaccine takeup.
That is on top of no prior immunity or seasonality effects being considered in the models!
I saw in one place mention that the WFH guidance will cease from 21/6 but I don't see anything mentioned about this in any of the official "roadmap" lists.
I don't think dates will be a heavy feature of this announcement. However, we all know Johnson tends to do what is best for Johnson, so I can see him giving conditions for easing that are realistic enough to allow him to avoid the humiliation of being booted out by his own party (when the Tory party deem the pandemic to be over in very low deaths and hospitalisations there'll want all restrictions gone, or him if they're not so he owns the damage), and/or allow him to resign at a very suitable time.
When I say 'very suitable time', I don't just mean when he can take the credit for removing all restrictions, but he will want/need to remove them and then jump ship before all the fallout from Brexit (sorry but this hasn't gone away either so will influence his behaviour) becomes apparent and he will want to avoid dealing with it like David Cameron avoided responsibility.
Therefore, he may set conditions surrounding a successful vaccination rollout hopefully seeing enough improvements before Brexit consequences become ever more apparent. These conditions theoretically would allow all restrictions to go by some point in June, because all of 1-9 would likely have 2 vaccine doses by mid-June and seasonal effects combined could well see a very good picture, then he could resign before end of the grace period of Brexit customs' checks that sees checks on imports come into effect from July, on top of all the increased activity from restrictions having been removed exacerbating Brexit effects.
This was one of my predictions earlier pre-the announcement, so far my guess about when all restrictions would be lifted is looking correct in suggesting June, all I need is for Johnson to announce he's resigning on the 22nd June (or similar) for this to be fairly accurate. Whatever actually happens time wise on lifting restrictions, I still believe Johnson will be looking to jump ship before the proverbial hits the fan with Brexit and/or Covid; in the case of the former it would be more realities being exposed, the latter would be him wanting to run off before re-imposing any restrictions if apparently necessary.
This was one of my predictions earlier pre-the announcement, so far my guess about when all restrictions would be lifted is looking correct in suggesting June, all I need is for Johnson to announce he's resigning on the 22nd June (or similar) for this to be fairly accurate. Whatever actually happens time wise on lifting restrictions, I still believe Johnson will be looking to jump ship before the proverbial hits the fan with Brexit and/or Covid; in the case of the former it would be more realities being exposed, the latter would be him wanting to run off before re-imposing any restrictions if apparently necessary.
I think he'd wait a few days to resign - I get the feeling he'll try to celebrate the fifth anniversary of Brexit somehow, and that's immediately after the 21st. But I think the general thrust of that is right, and I can't see him sticking around.
I think he'd wait a few days to resign - I get the feeling he'll try to celebrate the fifth anniversary of Brexit somehow, and that's immediately after the 21st. But I think the general thrust of that is right, and I can't see him sticking around.
Ideally it would also apply on the way up, which is why it was disappointing to see tiers being increased as quickly as they were back in Nov/Dec. As pointed out though, increasing restrictions is a rather different kettle of fish to decreasing restrictions - particularly as we'd have been unlikely to see any easing, and (IMO) the additional burden on the population of increased restrictions is minimal once they are already in place (though obviously depending on what restrictions were in place beforehand) - the worst case of rapidly increased restrictions is that we 'overshoot' the balancing point that was aimed for, bringing R down lower and cases decreasing more rapidly
The joint biosecurity centre does not decide what measures are, that is the job of the Government, who must weigh them properly against the harms they cause.
Ultimately the government has to weight and decide, but the JBC have been given responsibility to "consider" (read, tell the government) what to use. Not that it's likely that they would move away from their "covid first" approach
Ultimately the government has to weight and decide, but the JBC have been given responsibility to "consider" (read, tell the government) what to use. Not that it's likely that they would move away from their "covid first" approach
I don't know - up until now at least there's clearly been some attempt to balance covid with everything else, although I think few will agree they've found the right balance. Even the current plan isn't really covid only, as they'd have otherwise just continued with the restrictions as-is until we hit zero-cases or full vaccine coverage
I don't know - up until now at least there's clearly been some attempt to balance covid with everything else, although I think few will agree they've found the right balance. Even the current plan isn't really covid only, as they'd have otherwise just continued with the restrictions as-is until we hit zero-cases or full vaccine coverage
I'd disagree that the government have been trying to balance, they've very successfully thrown various industries under the bus, laid blame on practically everyone's doorsteps but their own, and instilled a fear into a significant proportion of the population, triggering a potential mental health crisis. And that has been very deliberate in an attempt to "defeat the virus". Only now does it seem that they have come to realise that elimination (aka Zero Covid) is impossible, and that the hundreds of billions they've chucked at the problem has only left more problems for the future.
History will not look favourably on this government, although to be fair it won't on many governments around the globe.
I'd disagree that the government have been trying to balance, they've very successfully thrown various industries under the bus, laid blame on practically everyone's doorsteps but their own, and instilled a fear into a significant proportion of the population, triggering a potential mental health crisis. And that has been very deliberate in an attempt to "defeat the virus". Only now does it seem that they have come to realise that elimination (aka Zero Covid) is impossible, and that the hundreds of billions they've chucked at the problem has only left more problems for the future.
History will not look favourably on this government, although to be fair it won't on many governments around the globe.
I don't disagree with your observations on what the government has managed to do, but those aren't proof of not trying to balance covid and everything else.
Throwing industries under the bus and trigger mental health crises are the 'inevitable'* results of restricting activities likely to result in higher transmission, though the fear campaigns are unforgivable in my eyes. UK Gov at least has never tried to pursue zero covid, which is the exact reason why we saw reduced restrictions (for most of the population) over the summer to try and balance covid strategy with the economy and population wellbeing at large. A "Covid only" strategy would have pigheadedly strived for zero covid, and damn the rest of it which I think we can agree is something that hasn't happened here
Agreed that few countries will come out of this well - only least worst in certain areas and even then only with the benefit of 2020 (ha) hindsight. The UK's vaccine programme for example, at this point appears to be a genuine 'world-beating' success, although the rest of our response has been somewhat less impressive, other countries (Aus/NZ) had a great initial response but have a poor exit strategy with their current vaccine plans
*inevitable if you decide that you must try to 'control' spread with NPIs rather than accepting that old people will die and building giga-hospices for covid patients to be made comfortable in as they pass - which is rather the point of trying to find a balance. The giga-hospice scenario is just as unpalatable as welding people into houses
I don't disagree with your observations on what the government has managed to do, but those aren't proof of not trying to balance covid and everything else.
Throwing industries under the bus and trigger mental health crises are the 'inevitable'* results of restricting activities likely to result in higher transmission, though the fear campaigns are unforgivable in my eyes. UK Gov at least has never tried to pursue zero covid, which is the exact reason why we saw reduced restrictions (for most of the population) over the summer to try and balance covid strategy with the economy and population wellbeing at large. A "Covid only" strategy would have pigheadedly strived for zero covid, and damn the rest of it which I think we can agree is something that hasn't happened here
Agreed that few countries will come out of this well - only least worst in certain areas and even then only with the benefit of 2020 (ha) hindsight. The UK's vaccine programme for example, at this point appears to be a genuine 'world-beating' success, although the rest of our response has been somewhat less impressive, other countries (Aus/NZ) had a great initial response but have a poor exit strategy with their current vaccine plans
*inevitable if you decide that you must try to 'control' spread with NPIs rather than accepting that old people will die and building giga-hospices for covid patients to be made comfortable in as they pass - which is rather the point of trying to find a balance. The giga-hospice scenario is just as unpalatable as welding people into houses
Personally speaking I'd say the only thing the government has got right is the vaccine programme. Everything has been a muddle at best.
With regard to strategy although the public goal was not zero covid, its quite clear to me that the government (probably egged on by their advisors) were eyeing up exactly this, hence the constant war-like rhetoric, Johnson banging his fist on his desk etc etc. "We will defeat the virus" is as close to "Zero covid is our goal" as you would would expect this government to admit to.
In terms of NPI, there were better approaches to be had than our government attempted. Shutting most facets down in March last year did little more than kick the issue down the road, I've long since come to the conclusion that the government almost certainly knew they would be locking down again in the Autumn when they threw us a few bones during the Summer. And I wouldn't be surprised if that was on the cards again, at least in their minds. Public tolerance however is probably going to make that difficult at best. However it should be allowed to disguise the horrific mistakes made early on in lockdown. By shutting down large parts of the NHS, and tipping lots of vulnerable people out of hospitals & back into care homes led to a significant proportion of the deaths, and what was very likely the epicentre of the spread.
I feel certain that if an honest and transparent inquiry is ever held into all the actions of the government in those early weeks would be shown to be the major source of the problem, and that subsequent lockdowns & restrictions did little more than deflect blame & kick the can down the road. I said all this back in April last year, and nothing I have seen or heard since has changed my mind on this.
Sounds like it's slipping already. My other half who is a teacher has been told that only staff will be back from Monday 8th; students won't be in until the Wednesday of that week.
Sounds like it's slipping already. My other half who is a teacher has been told that only staff will be back from Monday 8th; students won't be in until the Wednesday of that week.
We were all set up to test pupils next week ready for a return on the 8th. Not allowed to start testing until 8th and pupils aren't allowed back into face to face lessons until a negative test
We were all set up to test pupils next week ready for a return on the 8th. Not allowed to start testing until 8th and pupils aren't allowed back into face to face lessons until a negative test
I doubt the people coming up with these policies care. Such children will quickly become second-class citizens - either not allowed to attend school at all, or singled out in various ways for daring to refuse.
We're putting into place all the pieces of a medical-fascist state (and I don't use that term lightly) where we're going to have to 'prove' we're 'healthy', multiple times a day, to pretty much do anything.
And children will soon think this is entirely normal.
Organisers are "very confident" the events will happen this summer, as lockdown is due to be eased.
www.bbc.co.uk
Reading and Leeds Festival organisers appear to have confirmed the events will go ahead this summer, after plans to ease lockdown were announced.
Under the government's plan, limits on social contact in England could be gone by 21 June, if Covid is under control.
The twin-site festival is due to take place from 27 to 29 August.
"Following the government's recent announcement, we can't wait to get back to the fields this summer," Reading and Leeds' Twitter feed said. "Let's go!"
A spokesman said there was currently no further comment. Stormzy, Liam Gallagher and Queens of the Stone Age have already been announced as headliners, with Mabel, AJ Tracey and Doja Cat also on the line-up.
The apparent confirmation comes a month after Glastonbury - which takes place earlier in the summer - was forced to cancel its 2021 event.
I doubt the people coming up with these policies care. Such children will quickly become second-class citizens - either not allowed to attend school at all, or singled out in various ways for daring to refuse.
We're putting into place all the pieces of a medical-fascist state (and I don't use that term lightly) where we're going to have to 'prove' we're 'healthy', multiple times a day, to pretty much do anything.
And children will soon think this is entirely normal.
Students do not necessarily need a negative test before returning to school.
Pupils should return to face-to-face education following their first negative test result. Pupils not undergoing testing should attend school in line with your phased return arrangements. Schools will have discretion on how to test students over that week as they return to the classroom. Testing is voluntary. If consent is provided, pupils will be asked to self-swab at the on-site ATS and after 30 minutes they should be informed of their results.
We were all set up to test pupils next week ready for a return on the 8th. Not allowed to start testing until 8th and pupils aren't allowed back into face to face lessons until a negative test
It’s stated in the government document that testing is from 8th March. I assume this is because testing before then would break the current regulations.
The negative test is needed only if parents agree to having their child tested.
My kids' schools requested permission from us for them to be tested. It was a straightforward ask, with no hint of a threat of attendance being blocked if we declined.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Personally speaking I'd say the only thing the government has got right is the vaccine programme. Everything has been a muddle at best.
With regard to strategy although the public goal was not zero covid, its quite clear to me that the government (probably egged on by their advisors) were eyeing up exactly this, hence the constant war-like rhetoric, Johnson banging his fist on his desk etc etc. "We will defeat the virus" is as close to "Zero covid is our goal" as you would would expect this government to admit to.
In terms of NPI, there were better approaches to be had than our government attempted. Shutting most facets down in March last year did little more than kick the issue down the road, I've long since come to the conclusion that the government almost certainly knew they would be locking down again in the Autumn when they threw us a few bones during the Summer. And I wouldn't be surprised if that was on the cards again, at least in their minds. Public tolerance however is probably going to make that difficult at best. However it should be allowed to disguise the horrific mistakes made early on in lockdown. By shutting down large parts of the NHS, and tipping lots of vulnerable people out of hospitals & back into care homes led to a significant proportion of the deaths, and what was very likely the epicentre of the spread.
I feel certain that if an honest and transparent inquiry is ever held into all the actions of the government in those early weeks would be shown to be the major source of the problem, and that subsequent lockdowns & restrictions did little more than deflect blame & kick the can down the road. I said all this back in April last year, and nothing I have seen or heard since has changed my mind on this.
Alternatively, they started too late, and hit the sour spot of high medical impact AND high costs to the economy as a result. While I don't dispute your point about transfers to care homes last spring, the numbers of people hospitalised and worse are so high that they don't support your case - especially for autumn/winter.
Yes that's my thinking, Glastonbury technically would have been after the 21st June but a slight delay would have scuppered it had the decision to cancel this year not already been made. I'm not aware of any other major festivals around the time of Glastonbury or early July in a similar situ, V-Festival no longer runs I believe, Boardmasters and Creamfields are August.
I don't disagree with your observations on what the government has managed to do, but those aren't proof of not trying to balance covid and everything else.
Throwing industries under the bus and trigger mental health crises are the 'inevitable'* results of restricting activities likely to result in higher transmission, though the fear campaigns are unforgivable in my eyes. UK Gov at least has never tried to pursue zero covid, which is the exact reason why we saw reduced restrictions (for most of the population) over the summer to try and balance covid strategy with the economy and population wellbeing at large. A "Covid only" strategy would have pigheadedly strived for zero covid, and damn the rest of it which I think we can agree is something that hasn't happened here
Agreed that few countries will come out of this well - only least worst in certain areas and even then only with the benefit of 2020 (ha) hindsight. The UK's vaccine programme for example, at this point appears to be a genuine 'world-beating' success, although the rest of our response has been somewhat less impressive, other countries (Aus/NZ) had a great initial response but have a poor exit strategy with their current vaccine plans
*inevitable if you decide that you must try to 'control' spread with NPIs rather than accepting that old people will die and building giga-hospices for covid patients to be made comfortable in as they pass - which is rather the point of trying to find a balance. The giga-hospice scenario is just as unpalatable as welding people into houses
The problem with zero COVID is rightly as you describe - there is no exit strategy. Throwing whole large areas into a lockdown over a handful of cases is not a palatable idea at all - and there's a good chance that cycle could continue on a scale of years.
There's a lot of annoyance for me about how the October / November / December situation was handled. Areas were bounced between tier systems, half-lockdown and Tier 4 (lockdown in all but name), with the varying degrees of restrictions seemingly achieving nothing and the result being us now getting another 4 month lockdown even after suffering through that mess.
I am glad that the government has not given into fantasies about zero COVID and understands that every illness has a management level of infection / hospitalisation / death. Lockdowns are the most severe form of restriction imposed on this country since WW2, and zero-COVID fantasists act as if it's just something you can do on and off indefinitely.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I suspect most parents won't want to opt in to it for one of these reasons:
a) Because it will potentially result in their child getting pulled out of school, again
b) Because it will potentially result in them themselves needing to isolate, even though they aren't unwell
c) Because the more you test for COVID, the more you're going to find it.
d) Because they believe testing and constantly having to prove you're "healthy" and "not a risk" is intrusive and unfair - demonising kids for carrying around a virus that does no harm to them anyway
All these people who have already booked slots/tables in pubs and restaurants for when they reopen both outdoors and then indoors, will there even be any room left for the many who haven't done so, this side of 21st June? (assuming the social distancing requirements are lifted then)
Also reading reports about holiday bookings going through the roof the day after the lockdown easing was announced, somehow all this feels a bit like the mass superstore panic buying/stockpiling fiasco last March. I feel after all the patronising clapping last year, the least that could be done is to give all health care and care home workers along with some other obvious essential workers first dibs on holiday and hospitality bookings for the big reopening, with discounts.
I think nightclubs reopening on June 21st is far too soon. They're absolute breeding grounds for infection transmission and since vaccination won't even be finished at that point, it seems crazy that these will be opening only a month after indoor hospitality opens. There are other ways people can go out and enjoy themselves with friends over the summer.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
www.bbc.co.uk
