England's new three-tier lockdown system

[Bletchleyite]

Just been reading it. There is a village called Billinge just up the road from me - one half comes under St Helens Council (Merseyside) while the other comes under Wigan Council (Greater Manchester), so I can imagine that's going to be a very bizarre situation for many residents.

We really could do with reviewing our boundaries to sort that sort of thing out.

 

[S&CLER]

Only found out today that the Liverpool City Region is the old Merseyside Metro council area plus Halton, which was never in Merseyside.

 

[C J Snarzell]

Only found out today that the Liverpool City Region is the old Merseyside Metro council area plus Halton, which was never in Merseyside.

Southport has been part of the Merseyside region since the local authority boundary changes of 1974. However, many people in the town still regard themselves as Lancashire and have never accepted themselves as part of Liverpool's wider garden. I think there will be a bit of anger amongst the locals there tonight.

CJ

 

[Bletchleyite]

Southport has been part of the Merseyside region since the local authority boundary changes of 1974. However, many people in the town still regard themselves as Lancashire and have never accepted themselves as part of Liverpool's wider garden. I think there will be a bit of anger amongst the locals there tonight.

Looking at the stats for West Lancs (mostly, no doubt, from the students at Edge Hill), I can't imagine that can be too far behind in going into Level 3. This is where Southport would be if it wasn't in "Merseyside".

 

[duncanp]

Predictably of course Sturgeon says she will also have a 3 tier system "closely aligned" (but no doubt different) to the rest of the UK. She also comments, according to the BBC, that at the COBRA meeting this morning "professional advisors" said the Tier 3 restrictions didn't go anywhere near far enough.

So what would these so called "professional advisers" like the Tier 3 restrictions to be?

A full lockdown, such as we had in March? Or something more severe, such as compulsory house arrest and curfew, and anyone breaking the rules to be shot at dawn?

Presumably these "advisers" are not affected economically by the changes, and don't give a s**t about those who will lose their jobs and livelihoods as a result.

I also have no doubt that the Scottish 3 Tier system will be slightly different to that for England, just for the sake of it.

 

[lammergeier]

List of tier areas here, presume accurate but usual caveats apply

Twitter

 

[Bletchleyite]

A full lockdown, such as we had in March? Or something more severe, such as compulsory house arrest and curfew, and anyone breaking the rules to be shot at dawn?

Those should have been options, yes. Maybe not "shot", but definitely a full lockdown where nobody leaves the house unless a key worker. This would only be used if the NHS *actually was* overwhelmed - it would kick in at the point that someone was refused COVID treatment due to healthcare capacity.

 

[Richard Scott]

Those should have been options, yes. Maybe not "shot", but definitely a full lockdown where nobody leaves the house unless a key worker. This would only be used if the NHS *actually was* overwhelmed - it would kick in at the point that someone was refused COVID treatment due to healthcare capacity.

Doesn't work the other way around where people have been refused cancer treatment due to virus taking priority whether hospital is full or not?

 

[Peter Sarf]

Banning travel abroad is about the easiest thing to do.

Closely followed by closing all pubs. Easier and more reliable than silly opening times etc etc.

It was copycat one Country after another, and now they have not got a scooby what to do, they know it is not that much worse than a bad influenze year, but they are all in a corner, having runaway from it, and of course it will keep coming back to bite until we say 'just get on with it' ! even Italuy said a month or more ago they over reacted, based on China and Facebook hysteria

Point is we no Covid-19 is bad, really bad. So goodness knows how much worse things would have been without any control measures.

Doesn't work the other way around where people have been refused cancer treatment due to virus taking priority whether hospital is full or not?

And that is my fear. All the collateral health damage from an overwhelmed health service.

 

[DelayRepay]

If I am reading correctly, they are banning Support Bubbles from meeting indoors in High areas. Is this correct? It is very unsatisfactory, if so.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If I am reading correctly, they are banning Support Bubbles from meeting indoors in High areas. Is this correct? It is very unsatisfactory, if so.

I haven't seen any suggestion of that, where did you see it?

 

[radamfi]

And that is my fear. All the collateral health damage from an overwhelmed health service.

They should prioritise appointments that have been cancelled since March. That should take priority over new Covid patients over a certain age.

 

[DelayRepay]

I haven't seen any suggestion of that, where did you see it?

It was on gov.uk but not now. Either I mis-read it, or they got it wrong and changed it. Either is equally likely...

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was on gov.uk but not now. Either I mis-read it, or they got it wrong and changed it. Either is equally likely...

I've now seen wording that implies that, but it doesn't make any sense, so I suspect it's misworded.

 

[Domh245]

I've now seen wording that implies that, but it doesn't make any sense, so I suspect it's misworded.

I'd agree that it's poorly worded based on the context and that they do mean that households and support bubbles ought to be treated the same, but I do wonder if it's been done deliberately, ie scare people into 'overcompliance'

For anyone else looking for it:

Coronavirus: how to stay safe and help prevent the spread

Find out how to stay safe and help prevent the spread of coronavirus.

www.gov.uk

under "Local COVID alert level: very high"

This is for areas with a very high level of infections and where tighter restrictions are in place. The restrictions placed on areas with a very high level of infections can vary, and are based on discussions between central and local government.

At a minimum, this means:

• you must not socialise with anybody you do not live with, or have formed a support bubble with, in any indoor setting or in any private garden or at most outdoor hospitality venues and ticketed events

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I'd agree that it's poorly worded based on the context and that they do mean that households and support bubbles ought to be treated the same, but I do wonder if it's been done deliberately, ie scare people into 'overcompliance'

For anyone else looking for it:

Coronavirus: how to stay safe and help prevent the spread

Find out how to stay safe and help prevent the spread of coronavirus.

www.gov.uk

under "Local COVID alert level: very high"

I read that as saying bubbles can only meet up in the park or out for a walk.

Have they looked at their calendar?!

 

[Simon11]

So from the conference on now, older teenagers are the big spreaders but it is the older people over 60+ which are filling hospitals. With the three tiered system, why aren't people at risk in the top category being asked to shield?

 

[SuspectUsual]

So from the conference on now, older teenagers are the big spreaders but it is the older people over 60+ which are filling hospitals. With the three tiered system, why aren't people at risk in the top category being asked to shield?

Because they tend to vote conservative and older teenagers tend to vote anything but Tory?

 

[Domh245]

I read that as saying bubbles can only meet up in the park or out for a walk.

That's probably how the Government want it to be interpreted if my 'overcompliance' suspicion is correct. A second "not" just after the or would make it crystal clear but as it is I think it's just sloppy wording. I'd be amazed if they actually went so far as to make make support bubbles (in effect) pointless given the guidance on support bubbles to basically be treated as a single household. It'd lose them a lot of compliance and face on mental health grounds

 

[ChrisC]

Support bubbles are allowed to meet indoors both in Tier 2 and 3. I agree that it was not made very clear at first but seems quite clear now. I think support bubbles are absolutely essential for some people but I hope that some people don’t bend the rules and abuse the situation and make it difficult for those who rely on support bubbles.
I certainly need to maintain and use the support bubble with my sister as I could not cope another 3 months of looking after my elderly mother, who has dementia, without the support of my sister who lives about 40 miles away. That was a big problem at the beginning of the lockdown when support bubbles didn’t exist and we were told not to travel.

 

[WatcherZero]

So from the conference on now, older teenagers are the big spreaders but it is the older people over 60+ which are filling hospitals. With the three tiered system, why aren't people at risk in the top category being asked to shield?

In the North West and to a lesser extent the North East it is rising equally fast in both the student and elderly groups, though of course most of the people that suffer severe symptoms are elderly. Elsewhere in the country its mostly the young.

 

[The North Briton]

I think the intended meaning would be better expressed as ‘You must not socialise with anybody unless you live with them or have formed a support bubble with them...’
Unless the regulations explicitly contradict that reading, I shall be acting accordingly.

 

[onlinespotting]

If you are travelling to or via a tier 2 or 3 place from a tier one(or vice versa) will you be asked why you’re travelling?

 

[Kingspanner]

They should prioritise appointments that have been cancelled since March. That should take priority over new Covid patients over a certain age.

A disgraceful suggestion. Deal with the patients on the basis of clinical need and prognosis, regardless of Covid.

 

[radamfi]

A disgraceful suggestion. Deal with the patients on the basis of clinical need and prognosis, regardless of Covid.

So you are willing to allow a 90 year old Covid patient jump the queue over a 50 year old cancer patient who has had his/her appointment cancelled six months ago and might die 30 years early if not treated immediately?

 

[SuspectUsual]

So you are willing to allow a 90 year old Covid patient jump the queue over a 50 year old cancer patient who has had his/her appointment cancelled six months ago and might die 30 years early if not treated immediately?

Did you even read his post? Priority based on clinical need and prognosis seems perfectly sensible to me - it treats c19 as it would any other illness or disease

 

[bramling]

A disgraceful suggestion. Deal with the patients on the basis of clinical need and prognosis, regardless of Covid.

Surely that’s what the original poster was suggesting? It’s completely unacceptable that cancer patients have been pushed aside to make way for Covid, when in the medium term those cancer patients are far more likely to benefit from the care.

Jenny Harries said a while ago that no Covid patient had died due to not being able to access treatment. Will we be able to say the same for other conditions? And, to be honest, cancer probably has a much greater chance of being ultimately terminal especially if not caught promptly.

 

[birchesgreen]

What exactly are these tiers supposed to be called? I've seen Tier 1,2,3 used and Medium, High, Very High used.

 

[Crossover]

What exactly are these tiers supposed to be called? I've seen Tier 1,2,3 used and Medium, High, Very High used.

Both are equally "valid" I believe

 

[NorthOxonian]

If you are travelling to or via a tier 2 or 3 place from a tier one(or vice versa) will you be asked why you’re travelling?

I don't believe so for Tier 2 (as far as I can tell, there are no additional travel restrictions for those, for both private and public transport).

Could happen with Tier 3 - but in practice I doubt it will happen.