Life after the end of "lockdown" 2.0

[johntea]

It’s OK, by the time you get round to finishing a short game of Monopoly the vaccine will be available

 

[DB]

"All hail the Supreme leader [enter name of SAGE Scientist]".

Elsewhere I believe infections could easily go up in January, but I think it's much more likely to be a consequence of schools and physical workplaces that closed over Christmas returning from a 2-3 week holiday, rather than because of mixing at Christmas, in the same way infections rose again from September. However, without bringing this too much into the debate, the way "you know what" is going, if there's border disruption I wouldn't be surprised if a rise in infections in January gets overshadowed by troubles getting vaccines, drugs and other essential goods generally into the country in the first place.

Given what is known of repiratory viruses, it couod quite well go up in January, as they often do. But now of course we have this collective delusion among world leaders that they can "control" and "beat" a virus which is doing what this type of virus has evolved to do over millenia.

I'm not bothered about christmas one way or the other - I normally work over it - but many people are bothered and I have no doubt at all that a lot of those will meet up with who they want to meet up with, whatever the government says. But perhaps that's the plan - put a load of pathetic rules in place which they know will be widely ignored, then we can have another lockdown in January and the divide-and-rule tactic can be used to point the finger at those naughty people who didn't do what they were told. The whole situation has become Kafkaesque in the extreme - and I don't think it's at all unlikely that it's also being used as a distraction from the woeful failure of the Brexit negotiations.

 

[brad465]

It's getting even more ridiculous now.

SAGE are now recommending we don't play board games, just in case we all die from playing scrabble or snakes & ladders.

Covid Christmas: 'Avoid board games and sleepovers'

Scientists spell out measures to minimise coronavirus infection risk when rules are relaxed at Christmas.

www.bbc.co.uk

Just reading that article further, it seems patronising that the SAGE document in question includes the quote: "Women carry the burden of creating and maintaining family traditions and activities at Christmas. Messaging should be supportive of women adapting traditions and encouraging those around them to share the burden and to be supportive of any alterations to adapt for Covid-19 restrictions."

Apologies if pointing this out is wrong, but this quote seems rather stereotypical and possibly even sexist.

 

[DB]

Just reading that article further, it seems patronising that the SAGE document in question includes the quote: "Women carry the burden of creating and maintaining family traditions and activities at Christmas. Messaging should be supportive of women adapting traditions and encouraging those around them to share the burden and to be supportive of any alterations to adapt for Covid-19 restrictions."

Apologies if pointing this out is wrong, but this quote seems rather stereotypical and possibly even sexist.

It is very much sexist, and only goes to further increase the impression that Sage is not in tune with current-day society.

 

[sheff1]

With regard to the current tier system, we need to have some objective criteria that can be used to decide which tier each area should go into.

If we are to have a tier system (or any set of restrictions) then objective criteria should certainly be essential and Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition should quite clearly state that they are not going to vote for any system which lacks such criteria. Of course with poodle Starmer at the helm that will not happen.

 

[kez19]

Just to quote even the article from the BBC above....

The advisers recognise that negotiating these arrangements may "create tensions".

But they suggest a series of measures, ranging from minimising the numbers getting together to keeping events brief to avoiding physical contact.

So are they suggesting a fist fight? It does make you wonder if those that create these rules are having a laugh at this, yes lets get families/friends together have a bit of "tension" in the air then they all fallout! (or is this done on purpose?)

As I stated earlier..... here is one

Children should meet their grandparents outside where possible - so lets say its at least 1 degrees celsius lets freeze everyone outside than be in a warm place (again what did we do as a society prior to all this.... oh wait we all met INSIDE!)

Another document published by Sage makes clear that most coronavirus infections happen during prolonged indoor gatherings of people who are familiar with each other.
That creates what's called an "intimacy paradox" in which we let our guard down because we don't see our loved ones as a potential dangers.

I didn't realise COVID could recognise people familar with each other either but pray tell! SAGE are more than likely living in a box than out of it!

 

[johnnychips]

It’s OK, by the time you get round to finishing a short game of Monopoly the vaccine will be available

If Monopoly at my family house years ago is anything to go by, everybody will end up shouting at each other, which will spread the virus quicker (let alone the Banker handling the money); the board will be overturned at some point, meaning someone will have to pick the pieces off the floor where the virus droplets have fell; so then we’ll have to watch “Only Fools and Horses“ which will lead to massive yawns as DelBoy does the same jokes endlessly, thus inhaling each others’ germs.

In any case, in Monopoly, the hotels will be closed, and if more than three pieces land on a square with a house on, that’s against the rules

 

[Jamiescott1]

[/QUOTE]

So let's say people did that, would you be happy turning up at your local supermarket only to be told that there's a 3 hour wait

Sounds like the queue for the checkout at my local lidl

 

[brad465]

It is very much sexist, and only goes to further increase the impression that Sage is not in tune with current-day society.

Maybe SAGE still indulge in Harry Enfield Public service announcements (e.g. "Women, know your limits!"), which were what came to mind with that document statement.

 

[yorkie]

A good article (among the usual fearmongering rubbish the BBC also produces) on the BBC site:

Covid tiers: 'Rules have changed in the middle of the game'

Businesses and families are coming to terms with England's new tier system, in place from 2 December.

www.bbc.co.uk

The announcement of the rules, which will come into force from 2 December, has prompted questions and concerns from business owners and families.
Some areas with lower infection rates feel they have been unfairly targeted, while others feel that, despite having been through four weeks of lockdown, they are no further forward.

If anyone thinks the restrictions are wanted by the majority of the population, they are totally and utterly deluded.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I do believe one has acted as the dead cat for the other at least once this year. Covid is a good dead cat for Brexit with regards to economic hit (pass the latter off as because of the former) and in negotiation handling generally, while the internal market bill debacle has helped as one of many different dead cats to distract from disastrous Covid handling.

Right now with the end of the TP looming it makes a lot of sense for Covid to cover up Brexit issues, so the revised tier structure and Christmas rules certainly help that distraction.

Cynically but I certainly wouldn't have put it past Dom to see the opportunity

 

[bramling]

A good article (among the usual fearmongering rubbish the BBC also produces) on the BBC site:

Covid tiers: 'Rules have changed in the middle of the game'

Businesses and families are coming to terms with England's new tier system, in place from 2 December.

www.bbc.co.uk

If anyone thinks the restrictions are wanted by the majority of the population, they are totally and utterly deluded.

The problem is that when asked a substantial number of people are claiming they not only support restrictions, but think there should be *more*. There’s no hope for a change in direction whilst that’s happening.

 

[HSTEd]

Well assuming the vaccinations really do start in a week.... my position has changed somewhat.

It is no longer a case of open ended lockdown, we now have a definable end point.

All that really matters now is getting the vaccination rate as high as possible.
Which is why I don't think going to dispersed care home populations is a good idea.

All available vaccination resources should be concentrated onto a small number of sites, and people should be called by year of birth to attend the centres.
Taxis, buses and other similar vehicles should be laid on to convey as many people as possible to the concentrated vaccination centres.

They should pull pretty anyone who is trained, or can be trained, to give vaccine and put them there where their productivity in terms of number of people per hour can be maximised.
If necessary nonessential health activities should be suspended until the over 65s have been vaccinated.

Once the over 65s are done, all remaining restrictions are pointless and can be entirely relaxed and the vaccination programme can proceed at a far more sedate pace.

They will need sites with very large areas where seating can be spread out, and people will file into a given row of seats, then file out of the seats to the opposite side of the area after their fifteen minutes is completed.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Depends whether, during the process of the move, you are deemed to be no longer resident in a T3 area?

I can’t believe what I’m reading here, to be honest.
Your only consideration should be: will I be putting their health at risk if I stay with my family in rural Devon?
Technically, you will be breaking the law, but seriously, how likely is it that you will be stopped, questioned and need to show evidence of your identity AND address ???
This is not Nazi Germany... (yet)

 

[brad465]

Well assuming the vaccinations really do start in a week.... my position has changed somewhat.

It is no longer a case of open ended lockdown, we now have a definable end point.

All that really matters now is getting the vaccination rate as high as possible.
Which is why I don't think going to dispersed care home populations is a good idea.

All available vaccination resources should be concentrated onto a small number of sites, and people should be called by year of birth to attend the centres.
Taxis, buses and other similar vehicles should be laid on to convey as many people as possible to the concentrated vaccination centres.

They should pull pretty anyone who is trained, or can be trained, to give vaccine and put them there where their productivity in terms of number of people per hour can be maximised.
If necessary nonessential health activities should be suspended until the over 65s have been vaccinated.

Once the over 65s are done, all remaining restrictions are pointless and can be entirely relaxed and the vaccination programme can proceed at a far more sedate pace.

They will need sites with very large areas where seating can be spread out, and people will file into a given row of seats, then file out of the seats to the opposite side of the area after their fifteen minutes is completed.

Generally speaking I can get onboard with this, although the way the Government has handled most aspects of the pandemic response so far makes delivering anything like your proposal, in terms of both scale and rate, optimistic.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Spot on all conveniently lowered by Father Boris Christmas just in time for him to celebrated as the Great Leader who saved our Christmas

Hail the Chief

(image shows Boris Johnson photoshopped to resemble North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, and the message
Stay Fearful
Protect The State
Save Dictatorships)

 

[Freightmaster]

Maybe SAGE still indulge in Harry Enfield Public service announcements (e.g. "Women, know your limits!"), which were what came to mind with that document statement.

MARK

 

[DelayRepay]

I'm not bothered about christmas one way or the other - I normally work over it - but many people are bothered and I have no doubt at all that a lot of those will meet up with who they want to meet up with, whatever the government says.

Personally I am not that bothered about Christmas, but I am bothered about seeing my family. Under the current rules, I can only meet them in a park and as they live 100 miles away that's not a particularly practical option in the middle of winter.

So I am going home, not because it's Christmas, but because the Christmas relaxation of rules is my first opportunity since early October to see them. And I do not know when the next opportunity will be. I missed seeing them for my birthday last March due to lockdown, and I expect the same will happen for my next Birthday too.

 

[duncanp]

So I am going home, not because it's Christmas, but because the Christmas relaxation of rules is my first opportunity since early October to see them. And I do not know when the next opportunity will be. I missed seeing them for my birthday last March due to lockdown, and I expect the same will happen for my next Birthday too.

I think the longer this goes on, the fewer the number of people who are going to obey these silly rules, at least all of the time.

Who does the government think they are, telling people when and if they can see their families? I am surprised that someone hasn't challenged them under the Human Rights Act, which gives everyone a "..right to family life...".

And if the government thinks that everyone in Tier 3 is going to stay in their own local authority area and not travel anywhere else for the next four months, it has go another think coming.

 

[Bantamzen]

What I said was that people should self isolate as much as possible, taking into account their work and other commitments.

So if you are able to work from home, you should do so for up to two weeks after meeting up with family over Christmas.

But if you do work in a supermarket or bank, you can't self isolate and you will need to go to work. However you can self isolate for the time when you are not at work.

My suggestion was simply a strategy to reduce, not eliminate, the possibility of virus transmission following families meeting up at Christmas.

So basically business as usual then?

Just reading that article further, it seems patronising that the SAGE document in question includes the quote: "Women carry the burden of creating and maintaining family traditions and activities at Christmas. Messaging should be supportive of women adapting traditions and encouraging those around them to share the burden and to be supportive of any alterations to adapt for Covid-19 restrictions."

Apologies if pointing this out is wrong, but this quote seems rather stereotypical and possibly even sexist.

This is extremely sexist to say the least. Frankly it says a lot about the kind of people who make up SAGE.

Well assuming the vaccinations really do start in a week.... my position has changed somewhat.

It is no longer a case of open ended lockdown, we now have a definable end point.

All that really matters now is getting the vaccination rate as high as possible.
Which is why I don't think going to dispersed care home populations is a good idea.

All available vaccination resources should be concentrated onto a small number of sites, and people should be called by year of birth to attend the centres.
Taxis, buses and other similar vehicles should be laid on to convey as many people as possible to the concentrated vaccination centres.

They should pull pretty anyone who is trained, or can be trained, to give vaccine and put them there where their productivity in terms of number of people per hour can be maximised.
If necessary nonessential health activities should be suspended until the over 65s have been vaccinated.

Once the over 65s are done, all remaining restrictions are pointless and can be entirely relaxed and the vaccination programme can proceed at a far more sedate pace.

They will need sites with very large areas where seating can be spread out, and people will file into a given row of seats, then file out of the seats to the opposite side of the area after their fifteen minutes is completed.

The vaccination plan is already in place, that is those most vulnerable and those caring for them get the vaccine first should they wish. Once the majority of those people have been given it, restrictions must be lifted as the risk to the NHS is all but removed & the rest of the population can the be offered it in the in age bands defined by the government down to the 50+.

 

[C J Snarzell]

Yellowbelly Burnham is insisting that Greater Manchester moves to Tier 2 after two weeks which will put the date at around 16th December - just over a week ahead of Christmas.

I know one or two eating places near me have decided not to open their doors at all until 2021. Very sad - I reckon many pub/restaurant owners have simply given up any hope of making any profit over the festive period.

CJ

 

[37424]

A good article (among the usual fearmongering rubbish the BBC also produces) on the BBC site:

Covid tiers: 'Rules have changed in the middle of the game'

Businesses and families are coming to terms with England's new tier system, in place from 2 December.

www.bbc.co.uk

If anyone thinks the restrictions are wanted by the majority of the population, they are totally and utterly deluded.

Well maybe I am deluded but all the people I know haven't expressed any anti restrictions to me, and just seem to be getting on with things as best they can without moaning about it, In fact the only hostility to the regulations I have experienced with one exception has been on this forum.

 

[Bantamzen]

Well maybe I am deluded but all the people I know haven't expressed any anti restrictions to me, and just seem to be getting on with things as best they can without moaning about it, In fact the only hostility to the regulations I have experienced with one exception has been on this forum.

So I'm guessing you don't know anyone in the entertainment, leisure, holiday, hospitality industries or anyone who works for their supply chains then?

 

[Richard Scott]

Well maybe I am deluded but all the people I know haven't expressed any anti restrictions to me, and just seem to be getting on with things as best they can without moaning about it, In fact the only hostility to the regulations I have experienced with one exception has been on this forum.

I don't know anyone who is happy with these restrictions and I work with lots of different people.

 

[ChrisC]

There seems to be growing media coverage of general unrest amongst MPs and council leaders in large rural areas of Kent now that the whole county is to go into Tier 3. They are campaigning for a more local approach saying that areas like Tunbridge Wells and Romney Marsh should not be in same Tier as Margate, Isle of Sheppey etc.

I completely agree but also think, welcome to the situation we have had in the north for weeks. The most sparsely populated areas of England in Northumberland in Tier 3 with Newcastle. The same can be said for rural areas of Lancashire, West Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire etc etc. Will anything change now it’s happening down south in Kent?

 

[Class 33]

So it appears the Tiered system and Coronavirus restrictions are likely to remain until at least Easter. And Michael Gove warning that every hospital in the country risks being overwhelmed unless MP's back them on these restrictions remaining! This is absolutely bloody ridiculous. We've now found a couple of vaccines which will soon be rolled out to the most vulnerable people first, and then start rolling out to all other people over the coming months. So surely then all these restrictions can start to be relaxed and life get back to normal?? Cases are starting to decline now, Hospital admissions are already falling now, and the daily deaths will soon start falling. So why an earth will we have to put up this nonsense until at least Easter? Next thing a few months down the line they'll probably be saying these restrictions will have to remain until at least mid summer!!!! This is just absolutely insanity! All this in the meantime is causing absolutely catastrophic damage to many thousands of businesses(particularly in the hospitality and leisure industry), people's livelihoods and their mental health. This just can not drag on until at least Easter!!!!

You've probably watched the news about this, but here is an article from Sky News about this.

COVID-19: Restrictions likely until Easter as Gove launches fightback against Tory lockdown rebels

Senior Conservatives predict a rebellion by up to 70 Tory backbenchers, which would mean the PM would have to rely on Labour.

news.sky.com

COVID-19: Restrictions likely until Easter as Gove launches fightback against Tory lockdown rebels​

Senior Conservatives predict a rebellion by up to 70 Tory backbenchers, which would mean the PM would have to rely on Labour.

COVID-19 restrictions are likely to be in force until Easter, Sky News has learned, as Boris Johnson heads for a Commons showdown with rebel Tory MPs over the new tier system.

Senior sources have revealed that even if large numbers of COVID-19 vaccinations begin at the end of January it will be Easter - on 4 April next year - before life returns to normal.

The stark warning, handed to the prime minister and senior ministers by government scientific advisers, contrasts with more optimistic forecasts by Mr Johnson in recent days.

The gloomy prediction coincides with a government fightback by the Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove against rebel Tory MPs threatening to vote against the new tiers on Tuesday.


Writing in The Times, Mr Gove says every hospital in England faces being overwhelmed with COVID-19 cases if MPs fail to back the government's tough new restrictions in the vote.

Warning that it could be Easter before coronavirus restrictions are lifted, one source familiar with the government's scientific advice told Sky News: "This has been the running assumption.

"If you think that vaccines will start going in arms in large numbers at the end of January, it will be Easter by the time life changes properly and there would be restrictions until then.

"The government has also been very clear that the restrictions will go to January and beyond."

Earlier, during a visit to the Porton Down research laboratory near Salisbury, the prime minister raised the prospect of local authorities being moved into lower tiers in the review planned for 16 December.

But the government's scientific advisers have stressed that this is unlikely, particularly before Christmas, a warning that is likely to incense many Tory MPs ahead of next week's vote.

Senior Conservative MPs are predicting a rebellion by up to 70 Tory backbenchers, which would mean the prime minister would have to rely on Labour votes to avoid a humiliating defeat.

Writing in The Times, Mr Gove revealed the decision to impose a four-week lockdown earlier this month was taken after scientists warned the lockdown rules were not enough to prevent the NHS from being "physically overwhelmed".

He wrote: "Every bed, every ward occupied. All the capacity built in the Nightingales and requisitioned from the private sector too. The numbers infected with COVID-19 and requiring a bed would displace all but emergency cases. And then even those."

Mr Gove said MPs should not fall for "comfortable evasions" that things were now different or put their constituencies ahead of the national interest.

"When the country is facing such a national crisis, the truth is that all of us who have been elected to parliament, not just ministers, must take responsibility for difficult decisions," he said.

"COVID-19 is no respecter of constituency boundaries and the hardships we are facing now are unfortunately necessary to protect every single one of us, no matter where we live."

Mr Gove described the new restrictions that will see the vast majority of England in tougher tiers as "grimly, inevitably, necessary" to prevent the NHS from being unable to treat emergency patients.

"The level of infection across the country remains uncontrollably and threateningly high," he said. "Across the UK, around 16,000 beds are filled with COVID-19 patients, which compares with almost 20,000 at the April peak.

"From the current high base, any sharp uptick in infection could see the NHS under even more severe threat again."

Mr Gove also rejected suggestions that the measures were economically damaging, arguing that without them "the economy would grind to a halt" as a terrified population stayed at home rather than risked going out without care.

He also accepted that the previous tiers "were neither strong enough to reduce social contact sufficiently, nor applied widely enough to contain the virus's spread... and that is the difficult lesson we cannot unlearn as this lockdown ends".

 

[yorksrob]

The problem is that there are restrictions and there are restrictions.

It is concievable that it will take until Easter to get the vulnerable groups vaccinated, therefore it is indeed likely that restrictions will be needed before then. However these should be measured restrictions of the type seen in summer, probably better policed, but with a balance between activity and caution. Trying to keep the current lockdown in all but name going through then, is pointless, and counterproductive, particularly the unjustifiable scapegoating of hospitality.

As for Gove opining that "the economy will grind to a halt because people will be too scared to go out of their doors" if this is the best tripe he can come up with in support of this policy, it 's about time he was put out to grass.

 

[yorkie]

https://www.wmhi.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Abusive-Relationship-Infographic.pdf

YOU MAY BE IN AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP IF THEY...

• Play the victim. If things go wrong, it ́s all your fault
• Stop you seeing friends and family
• Tell you what to wear
• Control the finances, or won ́t let you work
• Control what you read, watch and say
• Won ́t let you go out without permission
• Punish you for breaking the rules, but the rules keep changing!
• Tell you it is for your own good, and that they know better
• Call you names or shame you for being stupid or selfish
• Dismiss your opinions

It's scary how familiar this all sounds.

As for Gove opining that "the economy will grind to a halt because people will be too scared to go out of their doors" if this is the best tripe he can come up with in support of this policy, it 's about time he was put out to grass.

It's nonsense; the vulnerable people are the ones who should be being cautious where they go, but the reality is that the vast majority of people realise that the vast majority of infections are asymptomatic or only lead to mild symptoms and are not "scared" of the virus. On the other hand many people are increasingly scared for the physical and mental wellbeing and livelihoods of people they know..

I don't know anyone who is happy with these restrictions and I work with lots of different people.

Quite. I have to wonder what work @37424 does and how many people they speak to. Through playing football as well as an incredibly varied job where I get to meet many different people including many different companies, of all those I've had a discussion about these matters, I think I get a much better idea of what people are thinking. I've not spoken to everyone I meet about it, of course, but I will do if a suitable opportunity arises.

A couple of work colleagues were under the illusion this virus is far more serious than it is for younger people; once we realised that all work colleagues who were actually ill had other viruses, and that everyone at work who tested positive had no, or mild, symptoms, even those who were originally keen for locking down have mostly changed their minds.

I no longer know anyone who is actually scared of the virus; I'd say most people are just wanting to behave in a way that is seen as acceptable to others and also avoids them having to quarantine if someone else was tested positive. The only 'fear' I am seeing in terms of wanting to avoid catching the virus, is being identified as a 'contact' for track & trace as no-one I know wants to isolate.

I am fortunate in that I get to meet hundreds of people on a daily basis and I get to see how things really are. Unlike perhaps some other people at other workplaces I always say hello to our lovely cleaners, and have some good conversations with them. Most are very sociable people who also are very 'switched on' as to what people are thinking and I've had some very interesting conversations with them. None of them appear to welcome or support the current measures we are taking.

 

[duncanp]

So it appears the Tiered system and Coronavirus restrictions are likely to remain until at least Easter. And Michael Gove warning that every hospital in the country risks being overwhelmed unless MP's back them on these restrictions remaining! This is absolutely bloody ridiculous. We've now found a couple of vaccines which will soon be rolled out to the most vulnerable people first, and then start rolling out to all other people over the coming months. So surely then all these restrictions can start to be relaxed and life get back to normal?? Cases are starting to decline now, Hospital admissions are already falling now, and the daily deaths will soon start falling. So why an earth will we have to put up this nonsense until at least Easter? Next thing a few months down the line they'll probably be saying these restrictions will have to remain until at least mid summer!!!! This is just absolutely insanity! All this in the meantime is causing absolutely catastrophic damage to many thousands of businesses(particularly in the hospitality and leisure industry), people's livelihoods and their mental health. This just can not drag on until at least Easter!!!!

You've probably watched the news about this, but here is an article from Sky News about this.

COVID-19: Restrictions likely until Easter as Gove launches fightback against Tory lockdown rebels

Senior Conservatives predict a rebellion by up to 70 Tory backbenchers, which would mean the PM would have to rely on Labour.

news.sky.com

Reading between the lines, this is Michael Gove desperately trying to scare Tory MPs into voting for these restrictions on Tuesday. He is talking a load of bovine excreta when he is saying that every hospital in England risks being overwhelmed unless these restrictions are approved. I only hope MPs grow a pair and see through these alarmist predictions, which are part of a media campaign to frighten people.

The ubiquitous "SAGE scientists" are even suggesting that areas are moved up from Tier 2 to Tier 3. This would be politically very difficult for Boris Johnson to achieve.

If you look at the actual figures hospital admissions have started to decline.

Also the total number of people in hospital and the number of people in mechanical ventilation beds are no longer increasing, and will start to decline in future following the decline in hospital admissions.

Additionally, if you look at the number of people admitted to hospital compared to the number of people testing positive, it is a lot lower in the second wave than in the first wave. (ie, in the second wave the number of people in hospital peaked at about 80% of the peak of the first wave, and yet there were considerably more cases)

No-one is suggesting that there should be no restrictions after the end of the current lockdown. The whole point of the tier system, allegedly, is to give a degree of flexibility, so that areas can be moved down the tiers as the situation improves, particularly after the most vulnerable people have been vaccinated.

I would expect that some areas are moved into Tier 2 in December just to keep Tory MPs quiet, and that the process of moving areas down the tiers will continue in the new year. There is also nothing to stop the government easing the restrictions in the existing tiers, such as allowing hospitality to open in Tier 3 for the service of food, and allowing wet pubs in Tier 2 to open.

 

[Domh245]

As for Gove opining that "the economy will grind to a halt because people will be too scared to go out of their doors" if this is the best tripe he can come up with in support of this policy, it 's about time he was put out to grass.

If people are too scared to go out of their doors, that's a failure of government to reassure the public that the vast majority of people aren't at risk. That people currently are so scared is entirely down to the campaign of fear that was prevalent during the early days of this mess