• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Heading into autumn - what next?

Status
Not open for further replies.

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,217
Location
London
Fixed that for you.

Cars serve a useful purpose, so no, obviously you don’t deserve to die for driving.

Smoking serves no useful purpose, and harms those around you, so yes if you get lung cancer due to smoking then it’s your own fault.

And refusing the vaccine without good reason serves no useful purpose, and harms those around you, so if you get sick after refusing the vaccine then it’s your own fault.

Not exaggerated or spurious comparisons at all. The point which you seem to have missed is that many perfectly legal activities we partake in have the potential to harm ourselves or others: driving and smoking be two rather good examples (and a lot of people who smoke are addicted, so continuing to do so isn’t a simple choice). Ultimately in a free country the decision of whether to partake in these (and many other) activities is a choice left to the individual.

A “good” reason not to take the vaccine might be: “I’m young and healthy and don’t really need it”; or, “I simply don’t like invasive medical treatments”. To say that people coming to that view “deserve whatever sickness or consequence they get” is despicable, frankly, and a sign of how far this country has fallen over the last eighteen months.


That’s what’s key - you’ve given thought to it and (for whatever reason) decided to wait.

I suspect most people declining the vaccine by this point have given a good deal of thought to their decision. Ultimately they should be in no way regarded as morally inferior to those who have been jabbed.


Taking the vaccine still has a net positive effect on society.

That argument can be used to justify anything and individual rights have been trampled on quite enough over the last couple of years.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
That argument can be used to justify anything and individual rights have been trampled on quite enough over the last couple of years.
The penny might drop on that when 'vaccine' passports are announced to be required for more situations than has so far been eluded to.
And of course the company lined up to produce them boast about how much more that these dystopian instruments can actually be used for.
'Papers please' .......
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
Yep. We haven’t see the last of masks, behavioural science #1. Don’t throw those exemption lanyards away just yet…
Hmmm, I'm not sure that this view of the intent of the scientists etc. is so true. Browsing Twitter today, I found a thread from a Danish behavioural scientist (Michael Bang Petersen) celebrating yesterday's lifting of all remaining Covid restrictions - see https://twitter.com/M_B_Petersen/status/1436193837744107523?s=20 for the thread with responses, and https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1436193837744107523.html for a consolidated view. I quote it in full at the bottom (with embedded images removed), but his emphasis on trust in government, transparent communications, collective buy-in, and avoiding polarisation all resonated with me, and made me wonder whether the positive feedback loop he describes is the inverse of the vicious circle we've seen here. Looking at relative case numbers over the last 6 months shows the difference such an approach can make, considering it both with the UK, Sweden, the wider EU, and the Tasman Sea zero Covid pair:
coronavirus-data-explorer.png

Today, Denmark lifted all restrictions & COVID-19 is no longer deemed a "societal threat".

I led the country's largest behavioral covid-project (@HopeProject_dk) & advised the Danish gov.

Here are my thoughts on how DK got here, what can be learned & what lies ahead.
(1/14)

In the HOPE-project ("How Democracies Cope With COVID-19", hope-project.dk), we have conducted over 400,000 interviews on covid-related behaviors and attitudes since March '20 in Denmark and 7 other countries. These data form the evidence-base for this thread. (2/13)

The basis for an open society is vaccinations. 86 % of all invited (from 12 years and up) have received 1+ dose. 96 % of everyone above 50 are fully vaccinated. Throughout the pandemic DK has had higher acceptance than many comparable countries. No mandates needed. (3/14)

The best predictor in DK - and elsewhere - of vaccine acceptance is trust in the authorities' management of the pandemic: bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/6/e…. This trust has been incredibly high and completely stable in DK. (4/14)


Public acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines: cross-national evidence on levels and individual-level predictors using observational data Objectives The management of the COVID-19 pandemic hinges on the approval of safe and effective vaccines but, equally importantly, on high vaccine acceptance among people. To facilitate vaccine accept… https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/6/e048172

DK is culturally a high-trust country. But so is Sweden & here trust has been lower. What authorities do during the pandemic matters too. E.g., if communication is transparent it will uphold trust, even if the message is unpleasant:
. (5/14)

In addition to transparency, our research shows that 3 factors are key: (1) Create a collective project; (2) avoid polarization; and (3) buffer the burden of restrictions. See, e.g., doi.org/10.1080/014023… & doi.org/10.1177/095679…. Here, DK has done particularly well. (6/14)


Public support for government responses against COVID-19: assessing levels and predictors in eight Western democracies during 2020 (2021). Public support for government responses against COVID-19: assessing levels and predictors in eight Western democracies during 2020. West European Politics: Vol. 44, COVID-19 in Europe: Politic… https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2021.1925821


The Psychological Burden of the COVID-19 Pandemic Is Associated With Antisystemic Attitudes and Political Violence - Henrikas Bartusevičius, Alexander Bor, Frederik Jørgensen, Michael Bang Petersen, 2021 What are the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for people’s political attitudes and behavior? We tested, specifically, whether the psychological burden of t... https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211031847

Stopping infections is a form of collective action. When the risk of a disease is highly skewed (as with covid), people need to do it for others. Here, leadership is key. The Danish gov formulated distancing as a *moral* project, which gained high public support. (7/14)

A moral project can backfire. It can lead to shaming and conflict. There has been discussions of this in DK. But in general shaming in DK is relatively low. Most simply followed the advice of the authorities and didn't take it upon themselves to police others. (8/14)

Support decreases over time. How fast depends on polarization. Polarization was avoided because the Danish opposition prioritized epidemic control over electoral gains. When the 2nd wave hit this led to a 2nd rally-around-the flag effect, which seems unique to DK. (9/14)

The burden of lockdowns itself fuels opposition: doi.org/10.1177/095679…. In DK, high compliance & support has made restrictions softer and made them seem meaningful, lowering the burden. As consequence, Danes have suffered less during the pandemic. (10/14)


The Psychological Burden of the COVID-19 Pandemic Is Associated With Antisystemic Attitudes and Political Violence - Henrikas Bartusevičius, Alexander Bor, Frederik Jørgensen, Michael Bang Petersen, 2021 What are the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for people’s political attitudes and behavior? We tested, specifically, whether the psychological burden of t... https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211031847

From this, Danes became active co-players in the epidemic, allowing authorities to try out new tools (e.g., mass testing & corona passports). These got wide public support and were seen not as control tools but as tools for protecting each other & returning to normality. (11/14)

In sum, citizens' trust is key. Still, my way into pandemic research was an essay, arguing that *authorities* need to trust citizens too:
. In the end, I think the positive dynamics from this mutual trust is responsible for where DK is today. (12/14)

Will the lifting of restrictions go well? Who knows (as even the DK gov agrees). New variants may emerge & restrictions reappear. Yet, from a behavioral perspective, I am optimistic about the future. Even with a 3rd wave, mutual trust should be high enough to pull thru. (13/14)

Finally: A pandemic is a severe crisis for any society. DK has seen protests, heated debates and mistaken decisions. Many Twitter threads can be written about what went wrong. So, if things go well in a crisis, it is despite all the things that will inevitably go wrong. (14/14)
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
Hmmm, I'm not sure that this view of the intent of the scientists etc. is so true. Browsing Twitter today, I found a thread from a Danish behavioural scientist (Michael Bang Petersen) celebrating yesterday's lifting of all remaining Covid restrictions - see https://twitter.com/M_B_Petersen/status/1436193837744107523?s=20 for the thread with responses, and https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1436193837744107523.html for a consolidated view.

That’s all great (genuinely it is!) but he’s not on SAGE….
 

davews

Member
Joined
24 Apr 2021
Messages
647
Location
Bracknell
As to the suggestion people are avoiding trains, my walk this afternoon took me, as often the case, through Martins Heron. Each time a London train was imminent and the platform was absolutely packed - and not a face mask in sight. Things are back to normal.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
To say that people coming to that view “deserve whatever sickness or consequence they get” is despicable, frankly, and a sign of how far this country has fallen over the last eighteen months.

Absolutely.

A shameful state of affairs for our weak and clown-like prime minister to be presiding over. Things should never have been allowed to sink to this level. Meanwhile it seems his raison d'etre is now to outlive Thatcher's tenure in office. Priorities being got right there, for sure.

But- I suspect we'll see a big outbreak of covidphobia in the meed-ja as soon as folks realise it's time to get back to work............ and calls for more lockdowns etc.

//rant over//

TPO

Agreed.

The problem is we have a prime minister who is too frit to grab hold of this. If today's papers are anything to believe, apparently the "Boris winter plan" is a return of masks and working from home. Great. So notwithstanding many more months of excuses for bad service ("for the winter" in reality means through to next September, based on how things have panned out this year), people have once again been handed the perfect combination of reasons not to attend their workplace, you can bet that as soon as cases start climbing it's going to be too dangerous to go to work, and back we all are to masks and other restrictions right through the winter and spring.

He needs to be tough, (some) people are absolutely milking this now to screw every minute of freeby leisure time they can get.

The one thing we have to hope for is that furlough does finish at the end of this month. If we can just get rid of the damn thing then once it's gone it will be harder to reintroduce as opposed to the perennial extensions.

If we're seemingly looking at a re-run of last year, then what was the point of the vaccine?


We do have that data, at least to an extent (we have it for overnight hospitalisations which isn't exactly the same as ICU but is still somewhat useful).

38% of those admitted to hospital between 9 August and 5 September were aged under 50. Out of those, 71% were unvaccinated, 15% had received one dose, and 16% had received two doses - the ratio in the population as a whole is roughly 30% to 10% to 60%.

I'm ambivalent about those numbers. There are certainly quite a lot of young people in hospital (well into the thousands), and the large majority are unvaccinated. But it's not at the point where it's stretching NHS capacity and it doesn't justify authoritarianism. I think those who choose not to get vaccinated are making an unwise move and the numbers bear that out, but they shouldn't be castigated.

Thanks for the data - it's good to see something a little more detailed. I'd agree it's certainly not at the point where anyone should be getting angry about it stretching the NHS.

I'd imagine that 38% figure tails off considerably once one gets down to the under-40 and under-30 levels. If so, this would do little to counter by general view that the scales certainly tip in favour of anyone over 50 taking the vaccine, and anyone over about 30 who has known underlying issues. But by the same token I'm not sure it's all that relevant for a health 30-something, and certainly not enough for them to be branded an idiot.
 
Last edited:

NorthOxonian

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
1,483
Location
Oxford/Newcastle
I'd imagine that 38% figure tails off considerably once one gets down to the under-40 and under-30 levels. If so, this would do little to counter by general view that the scales certainly tip in favour of anyone over 50 taking the vaccine, and anyone over about 30 who has known underlying issues. But by the same token I'm not sure it's all that relevant for a health 30-something, and certainly not enough for them to be branded an idiot.
It tails off less than I was expecting: 27% of those hospitalised are under 40, and 15% are under 30. In terms of actual numbers, 2538 under 50s, 1755 under 40s, and 1022 under 30s.

I still wouldn't call young people who choose not to have the vaccine idiots, but the risk from the virus isn't quite as low as I'd imagined.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Hmmm, I'm not sure that this view of the intent of the scientists etc. is so true. Browsing Twitter today, I found a thread from a Danish behavioural scientist (Michael Bang Petersen) celebrating yesterday's lifting of all remaining Covid restrictions - see https://twitter.com/M_B_Petersen/status/1436193837744107523?s=20 for the thread with responses, and https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1436193837744107523.html for a consolidated view. I quote it in full at the bottom (with embedded images removed), but his emphasis on trust in government, transparent communications, collective buy-in, and avoiding polarisation all resonated with me, and made me wonder whether the positive feedback loop he describes is the inverse of the vicious circle we've seen here. Looking at relative case numbers over the last 6 months shows the difference such an approach can make, considering it both with the UK, Sweden, the wider EU, and the Tasman Sea zero Covid pair:
View attachment 102486

I like the phrase used "no longer a societal threat". I get the feeling that barring a killer mutant strain, this is the situation here, regardless of the comparatively high rate of cases.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
It tails off less than I was expecting: 27% of those hospitalised are under 40, and 15% are under 30. In terms of actual numbers, 2538 under 50s, 1755 under 40s, and 1022 under 30s.

I still wouldn't call young people who choose not to have the vaccine idiots, but the risk from the virus isn't quite as low as I'd imagined.

Do we take it that hospitalised doesn't necessarily mean ICU?

I like the phrase used "no longer a societal threat". I get the feeling that barring a killer mutant strain, this is the situation here, regardless of the comparatively high rate of cases.

I'll bet a fiver that there will be a variant scare at some point this autumn / winter. In fact what's the bet it will come to fore some time around 18th - 25th December?!
 

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,217
Location
London
I'm not sure that this view of the intent of the scientists etc. is so true. Browsing Twitter today, I found a thread from a Danish behavioural scientist (Michael Bang Petersen) celebrating yesterday's lifting of all remaining Covid restrictions - see https://twitter.com/M_B_Petersen/status/1436193837744107523?s=20 for the thread with responses, and https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1436193837744107523.html for a consolidated view.

From the second of those threads:

The basis for an open society is vaccinations. 86 % of all invited (from 12 years and up) have received 1+ dose. 96 % of everyone above 50 are fully vaccinated. Throughout the pandemic DK has had higher acceptance than many comparable countries. No mandates needed.

I fundamentally disagree with the premise of the first sentence which takes as a given that we should view reducing deaths from Covid, an endemic virus with a low death rate, as more important than continuing to live in what most of us would regard as a free society.

The rest essentially boils down to a self congratulatory spiel which can be summed up as : “we didn’t need more restrictions, because we manipulated the population into doing what we wanted them to anyway”:

1) Create a collective project; (2) avoid polarization; and (3) buffer the burden of restrictions. See, e.g., doi.org/10.1080/014023… & doi.org/10.1177/095679…. Here, DK has done particularly well. (6/14)

My personal view of the U.K. government’s approach is that a much lighter-touch approach should have been taken, with far fewer (if ahard legal restrictions, and more emphasis on individual choice and responsibility, even if that led to more deaths directly attributed to Covid.

By all means encourage the vulnerable to isolate, encourage social distancing, but measures such as forcing businesses to close and placing legal restrictions on the ability of individuals to associate to a greater extent than was seen even during WW2 was quite simply a massive overreaction, and one which was mostly borne out of cowardice and political weakness.

Rather than terrifying the population into submission with alarmist nonsense around “staying safe”, and imposing measures such as masks purely for theatre, I would have preferred the government to get on board with instilling stoicism, a “blitz spirit”, and being more honest about the reality that, whatever we do, this pandemic is sadly going to lead to many deaths, but that we will get through it, and we *cannot* abandon our democratic values and way of life.

That said we are where we are, and I admire the Danish approach of stating that the virus is no longer a “societal threat”. This is the kind of messaging the U.K. government could do well to adopt, rather than yet more mixed messages and weasel words from Boris who we all know is as clueless as any of us is about what direction he and his government will be taking over the next few weeks and months.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Do we take it that hospitalised doesn't necessarily mean ICU?



I'll bet a fiver that there will be a variant scare at some point this autumn / winter. In fact what's the bet it will come to fore some time around 18th - 25th December?!
Yes, it never has done.

In terms of the variant, yes there are some out there already. None of the ones we've had so far have set us back to square 1 in terms of vaccine ability to limit severe illness.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
In terms of the variant, yes there are some out there already. None of the ones we've had so far have set us back to square 1 in terms of vaccine ability to limit severe illness.

I agree, but I also think the politicians will lose their nerve, and default to "more of the same". Especially with a PM who now seems to be more fussed with outserving Thatcher than anything else.

I just wish the opposition would get their act together. Starmer has had a gift handed to him with the tax rise, yet Labour's response has been to bang on about wealth. Do they not get that it's this sort of thing which did it for Corbyn?
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
I agree, but I also think the politicians will lose their nerve, and default to "more of the same". Especially with a PM who now seems to be more fussed with outserving Thatcher than anything else.

I just wish the opposition would get their act together. Starmer has had a gift handed to him with the tax rise, yet Labour's response has been to bang on about wealth. Do they not get that it's this sort of thing which did it for Corbyn?

That's true, but would labour be any less likely to lose their nerve over covid ? Past experience suggests not unfortunately.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
That's true, but would labour be any less likely to lose their nerve over covid ? Past experience suggests not unfortunately.

My answer is I don't know, as we haven't seen how Starmer would perform if his fingers were actually on the buttons of power. My hunch is we'd see similar policies but less clumsily executed (let's face it, the bar for that is already deep at the bottom of the sewer, it's hard to see how it can be much lower!). I do tend to agree with the view expressed here that Labour would likely have got more hostile scrutiny from the media.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
My answer is I don't know, as we haven't seen how Starmer would perform if his fingers were actually on the buttons of power. My hunch is we'd see similar policies but less clumsily executed (let's face it, the bar for that is already deep at the bottom of the sewer, it's hard to see how it can be much lower!). I do tend to agree with the view expressed here that Labour would likely have got more hostile scrutiny from the media.

That's true about the media, but (Andy Burnham excepted) they've been consistently more Pro restriction at every opportunity.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
That's true about the media, but (Andy Burnham excepted) they've been consistently more Pro restriction at every opportunity.

A bit like choosing which tooth to have pulled out. The restrictions are bad enough, but worse is the awfully divisive way this has all been handled. Sadly I think you're probably right though - on balance Labour would have probably been a bit worse on balance.

I must say I'm surprised just how weak and ineffective Starmer continues to be.
 
Last edited:

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
It tails off less than I was expecting: 27% of those hospitalised are under 40, and 15% are under 30. In terms of actual numbers, 2538 under 50s, 1755 under 40s, and 1022 under 30s.

I still wouldn't call young people who choose not to have the vaccine idiots, but the risk from the virus isn't quite as low as I'd imagined.

I think I’ve asked this before, but how many of those under 40s and under 30s a) contracted covid in hospital and b) are hospitalised for unrelated reasons but just happen to have tested positive for what is now an endemic virus?
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
I think I’ve asked this before, but how many of those under 40s and under 30s a) contracted covid in hospital and b) are hospitalised for unrelated reasons but just happen to have tested positive for what is now an endemic virus?

Exactly the sort of questions which

1) the media should be asking

and

2) MPs should be debating.
 

Cdd89

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
1,451
That's true about the media, but (Andy Burnham excepted) they've been consistently more Pro restriction at every opportunity.

Being on the side of more restrictions is a no brainer for any party in opposition, since the case can be made that they are only necessary as a result of the government’s failure.
 

johnnychips

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2011
Messages
3,675
Location
Sheffield
Being on the side of more restrictions is a no brainer for any party in opposition, since the case can be made that they are only necessary as a result of the government’s failure.
Labour have done a lot of ‘we agree with you but we should have done it sooner/harder’. Fat lot of good it did them in local elections and by-elections.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,928
Labour have done a lot of ‘we agree with you but we should have done it sooner/harder’. Fat lot of good it did them in local elections and by-elections.
When I met arch anti restriction Conservative Sir Desmond Swayne we discussed the Opposition. He came up with a good point and said "at least now they are doing some opposing"
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
I have posted this in the support conversation thread, but it is also worth posting it here.

The Telegraph is reporting that Boris Johnson is preparing to repeal significant parts of the legislation in the Coronavirus act which allows the government to:-
  • Close schools and pubs
  • Detain "infectious" people
  • Make restrictions on gatherings
The government will publish its "Winter COVID Plan" this coming week, so we will have to wait for the detail.

But if this turns out to be true, it is encouraging to see that over the winter we will not be living under such significant restrictions as in the past.


Boris Johnson set to repeal draconian Covid-19 powers that shut schools and pubs​

Infectious people will no longer be legally detained, and restrictions on events and gatherings cannot be imposed

Draconian Covid-19 powers, such as the ability to shut down schools and pubs, are no longer needed, Boris Johnson will announce this week.

The Prime Minister is set to repeal powers from the Coronavirus Act which are no longer deemed necessary in England as part of the Government's plan for managing the virus during the autumn and winter.

These include the ability to close down sectors of the economy, such as pubs and restaurants, and to restrict access to education by closing down schools, colleges and childcare.

Infectious people can also no longer be legally detained, and restrictions on events and gatherings cannot be imposed.

However, legal requirements will remain for someone to isolate if they test positive for the virus in order to reduce the likelihood of vulnerable people getting infected and to control the spread of variants.

Mr Johnson will emphasise that vaccines continue to be the "first line of defence" when he sets out his strategy for tackling Covid-19 during the colder months.

Ahead of the announcement, he said: “Thanks to the efforts of the public, the NHS and our phenomenal vaccination programme, we reached Step 4 in our Roadmap and life has returned to a sense of normality.

“These extraordinary times required necessary but intrusive measures. But I’m determined to get of rid of any powers we no longer need because of our vaccine defences.

“I will set out the next phase in our Covid response shortly.”

The Government said it is difficult to predict how Covid-19 will interact with flu and other respiratory viruses during the winter, and that the threat of a new variant remains.

The vast majority of restrictions were lifted in England on July 19.

As of 9 September, nearly 90 per cent of the UK population aged over 16 have received a first dose of the Covid-19 vaccine, and more than 80 per cent have received both doses.

People who have a weakened immune system and are insufficiently protected from the first two vaccine doses will be offered a third dose.

Separately, a vaccination booster programme is set to begin this month. It will be offered to people considered more vulnerable to serious illness from the virus. The Joint Committee on Vaccinations and Immunisation is expected to brief the Government on details this week.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,928
I have posted this in the support conversation thread, but it is also worth posting it here.

The Telegraph is reporting that Boris Johnson is preparing to repeal significant parts of the legislation in the Coronavirus act which allows the government to:-
  • Close schools and pubs
  • Detain "infectious" people
  • Make restrictions on gatherings
The government will publish its "Winter COVID Plan" this coming week, so we will have to wait for the detail.

But if this turns out to be true, it is encouraging to see that over the winter we will not be living under such significant restrictions as in the past.

Like him or loathe him, Johnson is a libertarian. At this point in time, I'd prefer him to be in No 10 than someone like Gove, or Starmer.

I can't actually believe that I'm happy for Johnson to be PM. It just seems so wrong.
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
Like him or loathe him, Johnson is a libertarian. At this point in time, I'd prefer him to be in No 10 than someone like Gove, or Starmer.

I can't actually believe that I'm happy for Johnson to be PM. It just seems so wrong.

And the Daily Mail ("where is that pinch of salt?") is reporting that the government is going to:-
  • scrap the requirement to take a PCR test when returning to the UK from amber and green list countries
  • allow people to take a lateral flow test instead of a PCR test on or before day 2 after their return to the UK.
These easements are for people who have had both doses of the vaccine.

So all those private testing companies that have been shafting us since May 17th can go an stick their expensive rip off tests somewhere where the sun doesn't shine.

And I can finallyuse my unused Eurostar vouchers from last year for a trip to France. :D :D


End of PCR travel tests: Double-jabbed travellers will no longer have to take expensive Covid tests when returning to Britain​

  • Officials are working towards scrapping requirement for green and amber lists
  • Travellers will no longer need Covid tests before leaving for Britain or PCR tests
  • Move will slash the cost of family holidays by hundreds of pounds
Double-jabbed travellers will no longer have to take expensive PCR Covid tests when returning to the UK, the Government is poised to announce.

Officials are working towards scrapping the requirement for green and amber list countries before the half-term holidays next month, The Mail on Sunday can reveal, providing a huge boost for millions of holidaymakers and the beleaguered travel industry.

Travellers will no longer need Covid tests before leaving for Britain, while the unpopular PCR tests currently required on the second day after arrival will be replaced by cheaper lateral flow tests.

The move will slash the cost of family holidays by hundreds of pounds. Currently, the PCR test can cost more than £100, while the NHS offers free lateral flow tests.

The plan will be discussed this week by Boris Johnson, Chancellor Rishi Sunak, Health Secretary Sajid Javid and Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove who form the so-called Covid-O committee.

The change would also tackle fears that some PCR firms are profiteering and could provide an incentive for people to be vaccinated, as the new rules would only apply to those who have been double jabbed.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,928
When from for the relaxation of test rules? I'm back in the UK on Wednesday..
 

philosopher

Established Member
Joined
23 Sep 2015
Messages
1,346
I have posted this in the support conversation thread, but it is also worth posting it here.

The Telegraph is reporting that Boris Johnson is preparing to repeal significant parts of the legislation in the Coronavirus act which allows the government to:-
  • Close schools and pubs
  • Detain "infectious" people
  • Make restrictions on gatherings
The government will publish its "Winter COVID Plan" this coming week, so we will have to wait for the detail.

But if this turns out to be true, it is encouraging to see that over the winter we will not be living under such significant restrictions as in the past.


From what I have been reading in the news this weekend, the government’s ’winter plan’ involves introducing vaccine passports, reintroduction of compulsory masks and restoring the working from home advice if things get bad.

However many Tory backbenchers are not keen on either vaccine passports or masks and it is no secret that Rishi is not keen on large scale working from home. So introducing these measures may be tricky for the government, so hopefully it will be that nothing changes at all over the winter.
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
From what I have been reading in the news this weekend, the government’s ’winter plan’ involves introducing vaccine passports, reintroduction of compulsory masks and restoring the working from home advice if things get bad.

However many Tory backbenchers are not keen on either vaccine passports or masks and it is no secret that Rishi is not keen on large scale working from home. So introducing these measures may be tricky for the government, so hopefully it will be that nothing changes at all over the winter.

What will probably happen is that the government will conveniently decide that the threshold for introducing compulsory face nappies, vaccine passports and working from home has not been met.

In other words, Boris will say that we will have to introduce these measures if cases "surge dramatically", and then decide that any "surge" is not quite dramatic enough for all the pointless measures outlined above.

I just hope that if face nappies are mandated again, you don't have the utterly pointless rule about them being required when you move about the pub, ie put face nappy on to order a drink at the bar, take it off to have your pint, put it on to go to the toilet and then go to the bar for your next drink....etc. etc. etc. Who do they think they are kidding with such utter pointlessness and virtue signalling?
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
More detail from the Daily Mail about the abandoning of plans for compulsory vaccine passports.

I just hope we don't go down the same route as with face nappies, whereby they (vaccine passports) are not mandatory, but government "guidance" says they are "expected and recommended" in order to "keep people safe" over the winter.

The article makes two interesting points:-

  • There will be a dividing line within the UK, given that vaccine passports are set to be compulsory in Scotland from October. It will be interesting to see what effect this "dividing line" has on infection rates in England and Scotland.
  • Rather predictably and depressingly, a "SAGE scientist" has said that a "precautionary break" may be necessary as part of the "contingency plans", but Health Secretary Sajid Javid has said: 'I don't think that's something we need to consider.' Do these locktivist bores never give up?


Boris bows to Tory fury by 'abandoning compulsory Covid passports in England' as he prepares to axe key powers when he unveils 'winter plan' to dodge fresh lockdowns​

  • Boris Johnson is set to set out the Government's winter Covid plan next week
  • He is reluctant to impose further lockdowns and wants to focus on vaccines
  • The Prime Minister is expected to say vaccines will be the first line of defence
  • Imposing of restrictions on events are also set to be abandoned in the Covid plan
Boris Johnson is set to appease angry Tories this week by scrapping plans for compulsory Covid passports in England.

The PM is expected to abandon the controversial idea for nightclubs and major events when he unveils the government's 'winter plan' on Tuesday.

The proposals had come under intense fire from Conservative MPs as 'unsupportable, coercive and discriminatory' last week.

He will also scrap some of the swinging powers that the government took to manage the response to the disease, and all-but rule out further lockdowns to control an anticipated surge over the coming months - after scientists said vaccinations can be an effective first line of defence.

A booster jab programme could begin as early as this month, while other measures in the 'toolbox' for tackling outbreaks will include masks.

Health Secretary Sajid Javid gave a strong hint that mandatory Covid passports will not go ahead as he stressed rising vaccination rates and said it would only happen if there is 'no alternative'.

'I hope we can avoid it,' he told Sky News.

The decision would draw another dividing line within the UK, as Nicola Sturgeon has insisted that a certification scheme will be launched in Scotland from October 1.


Ministers were sent out to defend the Covid passports proposals last week, with Nadhim Zahawi insisting they were the right thing to do even though he admitted they 'went against everything I believe in'.

The Sunday Times said under the U-turn firms and venues who are already demanding proof of vaccination will be allowed to continue to do so, but they will not be any legal obligation.

Speculation has been mounting over what increased measures may be brought in this winter, a high-risk time for coronavirus as other respiratory illnesses.

Mr Johnson hopes to avoid locking down the entire country and will send a message by repealling some of the Government's powers to shut down sections of the economy in England under the Coronavirus Act.

Mr Johnson said: 'Thanks to the efforts of the public, the NHS and our phenomenal vaccination programme, we reached Step 4 in our road map and life has returned to a sense of normality.

'These extraordinary times required necessary but intrusive measures. But I'm determined to get rid of any powers we no longer need because of our vaccine defences.

'I will set out the next phase in our Covid response shortly.'

The powers expected to be repealed include those allowing the closing down of the economy, the imposing of restrictions on events, the power to temporarily close or restrict access to schools, and powers to detain infectious people.

The Government expects the independent Joint Committee on Vaccinations and Immunisation (JCVI) to recommend details of a jab booster programme next week.

The focus on vaccination in the Covid winter plan comes after claims ministers were considering a so-called firebreak lockdown in October.

An unnamed member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said a 'precautionary break' could be part of 'contingency plans', the i newspaper reported.

But Health Secretary Sajid Javid said: 'I don't think that's something we need to consider.'

He said no decisions are 'risk-free' but insisted the 'best defence' against another wave of the virus is the vaccine programme.

Downing Street denied the Government is planning a lockdown or firebreak around the October half-term.

But the spokesman added that they have 'retained contingency plans as part of responsible planning for a range of scenarios'.

They said: 'These kind of measures would only be reintroduced as a last resort to prevent unsustainable pressure on our NHS.'

There are plans in place to begin giving booster jabs to the most vulnerable as early as this month, as more than 65 per cent of the entire UK population have been fully vaccinated.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
More detail from the Daily Mail about the abandoning of plans for compulsory vaccine passports.

I just hope we don't go down the same route as with face nappies, whereby they (vaccine passports) are not mandatory, but government "guidance" says they are "expected and recommended" in order to "keep people safe" over the winter.

The article makes two interesting points:-

  • There will be a dividing line within the UK, given that vaccine passports are set to be compulsory in Scotland from October. It will be interesting to see what effect this "dividing line" has on infection rates in England and Scotland.
  • Rather predictably and depressingly, a "SAGE scientist" has said that a "precautionary break" may be necessary as part of the "contingency plans", but Health Secretary Sajid Javid has said: 'I don't think that's something we need to consider.' Do these locktivist bores never give up?


I’ve just made the exact same points in the vaccine passport thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top