Could we see a return to "essential travel only" messaging?

[squizzler]

There is nowhere in the UK as motor-centric as Milton Keynes, and it has a very low rate and has had throughout. So I think you will have to rethink that.

Milton Keynes is an interesting experiment, but cannot really be considered a practical template for the rest of us, either in retrofit or new build cities. The population density and land take is impractical for a crowded island like the UK. This is not only ecologically unsustainable, but does not support what most people would regard as the main benefits of an urban lifestyle with vibrant street life, independent coffee shops and the rest.

Nonetheless, you suggest MK has been relatively successful in containing the virus, and provides an opportunity to work out what worked for them and adapt it into other cities. As you well know, MK has an excellent "Redway" system for dynamic forms of travel, and lots of green space, and air quality is decent due to (high) emissions being dispersed over a large area. I suggest it is those things which improved your outcomes rather than being able to boast a high level of participation in motoring. The rest of the country is indeed learning from this, with various attempts being made to fit similar active travel, better air quality and green spaces into traditional cities.

 

[The_Train]

Essential travel will return when a full lockdown occurs again. All of these little steps we are seeing Boris and chums implement now are just the same as the little steps we saw pre-lockdown back in March - basically a batch of rules and guidelines for the British public to go against so Boris can blame us and implement a full lockdown again. The fact that they have also crept the value of fines up also suggests they expect noncompliance when this comes around and again are implementing increases slowly to avoid negative press - I wouldn't be surprised to see the level of instant fines to be up to £500 by the time lockdown returns

 

[Bletchleyite]

Milton Keynes is an interesting experiment, but cannot really be considered a practical template for the rest of us, either in retrofit or new build cities. The population density and land take is impractical for a crowded island like the UK. This is not only ecologically unsustainable, but does not support what most people would regard as the main benefits of an urban lifestyle with vibrant street life, independent coffee shops and the rest.

To be fair I wasn't saying we should have more of them - simply that the concept seems to be working well for controlling the virus in an urban area. Those are indeed serious flaws in the concept which mean there's unlikely to be another one.

Nonetheless, you suggest MK has been relatively successful in containing the virus, and provides an opportunity to work out what worked for them and adapt it into other cities. As you well know, MK has an excellent "Redway" system for dynamic forms of travel, and lots of green space, and air quality is decent due to (high) emissions being dispersed over a large area. I suggest it is those things which improved your outcomes rather than being able to boast a high level of participation in motoring. The rest of the country is indeed learning from this, with various attempts being made to fit similar active travel, better air quality and green spaces into traditional cities.

I'll have to disagree here. Private motoring in your own household's car has the lowest risk of transmission outside your household - lower than even walking or cycling because you're in your own box - there is no comparison based on walking or cycling closely past someone. There are arguments against private motoring, but they are not relevant to COVID and should not be conflated with it as some are trying to do.

The main reasons for pushing walking and cycling elsewhere is to get people off public transport which is (despite the denial by some on here) pretty much by definition high risk compared with the various private modes.

 

[bramling]

Essential travel will return when a full lockdown occurs again. All of these little steps we are seeing Boris and chums implement now are just the same as the little steps we saw pre-lockdown back in March - basically a batch of rules and guidelines for the British public to go against so Boris can blame us and implement a full lockdown again. The fact that they have also crept the value of fines up also suggests they expect noncompliance when this comes around and again are implementing increases slowly to avoid negative press - I wouldn't be surprised to see the level of instant fines to be up to £500 by the time lockdown returns

Yes I have a suspicion that’s where Boris is heading.

Whether we will actually get to that point is less clear however, as I get the impression things are starting to happen behind the scenes now, in particular MPs agitating. Now there’s the whiff of furlough ending I bet a lot of people are starting to think “yikes I actually need to get back to work or else I won’t have a job”.

 

[DustyBin]

Yes I have a suspicion that’s where Boris is heading.

Whether we will actually get to that point is less clear however, as I get the impression things are starting to happen behind the scenes now, in particular MPs agitating. Now there’s the whiff of furlough ending I bet a lot of people are starting to think “yikes I actually need to get back to work or else I won’t have a job”.

Unfortunately those people needed to start thinking about that a month (or more) ago rather than calling for further restrictions on the basis that the furlough scheme would be extended.... I really do find the economic consequences of all this quite scary if I’m honest.

 

[bramling]

Unfortunately those people needed to start thinking about that a month (or more) ago rather than calling for further restrictions on the basis that the furlough scheme would be extended.... I really do find the economic consequences of all this quite scary if I’m honest.

Quite so.

I get the impression the problem groups are actually now the work from homes. My local Facebook is full of post after post where it’s clear they don’t want to return to the office, and are quite happy to have restrictions if it means they don’t have to set the alarm clock in the morning or have to commute.

There’s some retired people with similar views (to be fair in their cases they’re probably genuinely scared, which given the media coverage we can’t entirely blame them for), however for every one of those I think there’s another who is fed up and wants to be able to enjoy the rest of their life.

 

[radamfi]

The main reasons for pushing walking and cycling elsewhere is to get people off public transport which is (despite the denial by some on here) pretty much by definition high risk compared with the various private modes.

Public transport is also very low risk. See German link earlier.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Public transport is also very low risk. See German link earlier.

It is inconceivable that the risk is as low as a private car, and anyone who suggests it is is trying to make another point which it is really unhelpful to make at the moment.

Anywhere where there are not other people is lower risk than anywhere where there are. It is as simple as that. If you are in an enclosed box, you can't get it off anyone.

 

[radamfi]

It is inconceivable that the risk is as low as a private car, and anyone who suggests it is is trying to make another point which it is really unhelpful to make at the moment.

Anywhere where there are not other people is lower risk than anywhere where there are. It is as simple as that. If you are in an enclosed box, you can't get it off anyone.

So that website is lying?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So that website is lying?

I haven't read it, but it is clearly incorrect if it states the risk of private car and public transport are equal, because it is utterly and glaringly obvious that this cannot possibly be the case.

What it might be doing is putting both of them in a band of "low", which isn't entirely unfair but is misleading.

So either it is wrong or misleading, yes. I suspect the latter. This is not a time to push the environmental agenda; we can return to that once this more immediate threat is dealt with.

 

[radamfi]

I've just seen this from Brussels STIB/MIVB:

STIB-MIVB - Brussels Intercommunal Transport Company

www.stib-mivb.be

"An English study has shown that the risk of contracting Covid-19 while travelling by train is about 1 in 11,000 journeys. This is equivalent to a chance of less than 0.01%. The risk even lowers to 1 in 20,000 journeys (0.005%) when wearing a face mask. The study shows that travellers are not more prone to infections in public transports than elsewhere in their everyday lives."

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've just seen this from Brussels STIB/MIVB:

STIB-MIVB - Brussels Intercommunal Transport Company

www.stib-mivb.be

"An English study has shown that the risk of contracting Covid-19 while travelling by train is about 1 in 11,000 journeys. This is equivalent to a chance of less than 0.01%. The risk even lowers to 1 in 20,000 journeys (0.005%) when wearing a face mask. The study shows that travellers are not more prone to infections in public transports than elsewhere in their everyday lives."

Which is quite different from "it's the same risk as going by car", which it clearly is not. Going by car, with only your household in the car, is going to be as close to zero risk as you can imagine - basically the same as staying at home.

Grossly misleading, in other words.

 

[radamfi]

Which is quite different from "it's the same risk as going by car", which it clearly is not. Going by car, with only your household in the car, is going to be as close to zero risk as you can imagine - basically the same as staying at home.

Grossly misleading, in other words.

0.005% is safe enough.

 

[Huntergreed]

0.005% is safe enough.

Agreed (although if this study is to be believed, are masks actually proven to work?)

 

[radamfi]

Car driving is not zero risk from Covid. You have to touch petrol pumps and be near other people filling up and paying for petrol. You have to interact with mechanics for servicing and repairs. You have to interact with emergency services after an accident or when stopped by police.

Vienna:

Jobs bei den Wiener Linien - Wiener Linien

Hier findest du unsere offenen Stellen. Dein Traumjob ist vielleicht nur noch einen Klick entfernt!

www.wienerlinien.at

"Get on! Public Transport is safe.

Public transport in Vienna is safe, even in times of COVID-19"

 

[Bletchleyite]

0.005% is safe enough.

You can decide it is safe enough, but it's wrong to put the risk across as equal as it is not.

The priority at the moment is to reduce spread. Therefore, those who can travel by car, foot or bicycle doing so instead of public transport will help, and it is completely false to suggest otherwise.

I don't agree with people who don't have those options available being less mobile, but if you have one of the other options available it is best to choose it.

 

[DB]

I've just seen this from Brussels STIB/MIVB:

STIB-MIVB - Brussels Intercommunal Transport Company

www.stib-mivb.be

"An English study has shown that the risk of contracting Covid-19 while travelling by train is about 1 in 11,000 journeys. This is equivalent to a chance of less than 0.01%. The risk even lowers to 1 in 20,000 journeys (0.005%) when wearing a face mask. The study shows that travellers are not more prone to infections in public transports than elsewhere in their everyday lives."

Afraid I woudl be suspicious of any study which claims that masks reduce the risk by 50% compared to not wearing a mask - there does not seem to be any evidence for it making any difference at all, never mind one as signigicant as that.

 

[radamfi]

Car parts retailers such as Halfords and Euro Car Parts are still open, so people will be interacting with staff and other customers in those premises.

Car park machines are still in operation, so people are using the same machines and queueing for them, potentially causing spread.

 

[Domh245]

Car parts retailers such as Halfords and Euro Car Parts are still open, so people will be interacting with staff and other customers in those premises.

Car park machines are still in operation, so people are using the same machines and queueing for them, potentially causing spread.

Unless your car is particularly problematic, there's no reason that you'd need to be interacting with mechanics or part shops (the latter can also be substituted with online shopping) regularly, indeed the only reason to be doing it would be if your car was due for servicing/MOT - a remarkably low risk occurrence when done sensibly. The only real risk for 99% of drivers is the petrol pump, easily mitigated by using pay at pump options and the gloves available at the station (or, more appropriately following the guidance re hand washing - fill up, pay, sanitise your hands before getting back in the car)

Similarly the car park machines - near zero risk from outdoors environments (which fwiw even an underground car park would count as), and any risk from contaminated surfaces on the machine are mitigated by washing your hands properly once you've touched something that might be a risk.

Stop trying to create a frankly bizarre false equivalence between private cars and public transport. The private car is categorically a lower risk, end of. Public transport is a higher risk than private cars, but is still such a low risk as to be negligible.

 

[radamfi]

Unless your car is particularly problematic, there's no reason that you'd need to be interacting with mechanics or part shops (the latter can also be substituted with online shopping) regularly, indeed the only reason to be doing it would be if your car was due for servicing/MOT - a remarkably low risk occurrence when done sensibly. The only real risk for 99% of drivers is the petrol pump, easily mitigated by using pay at pump options and the gloves available at the station (or, more appropriately following the guidance re hand washing - fill up, pay, sanitise your hands before getting back in the car)

Similarly the car park machines - near zero risk from outdoors environments (which fwiw even an underground car park would count as), and any risk from contaminated surfaces on the machine are mitigated by washing your hands properly once you've touched something that might be a risk.

Stop trying to create a frankly bizarre false equivalence between private cars and public transport. The private car is categorically a lower risk, end of. Public transport is a higher risk than private cars, but is still such a low risk as to be negligible.

My point was to prove that car travel and public transport use are both non-zero risk and both negligible risk. So there's no reason to choose car over public transport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Car parts retailers such as Halfords and Euro Car Parts are still open, so people will be interacting with staff and other customers in those premises.

Car park machines are still in operation, so people are using the same machines and queueing for them, potentially causing spread.

Like with fuel, though, you're not sitting inside for a prolonged period with other people when doing those things. It's brief, almost fleeting.

My point was to prove that car travel and public transport use are both non-zero risk and both negligible risk. So there's no reason to choose car over public transport.

False. Public transport very clearly poses a higher risk than private car travel.

That risk needs to be accepted for people who do not drive and do not have a driver in their household who can take them somewhere. But it does not need to be accepted for those who do drive, and therefore it should not be accepted.

 

[radamfi]

Like with fuel, though, you're not sitting inside for a prolonged period with other people when doing those things. It's brief, almost fleeting.



False. Public transport very clearly poses a higher risk than private car travel.

That risk needs to be accepted for people who do not drive and do not have a driver in their household who can take them somewhere. But it does not need to be accepted for those who do drive, and therefore it should not be accepted.

Vienna and Brussels say public transport is safe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Vienna and Brussels says public transport is safe.

Nobody should be saying anything "is safe" under any circumstances, because safety is not an absolute.

Anyone who does, or who asks for that, is themselves failing to understand risk.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Nobody should be saying anything "is safe" under any circumstances, because safety is not an absolute.

Anyone who does, or who asks for that, is themselves failing to understand risk.

Quite so.

Public transport is low risk in terms of Covid. Private car usage is lower risk. Neither is no risk.

Should we get to essential travel only, then it applies equally irrespective of mode. In that event, people riding high powered motorcycles round National Parks, or driving soft tops from Tamworth to Weston super Mare should be equally restricted as people travelling on trains or buses for purely leisure reasons.

Essential is getting food or prescriptions or fulfilling caring responsibilities NOT travelling to an area to bash a particular train/bus/route.

I hope we don’t see an essential travel only decree. Christ, we’re all public travel advocates on this forum! If the situation worsens so we begin to see hospital admissions, death and serious health impacts on those who “recover” then it may be advised that travel is restricted (rather than mandated) and I’d like to think that most would respond accordingly.

 

[Bikeman78]

I haven't read it, but it is clearly incorrect if it states the risk of private car and public transport are equal, because it is utterly and glaringly obvious that this cannot possibly be the case.

What it might be doing is putting both of them in a band of "low", which isn't entirely unfair but is misleading.

So either it is wrong or misleading, yes. I suspect the latter. This is not a time to push the environmental agenda; we can return to that once this more immediate threat is dealt with.

But driving and cycling are less safe than travelling by train or bus. So scaring low risk people off public transport might actually increase their risk of death.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But driving and cycling are less safe than travelling by train or bus. So scaring low risk people off public transport might actually increase their risk of death.

It's not about risk of death. It's about the risk of spreading COVID-19 around the place and causing exponential growth. It basically has (unless a shielder) nothing to do with the risk posed to the individual.

 

[37424]

Car driving is not zero risk from Covid. You have to touch petrol pumps and be near other people filling up and paying for petrol. You have to interact with mechanics for servicing and repairs. You have to interact with emergency services after an accident or when stopped by police.

Vienna:

Jobs bei den Wiener Linien - Wiener Linien

Hier findest du unsere offenen Stellen. Dein Traumjob ist vielleicht nur noch einen Klick entfernt!

www.wienerlinien.at

"Get on! Public Transport is safe.

Public transport in Vienna is safe, even in times of COVID-19"

On the other hand I have disposable gloves in the car which I put on before using a petrol pump, I use pay at pump where possible, I have never had a serious accident in 40 years of driving, its been at least 15 years since I was stopped by police, my car has been very reliable so far yes it will need a visit to the garage in December for an MOT and Service but overall I will stick with my Car thanks.

 

[radamfi]

At least you get health benefits from cycling which outweigh the risk of an accident. With driving it is a lose-lose situation. There is a greater risk of causing an accident to yourself and others, involving Covid spread through the emergency services and you get more unhealthy due to the sedentary nature of driving. For a negligible reduction in Covid spread.

 

[The_Train]

At least you get health benefits from cycling which outweigh the risk of an accident. With driving it is a lose-lose situation. There is a greater risk of causing an accident to yourself and others, involving Covid spread through the emergency services and you get more unhealthy due to the sedentary nature of driving. For a negligible reduction in Covid spread.

I'm not going to lie, your argument is literally all over the place. Coming up with new reasons whenever a previous argument is shot down just stinks of someone arguing for the sake of arguing and refusing to show any sort of impartiality. You've gone from having to interact with mechanics (how often does that happen?), to having to touch a petrol pump (gloves are provided), to paying for car parking (anti-bac your hands before and after use or use your phone to pay), to now suggesting that people driving cars increases Covid spread through emergency services because cars are bound to end up in an accident. I'm sure you don't need reminding of the extremely serious rail accident that occurred during the covid pandemic which lead to multiple emergency services working in close proximity, investigating teams working in close proximity, and then recovery teams working in close proximity - no-one, quite rightly, so much as mentioned the fact that this might increase the spread of covid.

I much prefer travelling by train than car but @Bletchleyite has been spot on throughout his discussion with you - neither are 100% safe obviously, but travelling in a car by yourself or with people in your 'bubble' is quite obviously (without any need for science) safer than travelling amongst lots of strangers on public transport.

 

[radamfi]

I'm sure you don't need reminding of the extremely serious rail accident that occurred during the covid pandemic which lead to multiple emergency services working in close proximity, investigating teams working in close proximity, and then recovery teams working in close proximity - no-one, quite rightly, so much as mentioned the fact that this might increase the spread of covid.

This was notable because rail accidents are extremely rare. Hundreds of minor car accidents, as well as many serious ones, happen on a daily basis but are not publicised because it isn't news.