Reduction in social gatherings.

[Scrotnig]

He doesn’t have a choice. Sounding ominous gets quite a few people to take current restrictions more seriously, and is politically free, whilst those who won’t change because he’s a bit threatening just aren’t going to change anyway - they have made their mind up and only enforcement will really change their behaviour.

What about people who might be ok to comply grudgingly, but then refuse to do so because they won't be threatened by jumped-up lying politicians?

 

[Meerkat]

What about people who might be ok to comply grudgingly, but then refuse to do so because they won't be threatened by jumped-up lying politicians?

They need to grow up

 

[takno]

They need to grow up

Yes, like that. People who really hate being patronised like that are much less likely to comply with whatever you want them to do

 

[Richard Scott]

He doesn’t have a choice. Sounding ominous gets quite a few people to take current restrictions more seriously, and is politically free, whilst those who won’t change because he’s a bit threatening just aren’t going to change anyway - they have made their mind up and only enforcement will really change their behaviour.

Yes he does. How about justifying what is decided rather than picking arbitrary numbers like 6? People are much more likely to follow rules if there is a point to them. All recent rules are just knee jerk reactions not properly thought through methods to minimise infections.

 

[DelayRepay]

Yes he does. How about justifying what is decided rather than picking arbitrary numbers like 6? People are much more likely to follow rules if there is a point to them. All recent rules are just knee jerk reactions not properly thought through methods to minimise infections.

I hoped this was why the scientists were giving a briefing today. I hoped they would explain that the restriction x is in place because, without it, y is likely to happen. I was hoping that they would share some evidence (e.g. from T&T) showing that household gatherings were responsible for a significant proportion of infections (or whatever it is that we need to crack down on). At the moment it all feels a bit vague, we are being asked to do/not do things but the reason why those things are seen as significant contributors to the spread of the virus are not clear.

If people understand why we are being asked to live under specific restrictions, you are right that they are more likely to comply. In addition, there is likely to be some over-compliance (i.e. people decide that even though it is allowed, a gathering of six is not wise and decide to just meet three people instead, or decide to continue with online meetings for a bit longer even though a face to face meeting would be allowed). This will then offset some of the non compliance by others.

Personally there are things I can do to reduce my interaction with others, that would not really inconvenience me (e.g. being a bit more organised so I don't go to the shop twice in one day). But at the moment I am allowed to do that and there is nothing really to encourage me to try to avoid it. I think if people really understand the ask, then enough will modify their behaviours. The problem is we don't understand the ask other than don't meet in groups of more than six, wash your hands and wear face coverings in certain circumstances.

 

[Huntergreed]

Is it possible the rule of 6 could be further reduced in the coming days/weeks, as they’re saying if they don’t act now we’ll need another lockdown?

 

[scotrail158713]

What I’m worried about is this hasn’t been given enough time. The “rule of 6” has only been in place for a week and already the governments are introducing new restrictions. This means that in, say, 3 weeks time any potential reduction in numbers can be explained by the new restrictions being introduced in the coming days, and not the “rule of 6”, even if that on its own would have been enough to combat the increase.

 

[MikeWM]

What I’m worried about is this hasn’t been given enough time. The “rule of 6” has only been in place for a week and already the governments are introducing new restrictions. This means that in, say, 3 weeks time any potential reduction in numbers can be explained by the new restrictions being introduced in the coming days, and not the “rule of 6”, even if that on its own would have been enough to combat the increase.

Yes, it is like mid-March all over again, except with even less excuse this time around.

 

[6862]

Is it possible the rule of 6 could be further reduced in the coming days/weeks, as they’re saying if they don’t act now we’ll need another lockdown?

I suspect it will be taken right down to the rule of 0 pretty soon.

 

[Meerkat]

Is it possible the rule of 6 could be further reduced in the coming days/weeks, as they’re saying if they don’t act now we’ll need another lockdown?

I think they will try to ratchet up enforcement first, maybe a few ‘loud’ cases like that student’s house party £10k fine, shut down some pubs etc that let people break the rules.

 

[Bantamzen]

I suspect it will be taken right down to the rule of 0 pretty soon.

Who knows, the way this government flaps around they might forbid members of the same household from meeting....

 

[Andy Pacer]

I suspect it will be taken right down to the rule of 0 pretty soon.

Or a rule of 0 with a list of endless exceptions...

 

[ScottGallagher]

I think I will give the pub a wide berth for now, I cant afford right now to be put off work for 14 days and risk a £1000 fine just because I happened to be there the same time as someone I was nowhere near who later tested positive.

It was getting ridiculous anyway, Greene King in particular obviously prefer the sledgehammer approach, you name it theyve imposed it.

 

[Bantamzen]

I think I will give the pub a wide berth for now, I cant afford right now to be put off work for 14 days and risk a £1000 fine just because I happened to be there the same time as someone I was nowhere near who later tested positive.

It was getting ridiculous anyway, Greene King in particular obviously prefer the sledgehammer approach, you name it theyve imposed it.

I don't think its that universal with Greene King. Of the three in my area there seem to be very different approaches. The two more traditional pubs although started off with all the covid-trimmings, slowly dialled back on some of them. The third, more a restaurant than a pub has been the most relaxed of them all, implementing rather lighter measures than their two neighbours.

However I do wonder about how this will be received by the hospitality industry. As a commentator mused just yesterday, it was generally them tried to embrace the measures & comply with the rules, but it is them that are now getting hit again. Sure an hour off opening for some pubs won't be a major hardship, but not all bars relied on the traditional pub opening hours. And then there will be plenty of restaurants that saw late night custom that will pay a price too. If this is anything more than a short term measure I can see more trouble ahead.

 

[6862]

Who knows, the way this government flaps around they might forbid members of the same household from meeting....

My university has effectively done this, we are only allowed to socialise in our own kitchen with 2 other flatmates (I live with 6 people in a university owned flat). This is despite the fact we would all have to self isolate if one of us got it!

Or a rule of 0 with a list of endless exceptions...

Yes, they do seem fond of exceptions - thankfully!

 

[ScottGallagher]

I don't think its that universal with Greene King. Of the three in my area there seem to be very different approaches. The two more traditional pubs although started off with all the covid-trimmings, slowly dialled back on some of them. The third, more a restaurant than a pub has been the most relaxed of them all, implementing rather lighter measures than their two neighbours.

However I do wonder about how this will be received by the hospitality industry. As a commentator mused just yesterday, it was generally them tried to embrace the measures & comply with the rules, but it is them that are now getting hit again. Sure an hour off opening for some pubs won't be a major hardship, but not all bars relied on the traditional pub opening hours. And then there will be plenty of restaurants that saw late night custom that will pay a price too. If this is anything more than a short term measure I can see more trouble ahead.

The one near me , has dials on the toilet door (only touched with elbow), one in one out toilet policy (6 at a table is fine though), staff all wearing visors as if we are in hospital , plastic screens , freestanding screens, one way systems , entrance and exit only doors, QR codes or text a number on entry, not allowed to take empty glasses to the bar but you Can order at the bar. I could go on!

 

[Andy Pacer]

Yes, they do seem fond of exceptions - thankfully!

Yes, thankfully for us as individuals, but unfortunately it leads to the confusion we've been facing as society!

 

[Jamiescott1]

Let's hope there's no extra time in any televised evening cup football games or delayed kickoffs in the champions league as people watching in the pub will have to leave before the end of the game.

 

[Andy Pacer]

Let's hope there's no extra time in any televised evening cup football games or delayed kickoffs in the champions league as people watching in the pub will have to leave before the end of the game.

Interesting point. Would be very interesting to see people's reaction and compliance.

 

[brick60000]

My university has effectively done this, we are only allowed to socialise in our own kitchen with 2 other flatmates (I live with 6 people in a university owned flat). This is despite the fact we would all have to self isolate if one of us got it!



Yes, they do seem fond of exceptions - thankfully!

I’m sorry, what!? Have they gone mad!?

I’d almost want to refuse to isolate to prove a point if somebody else in the flat tested positive, as they’re surely not a close contact in the sense that you live with them, given you’re not allowed to act as if you do!

Seems slightly ropey legal ground too. You’re renting the flat, I don’t see how they have the right to tell you what you can and can’t do in it, providing you’re not acting unreasonably and trashing it (which is nothing to do with 6 of you being in the kitchen!).

Thankfully none of that madness has come to my university yet. Hopefully it stays that way.

As a matter of interest, are students in shared clustered flats considered to be a household or individual households as far as the law is concerned? Given I’m expected to have my own TV License for my room, and I have my own independent tenancy agreement, it seems crazy to suggest the former, but I imagine it probably is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Who knows, the way this government flaps around they might forbid members of the same household from meeting....

"Scarfolk Council" has some good examples. For more information please re-read!

Seems slightly ropey legal ground too. You’re renting the flat, I don’t see how they have the right to tell you what you can and can’t do in it, providing you’re not acting unreasonably and trashing it (which is nothing to do with 6 of you being in the kitchen!).

It is ridiculous, but it is enforceable because student flats are done using licence agreements rather than leases/rental agreements, and with those you can put any restriction in you like provided it doesn't infringe a protected characteristic.

 

[yorksrob]

A chap from SAGE was on Radio 4 about half an hour ago, suggesting we'd need the whole schmorgers board of restrictions including further restrictions on hospitality (presumably closure) continued restrictions on sporting events and crucially limiting social interaction outside ones household.

Good luck with that.

 

[duncanp]

A chap from SAGE was on Radio 4 about half an hour ago, suggesting we'd need the whole schmorgers board of restrictions including further restrictions on hospitality (presumably closure) continued restrictions on sporting events and crucially limiting social interaction outside ones household.

Good luck with that.

If we don't get 50,000 cases a day by October, I hope all these SAGE scientists, plus Whitty and Vallance, plus Professor Pantsdown, consider their position and resign, or at the very least wind their necks in and shut up and let us all get on with our lives.

No doubt they will claim that the measures announced this week were responsible for the drop in cases, and not consider the fact that their doom laden pieces of guesswork forecasts were a load of b******t in the first place.

 

[takno]

If we don't get 50,000 cases a day by October, I hope all these SAGE scientists, plus Whitty and Vallance, plus Professor Pantsdown, consider their position and resign, or at the very least wind their necks in and shut up and let us all get on with our lives.

No doubt they will claim that the measures announced this week were responsible for the drop in cases, and not consider the fact that their doom laden pieces of guesswork forecasts were a load of b******t in the first place.

They're just playing a more advanced game of the tiger and the stone than previously. Rather than introducing the magical stone which protects from tigers first, they decided to lead by saying "I think I hear tigers in the night". Today when Boris introduces the magical stone, we will all be prepped for how much we need it.

It works particularly well because Chris whitty looks like he's haunted by something at the best of times.

 

[6862]

I’m sorry, what!? Have they gone mad!?

I’d almost want to refuse to isolate to prove a point if somebody else in the flat tested positive, as they’re surely not a close contact in the sense that you live with them, given you’re not allowed to act as if you do!

Seems slightly ropey legal ground too. You’re renting the flat, I don’t see how they have the right to tell you what you can and can’t do in it, providing you’re not acting unreasonably and trashing it (which is nothing to do with 6 of you being in the kitchen!).

Thankfully none of that madness has come to my university yet. Hopefully it stays that way.

As a matter of interest, are students in shared clustered flats considered to be a household or individual households as far as the law is concerned? Given I’m expected to have my own TV License for my room, and I have my own independent tenancy agreement, it seems crazy to suggest the former, but I imagine it probably is.

We are considered to be a household, but they are imposing extra restrictions on top of that. Needless to say, we are ignoring them.

 

[takno]

We are considered to be a household, but they are imposing extra restrictions on top of that. Needless to say, we are ignoring them.

It's funny how what constitutes a household varies to be as inconvenient as possible to the people involved. The social will peg you as a household and cut your benefits if you are sharing so much as a food cupboard, but you've got to get separate TV licenses based on the contract. Of course you can have a single licence for TVs in communal areas, but then you can't get together and watch them because of the Covid risk. And yet the government will be surprised and horrified when bored lonely students spend the whole winter watching QAnon videos and getting radicalised.

 

[Scrotnig]

It's funny how what constitutes a household varies to be as inconvenient as possible to the people involved. The social will peg you as a household and cut your benefits if you are sharing so much as a food cupboard, but you've got to get separate TV licenses based on the contract. Of course you can have a single licence for TVs in communal areas, but then you can't get together and watch them because of the Covid risk. And yet the government will be surprised and horrified when bored lonely students spend the whole winter watching QAnon videos and getting radicalised.

Given the current situation, I'd expect restrictions on the number of hours of television we can watch being put it into law using the emergency powers.

 

[brick60000]

We are considered to be a household, but they are imposing extra restrictions on top of that. Needless to say, we are ignoring them.

I don’t blame you one bit, universities are supposed to be a place for adults to learn independently, not for them to be micromanaged beyond sense.

It's funny how what constitutes a household varies to be as inconvenient as possible to the people involved. The social will peg you as a household and cut your benefits if you are sharing so much as a food cupboard, but you've got to get separate TV licenses based on the contrac.

Isn’t it just... though I do wonder how all these different definitions would stand up in court if it ever came to that for everybody. It’s completely ludicrous.

 

[Ian Cunningham]

I suspect it will be taken right down to the rule of 0 pretty soon.

Scarfolk Council are already on it

 

[Jamiescott1]

Interesting point. Would be very interesting to see people's reaction and compliance.

Mondays liverpool vs arsenal game is an 8.15pm kick off so will not finish until gone 10pm.
Good luck kicking people out of the pub with 5 or 10 minutes remaining if its a close game