the most over the top restrictions introduced

[Mojo]

Oadby and Wigston Borough Council, in Leicestershire, have decided to punish local people for the rise in cases by introducing a 'parks curfew'. Nobody is allowed in any parks between 5pm and 7am.

I am sure there is a good reason for this. It's just that I don't know what it is.

https://twitter.com/Oadby_Wigston/status/1306247809461616643

To be fair, it is quite common in many countries, and indeed in many parts of the UK, for parks to be closed overnight - I'm assuming to prevent vagrants trashing the place or to prevent other types of antisocial behaviour. This is however usually accommodated with locked gates rather than some sort of curfew.

I do however know of many people who rely on parks for walking/cycling to and from work.

Are you sure these weren't anti robbery measures?

Yes, it wasn't there last time I visited (pre March) and also there's nothing to stop someone reaching through said hatch if they were determined to steal anything.

 

[AdamWW]

Went into a Chinese takeaway in "The North" on the weekend.

The divide between the public and staff areas (where the counter is) was completely sealed from top to bottom with a glass partition, with no visible gaps between. A microphone/speaker system was set up so customers could hear the staff and vice versa.

The takeaway is strictly cash only, so a drop box has been set up for customers to deposit their money into. This is then counted through the glass and dunked into a vault, with change issued as required in the same manner.

Food is given to customers through a "hatch" with strict signage to only open said hatch when authorised by a member of staff. Think a kitchen cupboard with a door on both sides.

We struggled to keep a straight face all throughout the whole experience and was so bemused by the whole situation burst out laughing both saying "wtf" to each other as soon as we opened the door to leave.

It certainly looks like something of an over-reaction.

On the other hand if it's the sort of takeaway run by a family who live there and one of them is a particular reason to be at risk, it might be a reasonable way of keeping the money coming in while staying as safe as possible.

Probably not, but you never know...

And if so I don't know how they get their supplies from the cash and carry or whatever.

To be fair, it is quite common in many countries, and indeed in many parts of the UK, for parks to be closed overnight - I'm assuming to prevent vagrants trashing the place or to prevent other types of antisocial behaviour. This is however usually accommodated with locked gates rather than some sort of curfew.

I do however know of many people who rely on parks for walking/cycling to and from work.[

Yes - growing up in a city with 'open' parks, it came as a bit a surprise to move somewhere that the parks had fences all the way round and gates that were locked at night.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

It certainly looks like something of an over-reaction.

On the other hand if it's the sort of takeaway run by a family who live there and one of them is a particular reason to be at risk, it might be a reasonable way of keeping the money coming in while staying as safe as possible.

Probably not, but you never know...

And if so I don't know how they get their supplies from the cash and carry or whatever.



Yes - growing up in a city with 'open' parks, it came as a bit a surprise to move somewhere that the parks had fences all the way round and gates that were locked at night.

Does no-one see the irony in all those anti-virus measures but then insisting people pay with grubby, disease-ridden notes and coins? This is, by the way, meant jokingly

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are you sure these weren't anti robbery measures?

My local Chinese has measures identical to those described and they were put in place for COVID.

More amusingly, the chippy next door (they tend to be separate down south, up north it's usually the same place) which is run by the same people (you can see that it's possible to walk through the back) has just a cursory and too-narrow plastic screen on the counter.

To be fair, it is quite common in many countries, and indeed in many parts of the UK, for parks to be closed overnight - I'm assuming to prevent vagrants trashing the place or to prevent other types of antisocial behaviour. This is however usually accommodated with locked gates rather than some sort of curfew.

It does vary a bit around the UK probably largely based on "we've always done it that way" - in MK the parks are always open, in Edinburgh and London many close at night, and in Lancaster (which only really has one) the car parks close but access remains possible on foot at all times.

 

[Scrotnig]

To be fair, it is quite common in many countries, and indeed in many parts of the UK, for parks to be closed overnight - I'm assuming to prevent vagrants trashing the place or to prevent other types of antisocial behaviour. This is however usually accommodated with locked gates rather than some sort of curfew.

That's fine. But not at 5pm, which precludes anyone with a daytime job from going anywhere near the place.

Why are we so obsessed with punishing ordinary working people who are keeping the country afloat at the moment?

Why should it be that those who, for whetever reason, do not work can have free use of the park, but those who do work cannot?

I wouldn't even object to any of this if there was some sort of obvious problem centered on parks that they were trying to solve. But there isn't. The parks in the early evening contain mainly people out alone walking their dogs, or small family groups wandering about, plus a few of the usual joggers who always look close to collapse. Why are these people being picked on?

Close them at 8pm by all means. It's dark by then. But I'm pretty sure the gates are indeed locked in most of them by then anyway. That's quite normal.

 

[Howardh]

There was one pub in London last night with pvc partitions between staff and customers, but a gap in between, and the bar maid and customer were chatting up close in the gap!
But praise to Comptons, a pub I was concerned might be packed, they had the distancing to a tee and I felt perfectly safe. However if they were at capacity I wouldn't have been let in.

 

[island]

I'd like to know the legalities behind this. I think I'm right in saying that councils have the right to close public spaces. But this has to be in response to incidents such as beach overcrowding I think.

The requirements (from section 2 of SI 2020/750) are that the closure must respond to a serious and imminent threat to public health; that it is necessary for preventing, protecting against, controlling, or providing a public health response to the incidence or spread of infection by coronavirus; and that the closure must be proportionate. There is not a requirement that it be a response to an “incident”.

In addition, any private security cannot issue fines. They could call the police, but I'm not sure plod would be that impressed to be called out for this.

Actually, a Secretary of State or a local authority may designate a person to be entitled to issue fixed penalty notices, see for example section 9 (13) of SI 2020/684 and similar provisions in other regulations. This could include private security guards contracted by local authorities. There is no requirement for any such designation to be published, so it is possible that they already have been so designated.

 

[No Expert]

Rather shamefully I quite like the sheer number of screens now in pubs, it makes them far more private and makes you feel as if you are able to have a conversation without the chap on the next table getting every single word!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Rather shamefully I quite like the sheer number of screens now in pubs, it makes them far more private and makes you feel as if you are able to have a conversation without the chap on the next table getting every single word!

Pubs used to be more like that. If, as some have, they've been done to look nice rather than look like a hospital ward, they are probably indeed a welcome thing.

 

[No Expert]

Pubs used to be more like that. If, as some have, they've been done to look nice rather than look like a hospital ward, they are probably indeed a welcome thing.

Even where it's a half and half wooden screen with plastic top, it's better than the 'ram as many tables in as possible' approach that seems to have predominated. But absolutely, if it's going to be a longer term thing it would be good for them to invest in aesthetically pleasing screens.

 

[Scrotnig]

Pubs used to be more like that. If, as some have, they've been done to look nice rather than look like a hospital ward, they are probably indeed a welcome thing.

I'd agree with that. More privacy is not a bad thing. But it has to be done tastefully and properly.

The few pubs I have seen photos and videos of seem to have ugly perspex screens everywhere along with masses of black and yellow tape. This, for me, would create an unpleasant, intimidating atmosphere. Some will argue that's the intention - in which case, I don't wish to go in.

I'm sure some are doing it well. Trouble is you don't know until you get there.

With that and all the other stuff, I'm staying away from pubs until such a time as this is 'over', whatever that may mean. There may very well be no pubs left by then though.

 

[farleigh]

I'd agree with that. More privacy is not a bad thing. But it has to be done tastefully and properly.

The few pubs I have seen photos and videos of seem to have ugly perspex screens everywhere along with masses of black and yellow tape. This, for me, would create an unpleasant, intimidating atmosphere. Some will argue that's the intention - in which case, I don't wish to go in.

I'm sure some are doing it well. Trouble is you don't know until you get there.

With that and all the other stuff, I'm staying away from pubs until such a time as this is 'over', whatever that may mean. There may very well be no pubs left by then though.

If there are no pubs left it will most likely be because of people staying away until this is over

 

[MikeWM]

New regulations - as ever, published hours before they come into force - have been made which require pubs, restaurants etc. to enforce the 'rule of six'.

They also have a requirement for 'social' distancing - 2m, or 1m 'plus' (although the definition of what satisfies that is very vague) - between groups in such venues.

That's the first time I think any distancing has been explicitly put into law in England. I don't recall anyone saying this was going to happen - were the appropriate industries even warned about this?

 

[island]

It was probably mentioned in some government soundbite

Notably, the requirement is placed only on the premises and its managers to ensure physical distancing is followed – customers cannot be fined or prosecuted over it.

 

[trebor79]

I hate to say it, but this is all starting to get rather dystopian. It's interesting there is so little opposition. I'm starting to wonder if the government is expecting opposition to slowly gather momentum and give them time to recalibrate their approach. I think they might be in for a nasty shock, I think it's going to be more like a pressure cooker going BOOM.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I hate to say it, but this is all starting to get rather dystopian. It's interesting there is so little opposition. I'm starting to wonder if the government is expecting opposition to slowly gather momentum and give them time to recalibrate their approach. I think they might be in for a nasty shock, I think it's going to be more like a pressure cooker going BOOM.

People keep saying that on here but I don't think it will. You just get increasingly poor compliance with measures, on the background of a Police force that is way too small to do anything about that.

 

[trebor79]

People keep saying that on here but I don't think it will. You just get increasingly poor compliance with measures, on the background of a Police force that is way too small to do anything about that.

Well I hope you are right and I am wrong. I think the outcome you posit is the more likely, but there is a chance of something more chaotic occurring. People have a limit, fear of the big bad virus is keeping them reigned in now, but if less level headed people start to realise their lives are being trashed for something that isn't as big and bad as made out, who knows what the consequences will be.
The third outcome is less compliance, but more conflict between coronaphobes and people who are eg not wearing pieces of damp cloth over their faces.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

People keep saying that on here but I don't think it will. You just get increasingly poor compliance with measures, on the background of a Police force that is way too small to do anything about that.

Well I hope you are right and I am wrong. I think the outcome you posit is the more likely, but there is a chance of something more chaotic occurring. People have a limit, fear of the big bad virus is keeping them reigned in now, but if less level headed people start to realise their lives are being trashed for something that isn't as big and bad as made out, who knows what the consequences will be.
The third outcome is less compliance, but more conflict between coronaphobes and people who are eg not wearing pieces of damp cloth over their faces.

People riot in summer! (There is some research which supports that statement) The government has safely got itself through summer, who wants to riot on a wet, cold, winter night?

My gut feeling on disorder is that people will lose their jobs (or have substantially reduced hours), the lack of money to spend will result in lower order crimes - theft, burglary, muggings, shoplifting. Much the same as in most previous recessions or a bit like desperate drug addicts shoplifting / stealing to raise just enough cash to buy their next fix. Along with other hidden issues such as self-harm and domestic problems (not just violence but relationship breakdown etc). Add to that increasing levels of debt for those not willing to resort to criminal behaviour.

Stories are emerging of violence over the issue of non mask wearing. There is one on the BBC News website today, there was an appeal for help last week for an incident on a train. It may have been happening more but simply not have been reported until recently.

 

[317 forever]

DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS!

Let's look at Leeds when I was there a couple of weeks back. I was asked to wait by one of the security staff, one of whom I understand is deployed to control access to the toilets full time (though presumably not the same person). They then told me that they're only allowed to let in 2 at a time, one for the (SIX) urinals and one for the (three) cubicles. I was tempted to ask if I had to declare what I was going in for...

That said, in fairness, as soon as I was asked to wait I was told that there were portaloos outside the station.

I noticed that at Leeds station yesterday. Mind you, at Leeds Bradford Airport they have closed the main terminal building. I was asked whether I was catching a flight and I admitted I wasn't but merely hoped to use the gents. Anyway, he informed me that only people travelling could use any toilets!

 

[trainophile]

The portaloos at Leeds station seemed to be for males only. Women were being allowed into the vast expanse of concourse toilets only two at a time, which involved queueing for ten minutes when I was there. Hard luck if you've got a train to catch!

 

[big_rig]

Not technically one that has been introduced, but I did have to laugh at a Tweet from an MP embedded in the Guardian story on today's briefing:

https://twitter.com/GeraintDaviesMP/status/1308000837164204035

To prevent 50,000 cases a day UK must reduce movement & assembly, the engines of infection by maximising remote working from home; schools open 6 days but each child for 4 days so schools only 2/3rds full; wear masks & use straws in pubs.

 

[trebor79]

Not technically one that has been introduced, but I did have to laugh at a Tweet from an MP embedded in the Guardian story on today's briefing:

https://twitter.com/GeraintDaviesMP/status/1308000837164204035

Jeez! He's a bit of a dimwit isn't he? All of those ideas are ridiculous.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Jeez! He's a bit of a dimwit isn't he? All of those ideas are ridiculous.

I think they are all very good ideas, to be honest, other than using straws in pubs which is beyond ridiculous. If pubs are an unmitigatable high risk they will need to close again.

 

[trebor79]

I think they are all very good ideas, to be honest, other than using straws in pubs which is beyond ridiculous. If pubs are an unmitigatable high risk they will need to close again.

Sorry, actually working from home is fine. But schools open 6 days with kids in 4 days:
Where do the extra teachers come from?
Who's doing childcare for teachers children on the days they are at school?
If kids are in 4 days out of 6, then that suggests they are all in for 2 days a week, so what's the point anyway?
Ridiculous!

 

[DelayRepay]

Sorry, actually working from home is fine. But schools open 6 days with kids in 4 days:
Where do the extra teachers come from?
Who's doing childcare for teachers children on the days they are at school?
If kids are in 4 days out of 6, then that suggests they are all in for 2 days a week, so what's the point anyway?
Ridiculous!

I think the suggestion as presented is flawed for the reasons in the quote above.

If we have enough extra teachers to provide an extra day of schooling per week, then why not get mobile classrooms and use these to reduce class sizes? I expect the suggestion above is relying on existing teachers working an extra day each week. They might do this as a one off but I doubt they'd agree to do it it every weekend for the next six months.

 

[island]

Where would we get these alleged “mobile classrooms” from, who would staff them, how would they travel around the place, and where would they be placed for each school?

 

[birchesgreen]

Where would we get these alleged “mobile classrooms” from, who would staff them, how would they travel around the place, and where would they be placed for each school?

I think there is a fleet of mobile classrooms waiting to be deployed, its in a field next to the fleet of rail replacement buses people think can be deployed in a few minutes!

 

[MattA7]

If the risk levels is going back to level 4 doesn’t this automatically mean that a second lockdown is inevitable unfortunately

 

[DB]

If the risk levels is going back to level 4 doesn’t this automatically mean that a second lockdown is inevitable unfortunately

Depends how willing they are to trash the economy even more, and whether they think the magic money tree can fund another furlough scheme. If not then they might have to be a bit more realistic.

 

[trebor79]

If the risk levels is going back to level 4 doesn’t this automatically mean that a second lockdown is inevitable unfortunately

No, lockdown is the level 5 action. Assuming Boris doesn't make something up. Level 4 is "Social distancing continues".