please empty your brain below
|
|
I would assume that someone in the Cabinet Office is tasked with ringing up Stanley Johnson and Dominic Cummings on a daily basis, asking them what they did the previous day and then adjusting the guidelines accordingly.
Jonathan | 05.11.20 - 8:04 a.m. | #
|
|
'Local' might in my case include anywhere in London - just a one hour trip on the train to get there. But those day out trips are more or less out anyway as I could only find a take away lunch and eating that or a picnic lunch outside is hardly on at this time of the year.
davews | 05.11.20 - 8:43 a.m. | #
|
Three "versions" of the rules in five days with at least the last one not being fully in step with the legislation.
We have known for over six months that a second wave was highly probable, so why was there no "oven ready" legislation and matching guidance?
strawbrick | 05.11.20 - 9:15 a.m. | #
|
I read this post on the bus after dropping my car off for a minor repair. Glad to know the fuzz won't be after me. I think.
Based on the traffic going to the garage, lockdown 2 is no lockdown 1.
Andrew Bowden | Homepage | 05.11.20 - 9:26 a.m. | #
|
I'm intrigued that I can and should travel, the inclusion of "should" implying to me that I have to even if I don't want to.
...and meanwhile of course anyone who hung onto that letter from Boris Johnson we all got when this kicked off could think that still applies as we've had no further updates in the same way since.
Andrew S | 05.11.20 - 9:30 a.m. | #
|
I already have a small dilemma. Phone charger broke last night. Replacement is essential. But I can get by for a while by time-sharing my wife's charger. So I think it will wait until travel for another purpose, probably fresh food, takes me near a charger shop. Common sense, but impossible to codify in a rule.
At least I am not in Wales where the charger shelf in Sainsbury's may have been roped off.
Malcolm of Kent | 05.11.20 - 9:31 a.m. | #
|
You have the bear in mind that with all of this, no-one knows what they are doing.
People expect to see a clear, concise and obvious way out of all of this and no such thing exists - the people in power are making this up as they go along and communications are imprecise. People hear what they want to hear, say what they want to say and do what they want to do.
Jimbo | 05.11.20 - 9:54 a.m. | #
|
There cannot be clarity when the situation is not clear.
Why nit pick rules that someone has done their best to make clear?
Read it and then make your own intelligent decisions.
Joho | Homepage | 05.11.20 - 10:10 a.m. | #
|
|
they specifically mention walking, cycling and public transport, but no mention of car driving
Caz | 05.11.20 - 10:12 a.m. | #
|
|
A very good summary. However, I think the guidance is crystal clear compared with that relating to vulnerability and age. If you can make any sense of the section covering greater risk, clinical vulnerability and the age group 60-69 as distinct from 70 plus, you are a far, far better man than I.
Cau1khead | 05.11.20 - 10:18 a.m. | #
|
Travel Guidance is fine until you try to put it into action!
Yesterday I went to the chemist to collect my bi-monthly prescription it wasn't complete, call back on Thursday I was told, went today and it still isn't complete, call back tomorrow they said. So that'll be at least 3 journeys made where only 1 should have been necessary. Not my fault Gov 😕
Kevin Too | 05.11.20 - 10:47 a.m. | #
|
The latest "travel for exercise" guidance seems fair enough as it has to cater for all circumstances. If somebody doesn't live near a proper open space, it would be really harsh to penalise them for driving or taking the bus to somewhere 3 miles away. By contrast me driving (or taking the train) 40 miles away because the scenery is nicer there wouldn't count as "necessary" travel.
It relies on people adhering to the SPIRIT of the wording. If people choose to take the p*ss, that's the fault of the individuals, not the guidance
Mikey C | 05.11.20 - 11:05 a.m. | #
|
Guidance is just content, just like (and usually less interesting) blog posts. That s why we invented legislation.
Govt and agencies have been reminded many times that the only reference for what is legal or not is legislation.
This having been said i would be interested in govt statistics about who reads this , who understands it and who applies it...
Jean Rigoule | 05.11.20 - 11:07 a.m. | #
|
Thanks for the latest update.
I'd been puzzling over whether a "short" journey meant in time or distance.
I could get to my nearest common 4 miles away in just under an hour by bus, or Regent's Park 10 miles away in 30 by tube!
Traffic & pedestrian-wise, Lockdown 2 (Day 1) seems to be more late evening than late morning which is nice for those of us living on a main road!
Cornish Cockney | 05.11.20 - 11:10 a.m. | #
|
|
Having come back from a walk, this 'lockdown' is nothing like last time, plenty of people about, surprising number of elderly, perhaps sitting at home isolating for the limited amount of time they have left on this earth isn't for them.
Still Anon | 05.11.20 - 11:40 a.m. | #
|
|
SO my pre-booked international holiday is essential to my mental health and well being? Plus had I booked it via Ryanair [yikes] they wont refund my money as they are still flying!
Andrew Jarman | 05.11.20 - 12:26 p.m. | #
|
|
DG you are certainly doing a service to historians with all these detailed blogs about the way the Government is trying to deal with the virus. It would be interesting to see what future generations make of our efforts to live in adversity. Anyone who lived through W W 2 must wonder what we've come to now when we can't even all pull together for the common good.
Tones | 05.11.20 - 1:10 p.m. | #
|
|
Probably worth thinking about why the ARP existed before evoking the spirit of WWII.
Andrew Bowden | Homepage | 05.11.20 - 1:18 p.m. | #
|
A contradiction is the encouragement to retain visits to care homes, but while that is essential travel for residents' mental health and wellbeing, is it 'essential' for visitors? If the journey to a Home is also a walk for 'exercise', is a visit now acceptable for all parties?
Applying a universal set of rules in our mixed Society opens up loopholes and inconsistencies. We need 'rules' and 'advice' to help keep Covid at bay, but those strictures appear to be drawn up by people to whom they will never apply - or as in the Barnard's Castle case, knowing no-one will nick them for self-varying those terms.
The reality is that much of this country has developed since 1979 a different type of strongly independent mind-set than before, coupled with inadequate enforcement.
Joel | 05.11.20 - 1:34 p.m. | #
|
Loads of interesting comments here today!
I do question whether what we have at the moment is ‘good law’. Given the detailed, changing and ambiguous guidance, it does not come across as particularly simple or enforceable. Which is worrying, given the scale of the fines that can be issued for ‘breaking the rules’. And the general point of lockdown being that we need to limit social contact as much as possible.
In any case, happy 5th of November!
Sam | 05.11.20 - 1:36 p.m. | #
|
|
Kevin Too, you can arrange for your repeat prescriptions to be delivered. Many pharmacies have a free delivery service.
JohnC | 05.11.20 - 1:45 p.m. | #
|
|
On the return arm of my long circular walk, I did a bit of shopping. Had bags and stuff all ready for this. I place items on counter to pay. Oh dear. I forgot wallet. The shop held my shopping as I went home to get wallet and return using 'essential' transport. If the fuzz have got nothing better to do than monitor all our activities then it will indeed be strange times - no burglaries, no car crime, etc... is what we should all expect.
B | 05.11.20 - 1:57 p.m. | #
|
|
Prescription deliveries suffer the same snag as other deliveries - you have to be in to receive them. Of course if fully locked down then you will be in, but there are still so many reasons for going out.
Malcolm of Kent | 05.11.20 - 3:10 p.m. | #
|
|
Teaching adults in HE I am expected to go into work and do face to face teaching; if I were teaching adults in FE, DfE guidance is to deliver teaching online. Could be exactly the same kinds of students, courses and content ...
Sarah | Homepage | 05.11.20 - 3:19 p.m. | #
|
|
Higher Education - universities and similar places - relies these days on tuition fees. It is claimed that students would not be willing to pay these for online-only tuition. That appears to be the difference.
Malcolm of Kent | 05.11.20 - 4:34 p.m. | #
|
Up to a point, Malcolm - but the govt could have done everyone - universities, staff and students - a favour by telling them to go online before students even left home in September; instead they put universities in a position where they didn't dare do so. Don't forget the reason that universities rely on tuition fees is because successive governments made it so.
Here's my take on the situation.
Sarah | Homepage | 05.11.20 - 7:20 p.m. | #
|
|
Frankly I just can't be bothered to follow this stuff any more. I will just use common sense, keep away from people as far as possible, and restrict myself to West and South Somerset.
Tony (Somerset) | 05.11.20 - 8:33 p.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|