Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Get well soon, Prime Minister

1568101113

Comments

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    I think there's a clause buried in the original rules allowing meetings of two people only not in the same household, so yes you could. Though in practice I imagine that won't happen very much. The 2m rule and the same household rule very clearly haven't changed and people, generally speaking, appear to have been sticking to those so I don't think that will change.

    Basically, the immediate amendments are to allow a lot more outdoor activity provided that people observe the social distancing rules. Beyond that, nothing new - not even the much anticipated garden centres (for English people - though if you live near the Welsh border you may have a get-out clause!) There's then a broad-brush plan for doing various other things, but the Government is unwilling to commit to any further easing unless it is convinced that the prevalence and rate of infection of the disease have been reduced by enough to allow it.

    I don't buy all the whingy-whining about a lack of clarity. All seemed completely clear to me. And yes, I do appreciate that a lot of businesses are in despair because they were looking for firm commitments on dates, but clearly everything is contingent on control of the virus, so I understand why they can't be given what they want.

    I've no time for the complaints about the strategies of the four home nations beginning to diverge a little, either. It's only what we see commonly happening in federal countries like the US and Germany, and differential regulations have also been introduced in Spain and France recently. Fundamentally, you either have devolution or you don't: if everybody must always do the same thing at the same time then that's an argument for doing away with it, is it not?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    It clear the PM has no confidence at all in the app.

    Virtually no mention of test track and trace or technology which would be right up his street.

    So what is actually meant to prevent a second wave? Did I miss it?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    Any particular reason why school teachers can't work through July and August this year?

    Yes. We will have taught our contracted amount of days for the current school year, I suppose they could offer extra pay pro rata but that will cost heavily.
    That won’t necessarily be true in the state sector depending on how they approached opening for key workers although I can see it might be a problem in the private sector.

    I think in your case the really bad news is this 14 day quarantine. That immediately epically buggers any private school that relies on overseas students.

    My concern about working would be that given how brutal the autumn term is anyway it would require a three week holiday at the end of September.
    We’re told that there is still a high level of interest from overseas but the reality I fear will be much different. One of ours who returned hime took nearly a month to get out of two separate quarantines! They haven’t messed about in Asia like we’ve done.

    The phrase was ‘some time with their teachers’, which most schools will take as being very limited, probably with a skeleton staff for a day or two.

    So September it is.
    If I were an international student, I wouldn’t be looking to travel overseas for an education right now. It might be two years before that changes. That’s longer than most boarding schools will survive without them.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited May 2020

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think I just heard Ydoethur and every other secondary school teacher scream.

    Here is my question.

    I’m teaching from home.

    If I go back into school, because they don’t have the necessary tech, I can’t do that.

    So I might be able to teach 12 and 10.

    What happens to 7, 8 and 9?
    I kind of think you are missing the point of what he said.

    The plan is that IF things are still improving then Reception, Year 1 and Year 6 might go back.

    That was it.

    He said something vague about giving Years 10 and 12 some face to face time with teachers but was clear that nothing else would happen until it was safe to do so.

    So the short answer is that in all likelihood the earliest years 7,8 and 9 will go back is September.

    And it is worth saying I think that no one in their right mind would criticise you or any other teacher for saying no if they feel they are being put at risk. But that was not the impression I got from the statement.

    Yes, but my point is that if I have to go back into school, I will have to give up providing online lessons. So it’s fine to provide lessons face to face OR online, but it can’t be both.
    This is exactly what my girlfriend, an FE college teacher, is having to put up with at the moment in Berlin. She started teaching some courses again, and is carrying on with some online teaching. The problem is that the distancing rules means the classes have been split in two, and each student is present only half the days.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    Johnson has invited England to open at will.

    If that isn't his intention he has mangled the message.

    Maybe he has played a blinder. I feel decidedly queasy that what has been indicated will in time be seen as a catastrophic error of judgement.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think I just heard Ydoethur and every other secondary school teacher scream.

    Here is my question.

    I’m teaching from home.

    If I go back into school, because they don’t have the necessary tech, I can’t do that.

    So I might be able to teach 12 and 10.

    What happens to 7, 8 and 9?
    It sounded like all they are thinking about is a transition day or something. This idea of ‘seeing’ their teacher is nonsensical; likely a hastily changed sentence to replace something that fell apart during the talks with unions.

    By the end of June it’s just assemblies (not going to happen), prizegiving (not going to happen), sports days (not going to happen) and concerts (not going to happen) anyway.

    Quite embarrassing, really. If they are this confused over education it makes you question everything else. If they just want to let them see their mates they should have just said that.
    Your school sounds more relaxed than mine. I asked when I first arrived what the programme was for the end of term, and got the answer, ‘the same as every other week until the very last day.’

    And it is.
    When do you break up? Start of July for us.

    Every school I’ve taught in has wound down for the last couple of weeks, that sounds harsh on students to not have those extras. Not even sports days?
    Mid July. And yes, it is hard.

    We do have sports days, but they tend to be more stressful and hard work than fifty year 13 lessons on the Earl of Warwick’s inheritance.
    I wonder if all the key workers kids are going to be miles ahead of everyone else by the time they all go back.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    I disagree strongly with the policy of this government on this issue, as I have posted frequently.

    It seems that some people, where determined to disagree with the government whatever they did. while the government is trying to find a balance between reopening gradually and minimising risk. Most critics seem unsure weather to pile on with, you are taking to many risks, or you are keeping the lock-down to long so are going with, this is too confusing, leaving them open to criticise ether way in the future.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,885

    Carnyx said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I thought devolution was a mistake in 1997 and still think it was.

    I dont have a strong view on devolution, happy to go along with the majority.

    But it is really weird to hear the same people in favour of devolution and localism also complaining that different parts of the country have different policies and outcomes. Isnt that the whole point of it?
    Oh yes - and look at the flat denial of the principle by Alister Jack for instance.

    The apparent conflict arises because in part nobody wants an outbreak next door when they can't close the border. But more generally it arises from the confusion caused by the equation of England = UK in many things, and in media coverage, because the English don't have their own parliament or government an d have the UK government to do it for them.

    Mr Johnson speaks only for English health matters, in principle, but he is also PM of the UK. The changing messaging he is producing is liable to cause confusion as to what is applicable in Scotland, NI and so on.
    Thus, the Government is stuck with managing the ongoing fallout from Blair's dog's breakfast of a devolution settlement.

    But they won't concede the necessity for an English Parliament, so I have absolutely zero sympathy for them.
    OH quite re first point. But, er, just for clarity, which Government please?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036
    OllyT said:

    There was no mention of when shielded oldies can come out of hiding.


    Wasn't anybody on the vulnerable list told 12 weeks at least at the very beginning?
    Text earlier this week said end of June at the earliest.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868
    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    The list of sports is angling, golf and tennis. Not sure you get a lot of social contact with any of those sports, though I think tennis could be a mistake.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    It clear the PM has no confidence at all in the app.

    Virtually no mention of test track and trace or technology which would be right up his street.

    He and I as one on this. It won't work.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    No you could [according to the advice] go out once per day with your household and they were not advising sport even with your household.

    Now they're saying you can go out as much as you want with your household and do sport with your household.

    So the advice has changed. That's not necessarily a change in the law but the law should be the lowest common denominator and the advice should be best practice and its the advice most people are trying to follow, even if its not against the law to be a prat. Its never been illegal to be a prat.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    I think the point is the old rule was supposed you were doing some short directed exercise e.g. run, bike. What they are saying now is if you want to go the park, hang out, kick a ball about, thats ok.

    And they are now saying things like golf, tennis, fishing are ok. They werent before.

    It is all about nudging.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    The list of sports is angling, golf and tennis. Not sure you get a lot of social contact with any of those sports, though I think tennis could be a mistake.
    Don't see why if its restricted to your household.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Do you reckon the stuff about being allowed to meet small family groups was just media speculation or do you reckon the government has rowed back from the idea over the last few days?. That is going to disappoint a great many people, pity it was ever floated.

    I think the presentation was good and the messaging was fairly clear but it was all a bit of an anti-climax. Unless I missed it even the garden centres can't reopen in England.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    I thought the idea behind this announcement was for us to use our judgement more and not rely on literal interpretation of the rules?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    edited May 2020
    Chris said:

    It clear the PM has no confidence at all in the app.

    Virtually no mention of test track and trace or technology which would be right up his street.

    So what is actually meant to prevent a second wave? Did I miss it?
    Gradual easing, aiming to keep R below 1 - with emergency brake if need be.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    DeClare said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think I just heard Ydoethur and every other secondary school teacher scream.

    Here is my question.

    I’m teaching from home.

    If I go back into school, because they don’t have the necessary tech, I can’t do that.

    So I might be able to teach 12 and 10.

    What happens to 7, 8 and 9?
    It sounded like all they are thinking about is a transition day or something. This idea of ‘seeing’ their teacher is nonsensical; likely a hastily changed sentence to replace something that fell apart during the talks with unions.

    By the end of June it’s just assemblies (not going to happen), prizegiving (not going to happen), sports days (not going to happen) and concerts (not going to happen) anyway.

    Quite embarrassing, really. If they are this confused over education it makes you question everything else. If they just want to let them see their mates they should have just said that.
    Your school sounds more relaxed than mine. I asked when I first arrived what the programme was for the end of term, and got the answer, ‘the same as every other week until the very last day.’

    And it is.
    When do you break up? Start of July for us.

    Every school I’ve taught in has wound down for the last couple of weeks, that sounds harsh on students to not have those extras. Not even sports days?
    Mid July. And yes, it is hard.

    We do have sports days, but they tend to be more stressful and hard work than fifty year 13 lessons on the Earl of Warwick’s inheritance.
    I wonder if all the key workers kids are going to be miles ahead of everyone else by the time they all go back.
    That’s rather assuming they are still working on content under specialist guidance. My experience suggests this is a bold assumption. Before I was switched to WFH precisely for the reasons I’ve just outlined, I was essentially running a baby-sitting service. I seemed mostly to be refereeing impromptu football games, which was interesting as I’ve never understood the offside rule.

    What we should all be pondering is how much further behind those on FSM will have fallen. They won’t be able to access lessons for the most part, and even if they could they will be suffering from if not malnourishment certainly severe hunger. This could leave a very nasty scar.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225

    I have seen a woman sunbathing in a secluded corner of the Botanic Garden in Edinburgh (sheltered from the wind).
    It’s not quite attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion, but it has a certain rough poetry.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    edited May 2020
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    The list of sports is angling, golf and tennis. Not sure you get a lot of social contact with any of those sports, though I think tennis could be a mistake.
    But how many people can participate? The current SI says you can associate with two people.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675
    Boris was working his undoubted communication skills to the limit to sell that plan. Will it work?

    Either way it was a pretty sobering broadcast. The economy and public finances must be in a truly dire state.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    I think the point is the old rule was supposed you were doing some short directed exercise e.g. run, bike. What they are saying now is if you want to go the park, hang out, kick a ball about, thats ok.

    And they are now saying things like golf, tennis, fishing are ok. They werent before.

    It is all about nudging.
    Personally, I believe in the rule of law not the rule of ministerial dictat. I appreciate that may be an outlier belief.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    Tennis, but no doubles.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    It clear the PM has no confidence at all in the app.

    Virtually no mention of test track and trace or technology which would be right up his street.

    He talked about tracking localised hotspots, so it's still part of the strategy.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102
    I suspect in parts of Wales especially near the border Drakeford will be ignored
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    I wasn't saying it was. I was saying it is standard criticism by public figures who don't like Boris.

    They always go but but but this is far too confusing for the public to understand. They said the same at the start of the lockdown and the public showed they understood.
    I think the WFH/retired groups might be surprised how much of the country is actually going to work. The pubs, high street shops etc are a large part of employment, but not the majority.

    Incredible though it may seem, to people from London, going to work in the car is a standard, everyday thing for many (most?) of people who work in this country. Hence the incomprehension at the War On The Car that is standard political belief at the national level.

    My theory on the increasing car usage we have been seeing, is a steady movement back to work.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250
    edited May 2020
    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    Any particular reason why school teachers can't work through July and August this year?

    Yes. We will have taught our contracted amount of days for the current school year, I suppose they could offer extra pay pro rata but that will cost heavily.
    That won’t necessarily be true in the state sector depending on how they approached opening for key workers although I can see it might be a problem in the private sector.

    I think in your case the really bad news is this 14 day quarantine. That immediately epically buggers any private school that relies on overseas students.

    My concern about working would be that given how brutal the autumn term is anyway it would require a three week holiday at the end of September.
    We’re told that there is still a high level of interest from overseas but the reality I fear will be much different. One of ours who returned hime took nearly a month to get out of two separate quarantines! They haven’t messed about in Asia like we’ve done.

    The phrase was ‘some time with their teachers’, which most schools will take as being very limited, probably with a skeleton staff for a day or two.

    So September it is.
    How many places have overseas campuses?

    Some independent Schools do, and so do some UK Universities.

    University of Nottingham has a 5000 student campus in Malaysia, and an 8000 one in China.

    Hmm.

    Some wriggle room to build new local facilities, especially as Nottm target the Chinese.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    OllyT said:

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Do you reckon the stuff about being allowed to meet small family groups was just media speculation or do you reckon the government has rowed back from the idea over the last few days?. That is going to disappoint a great many people, pity it was ever floated.

    I think the presentation was good and the messaging was fairly clear but it was all a bit of an anti-climax. Unless I missed it even the garden centres can't reopen in England.
    Number of infections is still too high and sure Germany scares government. Couple of weeks of relaxations and having to row back a bit.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    I hope everyone is being alert.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    Jonathan said:

    Boris was working his undoubted communication skills to the limit to sell that plan. Will it work?

    Either way it was a pretty sobering broadcast. The economy and public finances must be in a truly dire state.

    The broadcast in full:
    We need you to head out and generate taxes. If you're not doing that stay at home, or on a park bench.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    The list of sports is angling, golf and tennis. Not sure you get a lot of social contact with any of those sports, though I think tennis could be a mistake.
    But how many people can participate? The current SI says you can associate with two people.
    Probably the same, golf with one or two other people, singles tennis and angling isn't a sport you do with other people anyway.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    I think the point is the old rule was supposed you were doing some short directed exercise e.g. run, bike. What they are saying now is if you want to go the park, hang out, kick a ball about, thats ok.

    And they are now saying things like golf, tennis, fishing are ok. They werent before.

    It is all about nudging.
    With people inside or outside your household?

    Looking forward to seeing the SI.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    I hope everyone is being alert.

    That starts on Wed. ;)
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    I`ve just had an argument with my wife over this - and we`ve watched the relevant part of the broadcast four times.

    My understanding is that you can go out in your car and visit who you like - parks, whatever - as long as you socially distance with risk of increased fine if you do not.

    My wife thought he meant you can do all of that but only with members of your household (note, household, not family).

    Dunno.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    edited May 2020
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    The list of sports is angling, golf and tennis. Not sure you get a lot of social contact with any of those sports, though I think tennis could be a mistake.
    But how many people can participate? The current SI says you can associate with two people.
    Probably the same, golf with one or two other people, singles tennis and angling isn't a sport you do with other people anyway.
    The restriction on fishing was always bonkers. There's little to no social element in any angling I've ever observed in the same way that sunbathing can encourage others.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    I think the point is the old rule was supposed you were doing some short directed exercise e.g. run, bike. What they are saying now is if you want to go the park, hang out, kick a ball about, thats ok.

    And they are now saying things like golf, tennis, fishing are ok. They werent before.

    It is all about nudging.
    With people inside or outside your household?

    Looking forward to seeing the SI.
    Fishing is exercise?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think I just heard Ydoethur and every other secondary school teacher scream.

    Here is my question.

    I’m teaching from home.

    If I go back into school, because they don’t have the necessary tech, I can’t do that.

    So I might be able to teach 12 and 10.

    What happens to 7, 8 and 9?
    It sounded like all they are thinking about is a transition day or something. This idea of ‘seeing’ their teacher is nonsensical; likely a hastily changed sentence to replace something that fell apart during the talks with unions.

    By the end of June it’s just assemblies (not going to happen), prizegiving (not going to happen), sports days (not going to happen) and concerts (not going to happen) anyway.

    Quite embarrassing, really. If they are this confused over education it makes you question everything else. If they just want to let them see their mates they should have just said that.
    Your school sounds more relaxed than mine. I asked when I first arrived what the programme was for the end of term, and got the answer, ‘the same as every other week until the very last day.’

    And it is.
    When do you break up? Start of July for us.

    Every school I’ve taught in has wound down for the last couple of weeks, that sounds harsh on students to not have those extras. Not even sports days?
    Mid July. And yes, it is hard.

    We do have sports days, but they tend to be more stressful and hard work than fifty year 13 lessons on the Earl of Warwick’s inheritance.
    That seems an excessive amount of time devoted to one topic.

    Large inheritance though, I suppose.
    You don’t control half of England and large chunks of Wales without causing massive confusion.
    Works for the current incumbent of No10.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    Stocky said:

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    I`ve just had an argument with my wife over this - and we`ve watched the relevant part of the broadcast four times.

    My understanding is that you can go out in your car and visit who you like - parks, whatever - as long as you socially distance with risk of increased fine if you do not.

    My wife thought he meant you can do all of that but only with members of your household (note, household, not family).

    Dunno.
    The independent agrees with your wife:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/uk-lockdown-end-boris-johnson-ease-social-distancing-pubs-picnics-sunbathing-a9503921.html
  • ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    edited May 2020
    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    Any particular reason why school teachers can't work through July and August this year?

    Yes. We will have taught our contracted amount of days for the current school year, I suppose they could offer extra pay pro rata but that will cost heavily.
    That won’t necessarily be true in the state sector depending on how they approached opening for key workers although I can see it might be a problem in the private sector.

    I think in your case the really bad news is this 14 day quarantine. That immediately epically buggers any private school that relies on overseas students.

    My concern about working would be that given how brutal the autumn term is anyway it would require a three week holiday at the end of September.
    We’re told that there is still a high level of interest from overseas but the reality I fear will be much different. One of ours who returned hime took nearly a month to get out of two separate quarantines! They haven’t messed about in Asia like we’ve done.

    The phrase was ‘some time with their teachers’, which most schools will take as being very limited, probably with a skeleton staff for a day or two.

    So September it is.
    If I were an international student, I wouldn’t be looking to travel overseas for an education right now. It might be two years before that changes. That’s longer than most boarding schools will survive without them.
    Pretty much all non teaching staff are furloughed and I expect that they will continue that through the summer. I wonder if the % furlough cost is decreased if we will furlough teaching staff as well to make more savings. It makes sense when you think about it,

    So we have no catering, no real premises staff, no cleaning, nothing much in the way of matronic staff. For a few days here and there I don’t think they are going to unfurlough them, so there is no real school to go to. Now I’m thinking through it, the sheer mucked uppery of this becomes clearer, it’s as though he wanted to say something different but didn’t have practical to say (is this what they call virtue signalling, making a show of something without actually backing it up? It’s not a term I’ve ‘got’ before but, if so, this seems to be it!)
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    I thought the idea behind this announcement was for us to use our judgement more and not rely on literal interpretation of the rules?
    Indeed and if a boyfriend visits a girlfriend I doubt the Police are going to be bothered but the government aren't going to advise that.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    Stocky said:

    Chris said:

    It clear the PM has no confidence at all in the app.

    Virtually no mention of test track and trace or technology which would be right up his street.

    So what is actually meant to prevent a second wave? Did I miss it?
    Gradual easing, aiming to keep R below 1 - with emergency brake if need be.
    So just basically easing and hoping for the best? And going back to a lockdown when R rises above 1?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    Pulpstar said:

    Jonathan said:

    Boris was working his undoubted communication skills to the limit to sell that plan. Will it work?

    Either way it was a pretty sobering broadcast. The economy and public finances must be in a truly dire state.

    The broadcast in full:
    We need you to head out and generate taxes. If you're not doing that stay at home, or on a park bench.
    What`s wrong with that? Crikey, we need some taxes raising, and fast.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    Any particular reason why school teachers can't work through July and August this year?

    Yes. We will have taught our contracted amount of days for the current school year, I suppose they could offer extra pay pro rata but that will cost heavily.
    That won’t necessarily be true in the state sector depending on how they approached opening for key workers although I can see it might be a problem in the private sector.

    I think in your case the really bad news is this 14 day quarantine. That immediately epically buggers any private school that relies on overseas students.

    My concern about working would be that given how brutal the autumn term is anyway it would require a three week holiday at the end of September.
    We’re told that there is still a high level of interest from overseas but the reality I fear will be much different. One of ours who returned hime took nearly a month to get out of two separate quarantines! They haven’t messed about in Asia like we’ve done.

    The phrase was ‘some time with their teachers’, which most schools will take as being very limited, probably with a skeleton staff for a day or two.

    So September it is.
    If I were an international student, I wouldn’t be looking to travel overseas for an education right now. It might be two years before that changes. That’s longer than most boarding schools will survive without them.
    Pretty much all non teaching staff are furloughed and I expect that they will continue that through the summer. I wonder if the % is decreased if they will furlough teaching staff as well to make more savings. It makes sense when you think about it,

    So we have no catering, no real premises staff, no cleaning, nothing much in the way of matronic staff. For a few days here and there I don’t think they are going to unfurlough them, so there is no real school to go to. Now I’m thinking through it, the sheer mucked uppery of this becomes clearer, it’s as though he had to say something different but didn’t have anything useful to add (is this what they call virtue signalling, making a show of something without actually backing it up? It’s not a term I’ve ‘got’ before but, if so, this seems to be it!)
    You can’t furlough people who are on holiday. It’s a loophole in the system that is also going to cause private schools massive headaches over the summer holiday when most of them are on the edge financially anyway.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222

    I hope everyone is being alert.

    Alert as fuck, given the number of posts on here in the last hour.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250
    edited May 2020

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    I wasn't saying it was. I was saying it is standard criticism by public figures who don't like Boris.

    They always go but but but this is far too confusing for the public to understand. They said the same at the start of the lockdown and the public showed they understood.
    I think the WFH/retired groups might be surprised how much of the country is actually going to work. The pubs, high street shops etc are a large part of employment, but not the majority.

    Incredible though it may seem, to people from London, going to work in the car is a standard, everyday thing for many (most?) of people who work in this country. Hence the incomprehension at the War On The Car that is standard political belief at the national level.

    My theory on the increasing car usage we have been seeing, is a steady movement back to work.
    Yes - that's just London Parochials being themselves. We know that happens with everything and that outside the M25 does not exist. (He said helpfully).

    I wonder about retail, such as Garden Centres.

    And has not the WAG already announced that you can go to Garden Centres in Wales from tomorrow?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370
    stodge said:


    Chin up. From what I can see if you are in England you are free to almost do as you please.

    I never thought this time yesterday that in all but name it would be over by tonight in England.

    Johnson is a lucky politician. I hope for all our sakes that remains the case,. Today will be Johnson's defining moment, I believe he has taken a massive
    gamble. If he has got it wrong many people will die unnecessarily.

    I am shellshocked at how quickly he has moved.

    You must have listened to a very different speech to me. Perhaps you should read it:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-address-to-the-nation-on-coronavirus-10-may-2020

    The big issue is going to be the inability of a public transport system to manage social distancing. If construction sites are re-opening that will immediately have an impact on passenger numbers on the Underground in London but presumably people will just get on what tubes that are running and hope for the best.

    Many construction sites in London are already operating - social distancing etc on site. I know people in the business.

    The construction workers, in general, used to start much earlier and end earlier - this was to avoid the rush hour of commuters.

    If you look at who was on the trains, not many construction workers were on the 8:25. By that time they would be already on site.

    Rush hour is/was created by office workers and those working in jobs created by/supporting office work.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    You may not agree with what Boris said but to say his speech was confusing is a bit daft
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    I suspect in parts of Wales especially near the border Drakeford will be ignored

    For some Johnson trumps Drakeford and those individuals will consider lockdown in Wales over too. Just ridiculous

    For once I feel Drakeford will be on the right side of history. Even though I was expecting Boris to unlock throughout today I am stunned.

    United Kingdom? My arse!
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    I thought the idea behind this announcement was for us to use our judgement more and not rely on literal interpretation of the rules?
    Indeed and if a boyfriend visits a girlfriend I doubt the Police are going to be bothered but the government aren't going to advise that.
    They might shine their torch in the car window though ...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Scott_xP said:
    That doesn't seem like a U-turn. Sensible if neither country are experiencing high infection rates, like NZ and Australia.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370
    MattW said:

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    I wasn't saying it was. I was saying it is standard criticism by public figures who don't like Boris.

    They always go but but but this is far too confusing for the public to understand. They said the same at the start of the lockdown and the public showed they understood.
    I think the WFH/retired groups might be surprised how much of the country is actually going to work. The pubs, high street shops etc are a large part of employment, but not the majority.

    Incredible though it may seem, to people from London, going to work in the car is a standard, everyday thing for many (most?) of people who work in this country. Hence the incomprehension at the War On The Car that is standard political belief at the national level.

    My theory on the increasing car usage we have been seeing, is a steady movement back to work.
    Yes - that's just London Parochials being themselves. We know that happens with everything and that outside the M25 does not exist. He said helpfully.

    I wonder about retail, such as Garden Centres.
    A Green friend (of the water melon type) has just worked out what social distancing means for public transport.

    A part filled train is much less efficient than the same number in electric cars.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Apparently recommendation on masks coming this week.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    This is the new fifth test, as the Prime Minister put it today:

    “And last, we must make sure that any measures we take do not force the reproduction rate of the disease - the R - back up over one, so that we have the kind of exponential growth we were facing a few weeks ago.“
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119

    Apparently recommendation on masks coming this week.

    Not recommendation, "advice".
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675
    That was about the economy, not the virus.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868
    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    That doesn't seem like a U-turn. Sensible if neither country are experiencing high infection rates, like NZ and Australia.
    Yes, but there isn't any transparency over this, what if Donald gives Boris a call and asks for US travellers to get a free pass? What was the criteria used to allow people travelling from France not to have to do the quarantine?
  • ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    MattW said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    Any particular reason why school teachers can't work through July and August this year?

    Yes. We will have taught our contracted amount of days for the current school year, I suppose they could offer extra pay pro rata but that will cost heavily.
    That won’t necessarily be true in the state sector depending on how they approached opening for key workers although I can see it might be a problem in the private sector.

    I think in your case the really bad news is this 14 day quarantine. That immediately epically buggers any private school that relies on overseas students.

    My concern about working would be that given how brutal the autumn term is anyway it would require a three week holiday at the end of September.
    We’re told that there is still a high level of interest from overseas but the reality I fear will be much different. One of ours who returned hime took nearly a month to get out of two separate quarantines! They haven’t messed about in Asia like we’ve done.

    The phrase was ‘some time with their teachers’, which most schools will take as being very limited, probably with a skeleton staff for a day or two.

    So September it is.
    How many places have overseas campuses?

    Some independent Schools do, and so do some UK Universities.

    University of Nottingham has a 5000 student campus in Malaysia, and an 8000 one in China.

    Hmm.

    Some wriggle room to build new local facilities, especially as Nottm target the Chinese.
    *Everyone* targets the Chinese.

    I think there was going to be a push in Malaysia/Thailand but I imagine that’s gone now,
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,708
    I don't think garden centres were mentioned by Boris.

    But presumably they are opening from Wed - was strongly trailed on TV news today.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    That doesn't seem like a U-turn. Sensible if neither country are experiencing high infection rates, like NZ and Australia.
    Probably it's pointless applying quarantine to anyone except Brazilians and perhaps Americans and Russians, as we probably have higher infection rates than everyone else.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    ydoethur said:

    Stocky said:

    TOPPING said:

    Okay I think I've got the logic fail.

    You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?

    If so, then the lockdown is over.

    I`ve just had an argument with my wife over this - and we`ve watched the relevant part of the broadcast four times.

    My understanding is that you can go out in your car and visit who you like - parks, whatever - as long as you socially distance with risk of increased fine if you do not.

    My wife thought he meant you can do all of that but only with members of your household (note, household, not family).

    Dunno.
    The independent agrees with your wife:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/uk-lockdown-end-boris-johnson-ease-social-distancing-pubs-picnics-sunbathing-a9503921.html
    My wife heard him say this: “You can sit in the sun in your local park, you can drive to other destinations, you can even play sports but only with members of your own household.”

    I heard him say this: “You can sit in the sun in your local park, you can drive to other destinations. You can even play sports (but only with members of your own household).”
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250
    edited May 2020

    MattW said:

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    I wasn't saying it was. I was saying it is standard criticism by public figures who don't like Boris.

    They always go but but but this is far too confusing for the public to understand. They said the same at the start of the lockdown and the public showed they understood.
    I think the WFH/retired groups might be surprised how much of the country is actually going to work. The pubs, high street shops etc are a large part of employment, but not the majority.

    Incredible though it may seem, to people from London, going to work in the car is a standard, everyday thing for many (most?) of people who work in this country. Hence the incomprehension at the War On The Car that is standard political belief at the national level.

    My theory on the increasing car usage we have been seeing, is a steady movement back to work.
    Yes - that's just London Parochials being themselves. We know that happens with everything and that outside the M25 does not exist. He said helpfully.

    I wonder about retail, such as Garden Centres.
    A Green friend (of the water melon type) has just worked out what social distancing means for public transport.

    A part filled train is much less efficient than the same number in electric cars.
    That used to be an argument used by the Association of British Drivers - that n people in cars were less polluting than n people in buses. Never mind the empty trains driving around London in the evenings I used to watch from my window.

    Presumably black cabs will come back first as they have customer screens.

    I think the traffic droop for cars has been to about 40%, which has never seemed that low.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    That doesn't seem like a U-turn. Sensible if neither country are experiencing high infection rates, like NZ and Australia.
    Yes, but there isn't any transparency over this, what if Donald gives Boris a call and asks for US travellers to get a free pass? What was the criteria used to allow people travelling from France not to have to do the quarantine?
    I guess that will be announced/discussed tomorrow?
  • ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    Any particular reason why school teachers can't work through July and August this year?

    Yes. We will have taught our contracted amount of days for the current school year, I suppose they could offer extra pay pro rata but that will cost heavily.
    That won’t necessarily be true in the state sector depending on how they approached opening for key workers although I can see it might be a problem in the private sector.

    I think in your case the really bad news is this 14 day quarantine. That immediately epically buggers any private school that relies on overseas students.

    My concern about working would be that given how brutal the autumn term is anyway it would require a three week holiday at the end of September.
    We’re told that there is still a high level of interest from overseas but the reality I fear will be much different. One of ours who returned hime took nearly a month to get out of two separate quarantines! They haven’t messed about in Asia like we’ve done.

    The phrase was ‘some time with their teachers’, which most schools will take as being very limited, probably with a skeleton staff for a day or two.

    So September it is.
    If I were an international student, I wouldn’t be looking to travel overseas for an education right now. It might be two years before that changes. That’s longer than most boarding schools will survive without them.
    Pretty much all non teaching staff are furloughed and I expect that they will continue that through the summer. I wonder if the % is decreased if they will furlough teaching staff as well to make more savings. It makes sense when you think about it,

    So we have no catering, no real premises staff, no cleaning, nothing much in the way of matronic staff. For a few days here and there I don’t think they are going to unfurlough them, so there is no real school to go to. Now I’m thinking through it, the sheer mucked uppery of this becomes clearer, it’s as though he had to say something different but didn’t have anything useful to add (is this what they call virtue signalling, making a show of something without actually backing it up? It’s not a term I’ve ‘got’ before but, if so, this seems to be it!)
    You can’t furlough people who are on holiday. It’s a loophole in the system that is also going to cause private schools massive headaches over the summer holiday when most of them are on the edge financially anyway.
    So not teaching staff but office staff, finance, some catering and all of the premises staff would normally be working, so they can be furloughed can’t they?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225

    MattW said:

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    I wasn't saying it was. I was saying it is standard criticism by public figures who don't like Boris.

    They always go but but but this is far too confusing for the public to understand. They said the same at the start of the lockdown and the public showed they understood.
    I think the WFH/retired groups might be surprised how much of the country is actually going to work. The pubs, high street shops etc are a large part of employment, but not the majority.

    Incredible though it may seem, to people from London, going to work in the car is a standard, everyday thing for many (most?) of people who work in this country. Hence the incomprehension at the War On The Car that is standard political belief at the national level.

    My theory on the increasing car usage we have been seeing, is a steady movement back to work.
    Yes - that's just London Parochials being themselves. We know that happens with everything and that outside the M25 does not exist. He said helpfully.

    I wonder about retail, such as Garden Centres.
    A Green friend (of the water melon type) has just worked out what social distancing means for public transport.

    A part filled train is much less efficient than the same number in electric cars.
    Well Tesla had the best selling car in the UK last month....

    All 650 of them.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370
    edited May 2020
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    I wasn't saying it was. I was saying it is standard criticism by public figures who don't like Boris.

    They always go but but but this is far too confusing for the public to understand. They said the same at the start of the lockdown and the public showed they understood.
    I think the WFH/retired groups might be surprised how much of the country is actually going to work. The pubs, high street shops etc are a large part of employment, but not the majority.

    Incredible though it may seem, to people from London, going to work in the car is a standard, everyday thing for many (most?) of people who work in this country. Hence the incomprehension at the War On The Car that is standard political belief at the national level.

    My theory on the increasing car usage we have been seeing, is a steady movement back to work.
    Yes - that's just London Parochials being themselves. We know that happens with everything and that outside the M25 does not exist. He said helpfully.

    I wonder about retail, such as Garden Centres.
    A Green friend (of the water melon type) has just worked out what social distancing means for public transport.

    A part filled train is much less efficient than the same number in electric cars.
    That used to be an argument used by the Association of British Drivers - that n people in cars were less polluting than n people in buses. Never mind the empty trains driving around London in the evenings I used to watch from my window.

    Presumably black cabs will come back first as they have customer screens.
    Black cabs are operating at the moment. Very few customers.

    For the social control type Greens, this is a nightmare.

    On buses - when Priuses first came in, a cab company, in a rural area came up with a an innovative bid for public transport. They could provide a get-little-old-ladies-to-the-town-and-back service, with a massively more frequent service, with less CO2 emission per mile etc. The Greens on the council torpedoes the idea on the basis BusDoublePlusGood.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
    Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.

    You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    edited May 2020

    This is the new fifth test, as the Prime Minister put it today:

    “And last, we must make sure that any measures we take do not force the reproduction rate of the disease - the R - back up over one, so that we have the kind of exponential growth we were facing a few weeks ago.“

    That is a much more stringent test than the previous formulation based on not overwhelming the NHS. Difficult to believe that any significant relaxation will fail to raise R above 1.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675
    The comms for this have been backwards.

    Leaks to and analysis in press
    PM ministerial broadcast
    Debate in parliament

    Should be the other way around. Would have been clearer.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102

    I suspect in parts of Wales especially near the border Drakeford will be ignored

    For some Johnson trumps Drakeford and those individuals will consider lockdown in Wales over too. Just ridiculous

    For once I feel Drakeford will be on the right side of history. Even though I was expecting Boris to unlock throughout today I am stunned.

    United Kingdom? My arse!
    Here in the North, Cardiff and Drakeford are out of touch and irrelevant hence the big conservative gains. Many feel closer to Cheshire and Lancashire and are likely to ignore Drakeford who will be kicked out of office next April
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Away from politics tried a new type of pizza today. I created my own pizza base made out of just grated cauliflower, grated Parmesan cheese and an egg. Topped with pizza suace, more Parmesan cheese, ham, tenderstem broccoli, olives and of course pineapple.

    Was really nice the cauliflower base worked, though had to eat it with a knife and fork as the cauliflower base hadn't dried out enough to be held up.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Chris said:

    This is the new fifth test, as the Prime Minister put it today:

    “And last, we must make sure that any measures we take do not force the reproduction rate of the disease - the R - back up over one, so that we have the kind of exponential growth we were facing a few weeks ago.“

    That is a much more stringent test than the previous formulation based on not overwhelming the NHS. Difficult to believe that any significant relaxation will fail to raise R above 1.
    It might be the most important thing said today.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,708
    After today I can't see Starmer beating Boris in a GE.

    Forget all policies and all details - none of that matters. As always it will come down to very big picture and general impressions.

    I think result of GE will depend entirely on whether Boris is still PM.

    If Boris fights next GE, he beats Starmer.

    Any other Con leader and Starmer probably PM in Hung parliament.

    Only caveat would be if Con can again pull off trick of new leader just before GE who gets honeymoon. But I think unlikely Boris resigns just before a 2024 GE. He either goes within first half of this Parliament or he lasts to GE.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Away from politics tried a new type of pizza today. I created my own pizza base made out of just grated cauliflower, grated Parmesan cheese and an egg. Topped with pizza suace, more Parmesan cheese, ham, tenderstem broccoli, olives and of course pineapple.

    Was really nice the cauliflower base worked, though had to eat it with a knife and fork as the cauliflower base hadn't dried out enough to be held up.

    You can put anything on pizza. Just don’t let @Cyclefree catch you.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
    Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.

    You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
    A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225

    Apparently recommendation on masks coming this week.

    Not recommendation, "advice".
    I haven’t seen the paper, as it hasn’t yet been published, but interesting.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says/amp
    ... This comes despite Japan having no lockdown, still-active subways, and many businesses that have remained open—reportedly including karaoke bars, although Japanese citizens and industries are practicing social distancing where they can. Nor have the Japanese broadly embraced contact tracing, a practice by which health authorities identify someone who has been infected and then attempt to identify everyone that person might have interacted with—and potentially infected. So how does Japan do it?

    “One reason is that nearly everyone there is wearing a mask,” said De Kai, an American computer scientist with joint appointments at UC Berkeley’s International Computer Science Institute and at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is also the chief architect of an in-depth study, set to be released in the coming days, that suggests that every one of us should be wearing a mask—whether surgical or homemade, scarf or bandana—like they do in Japan and other countries, mostly in East Asia. This formula applies to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence (occasional mask refuseniks) as well as every other official who routinely interacts with people in public settings. Among the findings of their research paper, which the team plans to submit to a major journal: If 80% of a closed population were to don a mask, COVID-19 infection rates would statistically drop to approximately one twelfth the number of infections—compared to a live-virus population in which no one wore masks....


  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Scott_xP said:
    The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
    Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.

    You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
    I understand that. Shit happens.
  • MaxPB said:

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
    Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.

    You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
    A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
    You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205

    This is the new fifth test, as the Prime Minister put it today:

    “And last, we must make sure that any measures we take do not force the reproduction rate of the disease - the R - back up over one, so that we have the kind of exponential growth we were facing a few weeks ago.“

    It's a good 5th test actually.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,932

    Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
    I relay - it’s not particularly my view.

    My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
    Johnson has invited England to open at will.

    If that isn't his intention he has mangled the message.

    Maybe he has played a blinder. I feel decidedly queasy that what has been indicated will in time be seen as a catastrophic error of judgement.
    It is hard not to imagine Boris intended a more portentous address when this was first scheduled but that something has intervened to change his mind, perhaps Germany, but to avoid losing face by cancellation, he went through the motions.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    Chris said:

    This is the new fifth test, as the Prime Minister put it today:

    “And last, we must make sure that any measures we take do not force the reproduction rate of the disease - the R - back up over one, so that we have the kind of exponential growth we were facing a few weeks ago.“

    That is a much more stringent test than the previous formulation based on not overwhelming the NHS. Difficult to believe that any significant relaxation will fail to raise R above 1.
    It might be the most important thing said today.
    I just don't see how it's possible to come out of lockdown - or even halfway out - without R going above 1. Unless there are sufficiently many people who will continue to lock themselves down voluntarily.

    I thought the plan before - if there was a plan - was to get the numbers down far enough that after lockdown we could have a few months' respite before they went back up again.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    MaxPB said:

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
    Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.

    You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
    A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
    You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
    Yes the lockdown sucks and sucks more for some people than others.

    The alternative is exponential growth of the virus and letting hundreds of thousands die.

    So pick your poison. Which would you prefer?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Nigelb said:

    Apparently recommendation on masks coming this week.

    Not recommendation, "advice".
    I haven’t seen the paper, as it hasn’t yet been published, but interesting.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says/amp
    ... This comes despite Japan having no lockdown, still-active subways, and many businesses that have remained open—reportedly including karaoke bars, although Japanese citizens and industries are practicing social distancing where they can. Nor have the Japanese broadly embraced contact tracing, a practice by which health authorities identify someone who has been infected and then attempt to identify everyone that person might have interacted with—and potentially infected. So how does Japan do it?

    “One reason is that nearly everyone there is wearing a mask,” said De Kai, an American computer scientist with joint appointments at UC Berkeley’s International Computer Science Institute and at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is also the chief architect of an in-depth study, set to be released in the coming days, that suggests that every one of us should be wearing a mask—whether surgical or homemade, scarf or bandana—like they do in Japan and other countries, mostly in East Asia. This formula applies to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence (occasional mask refuseniks) as well as every other official who routinely interacts with people in public settings. Among the findings of their research paper, which the team plans to submit to a major journal: If 80% of a closed population were to don a mask, COVID-19 infection rates would statistically drop to approximately one twelfth the number of infections—compared to a live-virus population in which no one wore masks....


    I know the government have been vague on this (clearly not wanting repeat of bog roll stockpiling), but shocked to see how few people wear one here
    in the UK. It seems one of the easiest things you can do and there is not really any downside.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222

    Stocky said:

    This is the elephant in the room: the government clearly want folk back at work, except for in certain areas e.g. pubs, restaurants, retail etc. But what isn`t clear is how fast the furlough payments stop when they do. It sounded to me like "should" go back to work still implies choice. If it is a choice between 1) going back to work and losing furlough to be replaced by wages again, or 2) staying at home and continuing draw 80% from the government, then why go back to work?

    I would assume because furlough is the choice of the company not the individual workers. So if a company decides that some of its staff can return then they would no longer have the choice of furlough. Ity is exactly how things were done when furlough started with many companies sending a percentage of their workforce home but keeping the rest working.
    Yes - you`ve made my point for me. So ABC Ltd start operating again, employee X goes back to work, back to normal. Employee Y says "no, I`m not going back to work". So (presumably, and in my view regretably) Y continues to receive his 80/100% for staying at home off the back of his employer`s application for payment.

    So people choose Y.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,206
    BigRich said:

    I disagree strongly with the policy of this government on this issue, as I have posted frequently.

    It seems that some people, where determined to disagree with the government whatever they did. while the government is trying to find a balance between reopening gradually and minimising risk. Most critics seem unsure weather to pile on with, you are taking to many risks, or you are keeping the lock-down to long so are going with, this is too confusing, leaving them open to criticise ether way in the future.
    Yep. I think the government policy is wrong in many ways. I think we should be trying to isolate the NHS and care environment (where the Covid problem is) from the rest of the low risk public (which isn't the problem), rather than having a blanket policy of reducing public interaction.
    However I'm not complaining that Johnson wasn't clear. He was perfectly clear, any normal adult should have been able to understand what he was saying (even if I did lol a bit at the 3.5 bit).
    I didn't like a lot of what he had to say, but that is a different thing entirely.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
    The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
    Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.

    You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
    A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
    You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
    I know I'd hate it and you have my sympathies. Unfortunately it's going to be July at the earliest before friends and family are part of the equation. That's assuming people aren't complete dickheads and start partying on beaches and raise the R above 1.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,932
    edited May 2020
    ydoethur said:

    DeClare said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    ukpaul said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think I just heard Ydoethur and every other secondary school teacher scream.

    Here is my question.

    I’m teaching from home.

    If I go back into school, because they don’t have the necessary tech, I can’t do that.

    So I might be able to teach 12 and 10.

    What happens to 7, 8 and 9?
    It sounded like all they are thinking about is a transition day or something. This idea of ‘seeing’ their teacher is nonsensical; likely a hastily changed sentence to replace something that fell apart during the talks with unions.

    By the end of June it’s just assemblies (not going to happen), prizegiving (not going to happen), sports days (not going to happen) and concerts (not going to happen) anyway.

    Quite embarrassing, really. If they are this confused over education it makes you question everything else. If they just want to let them see their mates they should have just said that.
    Your school sounds more relaxed than mine. I asked when I first arrived what the programme was for the end of term, and got the answer, ‘the same as every other week until the very last day.’

    And it is.
    When do you break up? Start of July for us.

    Every school I’ve taught in has wound down for the last couple of weeks, that sounds harsh on students to not have those extras. Not even sports days?
    Mid July. And yes, it is hard.

    We do have sports days, but they tend to be more stressful and hard work than fifty year 13 lessons on the Earl of Warwick’s inheritance.
    I wonder if all the key workers kids are going to be miles ahead of everyone else by the time they all go back.
    That’s rather assuming they are still working on content under specialist guidance. My experience suggests this is a bold assumption. Before I was switched to WFH precisely for the reasons I’ve just outlined, I was essentially running a baby-sitting service. I seemed mostly to be refereeing impromptu football games, which was interesting as I’ve never understood the offside rule.

    What we should all be pondering is how much further behind those on FSM will have fallen. They won’t be able to access lessons for the most part, and even if they could they will be suffering from if not malnourishment certainly severe hunger. This could leave a very nasty scar.
    Key workers' children going to school might make a difference, especially for the younger age groups, to relationships. When normality returns, some non-key children might be hurt to find their best friends have made new best friends.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675
    Pulpstar said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
    The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses
    will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the
    workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
    So the cleaners, receptionists and facilities teams should come into work tomorrow, the office workers should stay put.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    Nigelb said:

    Apparently recommendation on masks coming this week.

    Not recommendation, "advice".
    I haven’t seen the paper, as it hasn’t yet been published, but interesting.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says/amp
    ... This comes despite Japan having no lockdown, still-active subways, and many businesses that have remained open—reportedly including karaoke bars, although Japanese citizens and industries are practicing social distancing where they can. Nor have the Japanese broadly embraced contact tracing, a practice by which health authorities identify someone who has been infected and then attempt to identify everyone that person might have interacted with—and potentially infected. So how does Japan do it?

    “One reason is that nearly everyone there is wearing a mask,” said De Kai, an American computer scientist with joint appointments at UC Berkeley’s International Computer Science Institute and at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is also the chief architect of an in-depth study, set to be released in the coming days, that suggests that every one of us should be wearing a mask—whether surgical or homemade, scarf or bandana—like they do in Japan and other countries, mostly in East Asia. This formula applies to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence (occasional mask refuseniks) as well as every other official who routinely interacts with people in public settings. Among the findings of their research paper, which the team plans to submit to a major journal: If 80% of a closed population were to don a mask, COVID-19 infection rates would statistically drop to approximately one twelfth the number of infections—compared to a live-virus population in which no one wore masks....


    I know the government have been vague on this (clearly not wanting repeat of bog roll stockpiling), but shocked to see how few people wear one here
    in the UK. It seems one of the easiest things you can do and there is not really any downside.
    I think it's very plausible that the major route of transmission could be large droplets when people talk face-to-face, and masks could have a dramatic effect on that.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Jonathan said:

    That was about the economy, not the virus.

    They're related.
  • Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.

    As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.

    Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
    Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
    Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
    Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
    They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
    Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.

    Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
    Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.

    Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
    No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.

    Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
    There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
    Says the person living with a loving family.
    Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
    Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.

    You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
    I understand that. Shit happens.
    Why are you so rude?
This discussion has been closed.