Face coverings compulsory on public transport in England from 15 June

[Bletchleyite]

Agree. Although if we are still being asked to wear face masks in 6 months I'd be concerned.

Of course there's a reasonable chance that wearing them now will reduce the measures needed in 6 months time.

 

[Journeyman]

I think making masks mandatory would be much better if it were linked to the government’s alert levels and their relation to social distancing. So, masks are mandatory at level 4 but once we reach, say, level 3 then take that restriction away.

Out of interest, what’s the take of the railway unions/staff on the ground. Are staff generally for or against?

I've seen rail staff here complain that it causes a lot of problems and discomfort, but they have to do it as management are insisting.

 

[sjpowermac]

How deliciously authoritarian!

Not at all. I use the train to travel to work, masks have been made mandatory, I have a mortgage to pay, I’ll wear a mask. You yourself made a similar argument on the furlough thread.

It’s a genuine ‘good luck’, if people want to try not wearing a mask then I couldn’t care less, that’s their personal choice and not up to me to judge them.

 

[Starmill]

But they aren't. Face coverings are not to benefit the wearer. They are to benefit others. You therefore can't risk assess for yourself, and this is the precise situation where the Government does need to step in.

As a comparison I oppose cycle helmet legislation as these exist to protect the wearer, but I support speed limits because they are primarily to protect others from the misuse of a motor vehicle in a dangerous manner.

Exactly. People cannot do fair risk assessments on Covid-19 spread because individual people cannot quantify the risks of transmission of the disease to others. This is why it should be done by experts, and well communicated policies adopted by governments. There simply isn't an alternative way to keep the risk low. We know for sure that this can work, because it has been done again and again across the world. What we're as yet unsure of is how to best fit it in with what we are more used to.

 

[sjpowermac]

I'm not saying it's scientific, I'm saying there's a body of public opinion that thinks we should be even more limited in what we can do than we are, and a lot of these people are driving the agenda. Did you hear Grant Shapps in the media this morning? He basically said "yeah, we know they don't really do any good, but making people wear masks might make a few people feel better." That is no justification at all, I'm afraid. Must try harder.

There’s also a body of public opinion that says nothing of the sort. There are a great many people just getting on with things and trying their best to get by in the current situation. I can’t provide a link for that either. I have to go to work, masks have been made mandatory, I’ll wear a mask. End of story. There are much more important things the government should be being held to account over, like their ‘world class’ test and trace system that won’t be fully functioning until September...

 

[Bletchleyite]

As an aside (may be justifying of a new thread, but then again maybe not) Matt Hancock has just announced they will be mandatory for hospital outpatients and visitors, and medical-grade masks mandatory for all hospital staff regardless of setting (unless a higher level is required).

 

[Journeyman]

As to what is special about this one, I have no idea. I am too young to remember the Hong Kong flu, but it appears to me that we took virtually no steps against that whatsover and just got on with our lives, though it killed about 80000 people in the UK (equivalent to 100000 at current population levels). Certainly it wasn't a *political* crisis - I've read political diaries of the period and I don't recall it being mentioned *at all*.

True. When my parents were kids in the thirties and forties, diseases like measles, TB, polio, whooping cough and diphtheria killed people in absolutely shocking numbers, yet beyond a few specific isolation measures to keep sufferers away from others, life just went on. That's not even all that long ago.

 

[Journeyman]

There’s also a body of public opinion that says nothing of the sort. There are a great many people just getting on with things and trying their best to get by in the current situation. I can’t provide a link for that either. I have to go to work, masks have been made mandatory, I’ll wear a mask. End of story. There are much more important things the government should be being held to account over, like their ‘world class’ test and trace system that won’t be fully functioning until September...

I completely understand your predicament - my income has plummeted recently - but the threat of destitution still doesn't make this right.

 

[Socanxdis]

will train drivers be required to wear face covering? if so, is it in the cab as well or only during walking to trains/changing ends etc

 

[Journeyman]

will train drivers be required to wear face covering? if so, is it in the cab as well or only during walking to trains/changing ends etc

A lot of rail staff have been told they need to wear them at all times.

 

[mmh]

There are, I see plenty of "we mustn't undo lockdown, they're only doing it for the economy" hot takes. Quite what we'll do without an economy to speak of seems to be lost on them. Oddly they're not screeching for cars to be banned.

The Locktivists terrify me. I hate the phrase "virtue signalling", but this is really what it is.

As for masks, I'm against them because they serve no purpose but I will wear one because, ultimately, there's not a jot of difference I can make to the decision.

Also I see no evidence that those actually in the higher risk categories share the enthusiasm for restrictions. The elderly want to see their families, and the young back to normal. It's an odd grandparent who'd choose to extend their own life at the expense of their grandchildren's. Out and about, the elderly aren't the ones mask wearing, cowering or ignoring people. Those are the young and the unaffected being fearful, or demonstrating "care", on someone else's behalf - an all too common trait in the modern world.

 

[Horizon22]

It will be enforced by the public. If you can successfully make a good proportion of the country view fellow citizens as potential murderers for getting too close in Tesco, there will be a high enough proportion of people policing it themselves that the majority who don't care or actively disagree with masks will wear one in order to avoid confrontation. Like the queue to get inside Tesco, just on steroids.

If the tube is currently anything to go by, there is <20% usage of masks. People on the tube don't confront one another; they stare at their phones.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A lot of rail staff have been told they need to wear them at all times.

Presumably the cab door isn't good enough then? That's silly. No point in a driver wearing one, nor a member of lone-working ticket office staff behind a sheet of glass.

 

[Journeyman]

Presumably the cab door isn't good enough then? That's silly. No point in a driver wearing one, nor a member of lone-working ticket office staff behind a sheet of glass.

Exactly, but they've still been told to do it, presumably because the unions have been jumping up and down.

 

[Starmill]

Presumably the cab door isn't good enough then? That's silly. No point in a driver wearing one, nor a member of lone-working ticket office staff behind a sheet of glass.

It's useful only in so far as it normalises the idea.

I'd like to see the Prime Minister and MPs wearing one. OK might not be able to give much of a speech, and might not actually be that effective in the specific settings, but they need to show some leadership here.

Joe Biden has been pictured with them for weeks.

 

[43066]

Not at all. I use the train to travel to work, masks have been made mandatory, I have a mortgage to pay, I’ll wear a mask. You yourself made a similar argument on the furlough thread.

That argument was rather different. I was simply arguing for a return to the usual status quo. At some point people need to accept that they will need to return to work and continue to provide for themselves. It’s simply unsustainable for the government to continue paying peoples’ wages!

There is something deeply, deeply troubling about a requirement to wear any item of clothing: it’s the thin end of the wedge. Where does it end?

“I have to mortgage to pay, so I’ll wear the Star of David the government has ordered me to.” (1930s Germany)

“I have a mortgage to pay, so I’ll wear the burqa the Taliban has ordered me to.” (21st century Afghanistan).

Is this the way we want the UK to go? Anyone who values living in a free country should be deeply, deeply troubled by the actions of this government over the last few months.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd like to see the Prime Minister and MPs wearing one. OK might not be able to give much of a speech, and might not actually be that effective in the specific settings, but they need to show some leadership here.

Fair point. Interestingly, Matt Hancock is on his own today - I wonder with news this week about infection spreading round the Government again they are being much more cautious.

 

[sjpowermac]

I completely understand your predicament - my income has plummeted recently - but the threat of destitution still doesn't make this right.

Please don’t get me wrong. I’m not a doctor or an epidemiologist, I’ve absolutely no idea if the masks really work or not. From what, as an ordinary person, I’ve read it seems there might be some ‘weak’ evidence for them.

I do take on board your points about ‘what if it’s masks long term’ and I think my suggestion that the government link it to the Covid alert system isn’t such a bad one.

We are currently at level 4 so ‘mask up on the train’ once we get to level 3 ‘masks are no longer required on trains’. At least that would put aside fears that masks might become permanent.

In all of this, I do actually see some of the points you are making. Certainly if they persist with discouraging travel, I can’t see the point in the switch to masks. I don’t drive and so rely on public transport. As such, I’m prepared to accept a bit of discomfort from a mask in order to get my own life a bit more back to normal.

I honestly feel though there are much greater things over which to hold the government to account.

 

[Weekender]

It is clear from here that there are many - shall we say 'misconceptions', about the various measures' intended effect. However this thread is specifically about the mandating of wearing masks to reduce the incidence of persons infecting others whilst using public transport. In that respect, the majority of wearers are fully aware of why masks are being worn (I.e. we are talking about passengers who will mostly be of working age). So as has been noticed in other countries* where the population has complied with requests, there is a case for those travelling in this country to do same.
Controlling (and eradicating) the virus is a national task which relies on the majority of people doing the right thing. Most will, - just as the majority of the population complied with the stay at home requests over 10 weeks, and so it will be on the wearing of face covering on public transport. Those objecting have four choices:
1) stay away (or be stopped when trying) from using public transport
2) if there is a genuine medical resonance for not being able to wear a mask, get verification from a GP
3) wear a mask
4) just keep splitting hairs here, - it won't change the rules but it might give them some self-satisfaction
* see post #285 from xydancer above

On point 2 11% of the population have asthma in varying degrees.
a doctor on BBC news said this morning that at the current time doctors would not have the time to write potentially hundreds of letters

 

[yorksrob]

There really do seem to be some hardcore lockdown fetishists out there who seem to delight in telling us we should all put up with this for years if necessary. I've even seen people advocating martial law, and saying things like only one person per household should be allowed outside. I know that's rather more extreme than being told to wear masks on trains, but I see it as a slippery slope, and any freedoms taken away from us will need a long battle to bring back. The government has to be held accountable for its decisions, and the justification it's come out with so far is absolutely pathetic.

Well, each case on its merits. I personally don't feel that wearing masks is the slippery slope, whereas I do strongly think that being confined to my town of residence for months on end simply because I don't drive, as some on here advocate, definitely would be.

I completely agree with what you’ve put there. It doesn’t make for good headlines to put ‘I’ll be going back to doing the things I enjoy’! If some want to go back to work and yet not enjoy the things you’ve mentioned then leave them to it!

I do think the news media comments pages tend to attract posters who are more strident in their opinions.

 

[johntea]

As an aside (may be justifying of a new thread, but then again maybe not) Matt Hancock has just announced they will be mandatory for hospital outpatients and visitors, and medical-grade masks mandatory for all hospital staff regardless of setting (unless a higher level is required).

So now I have to wear a mask going to work, at work and coming home from work...might as well wear one 24/7! (I work for a hospital but in a non patient area role)

 

[43066]

From what, as an ordinary person, I’ve read it seems there might be some ‘weak’ evidence for them.

I’m in exactly the same position as you: an ordinary person, with no expert knowledge on these matters.

But it strikes me that this government is taking a highly illiberal step, based on *profoundly* weak evidence, quite possibly underpinned by a desire to avoid a fight with the rail unions.

In my view that is not an acceptable basis upon which to introduce such draconian measures.

 

[sjpowermac]

That argument was rather different. I was simply arguing for a return to the usual status quo. At some point people need to accept that they will need to return to work and continue to provide for themselves. It’s simply unsustainable for the government to continue paying peoples’ wages!

There is something deeply, deeply troubling about a requirement to wear any item of clothing: it’s the thin end of the wedge. Where does it end?

“I have to mortgage to pay, so I’ll wear the Star of David the government has ordered me to.” (1930s Germany)

“I have a mortgage to pay, so I’ll wear the burqa the Taliban has ordered me to.” (21st century Afghanistan).

Is this the way we want the UK to go? Anyone who values living in a free country should be deeply, deeply troubled by the actions of this government over the last few months.

So is your suggestion that I rock up at the station on 15th June without a mask?

Or that I call my manager and say ‘I’m sorry but I’m not coming in today because I’m afraid that wearing a mask will one day lead to me having to wear a burqa’?

Perhaps I could have used a similar argument when I worked in retail and had to wear a uniform.

So, what would you advise on June 15th?

 

[Journeyman]

Well, each case on its merits. I personally don't feel that wearing masks is the slippery slope, whereas I do strongly think that being confined to my town of residence for months on end simply because I don't drive, as some on here advocate, definitely would be.

Completely understandable. I love travel, and under normal circumstances I do quite a lot, both for work and pleasure. I'm finding my life pretty miserable without it.

 

[MikeWM]

Anyone who values living in a free country should be deeply, deeply troubled by the actions of this government over the last few months.

I have been, and am still. I'm deeply troubled by the lack of any apparent political opposition too [1]. Have any one of the 650 MPs made any comment against masks, or indeed pretty much anything else apart from the quarantine measures?


[1] Sufficiently so that I'm about to resign my membership of the Labour party over precisely this issue, when I get around to writing the letter in the next few days. Interestingly, the last time I resigned from the Labour party (around 2008) was over civil liberties issues too. Perhaps I need to remember this time that they're not very good at it!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Completely understandable. I love travel, and under normal circumstances I do quite a lot, both for work and pleasure. I'm finding my life pretty miserable without it.

Fortunately I have a car, but even with one I am missing the railway and would rather be able to use it with a mask than not be able to use it, and I'd feel even more strongly on that were I not a car owner.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sufficiently so that I'm about to resign my membership of the Labour party over precisely this issue, when I get around to writing the letter in the next few days. Interestingly, the last time I resigned from the Labour party (around 2008) was over civil liberties issues too. Perhaps I need to remember this time that they're not very good at it!

Labour are not a party of civil liberties, far from it; they are the party of the nanny state. They never have been and never will be. Boris is a libertarian and you can be sure he won't do more than he needs to.

I heard on the grapevine ( ) that the reason masks aren't going into the Coronavirus (Restrictions) Regulations 2020 is that Boris wouldn't let them.

 

[sjpowermac]

I’m in exactly the same position as you: an ordinary person, with no expert knowledge on these matters.

But it strikes me that this government is taking a highly illiberal step, based on *profoundly* weak evidence, quite possibly underpinned by a desire to avoid a fight with the rail unions.

In my view that is not an acceptable basis upon which to introduce such draconian measures.

I do take your point, I honestly do, and I think it would have been much better if masks have to be used to link it with the virus alert level. I also think that publishing the advice on which the decision has been made, however weak it is, would also have been a good idea.

 

[sjpowermac]

I do think the news media comments pages tend to attract posters who are more strident in their opinions.

I agree. On the other hand, railway forums are really the last bastions of calm and considered reasoning

 

[MikeWM]

Labour are not a party of civil liberties, far from it; they are the party of the nanny state. They never have been and never will be. Boris is a libertarian and you can be sure he won't do more than he needs to.

I heard on the grapevine ( ) that the reason masks aren't going into the Coronavirus (Restrictions) Regulations 2020 is that Boris wouldn't let them.

I would have agreed about Boris a few months ago. Indeed initally I was rather pleased he was in charge at this point for precisely that reason. But the evidence over the last few months has not reflected that in the slightest; I strongly hope that you're right in the longer term.

(o/t but on the Labour/civil liberties issue - a big part of the reason I rejoined the party after my utter dismay at the disrespect shown for civil liberties during the Blair/Brown years was due to the respect I had for Jeremy Corbyn on his approach to such issues over many years on the backbenches. Sadly, once he became party leader, his performance on such issues was rather less impressive).