22nd February - Roadmap out of the pandemic, lifting of restrictions.

[6862]

Exam-orientated years possibly every week but if we send all kids back in a fortnight the R rate and cases (if not so much deaths) will increase again.

And why would this be such a problem that we should destroy the future of an entire generation even further?

 

[DB]

Exam-orientated years possibly every week but if we send all kids back in a fortnight the R rate and cases (if not so much deaths) will increase again.

But as has been repeatedly pointed out, once a large proportion of those at particualar risk have been vaccinated, so what if infections increase?

 

[Richard Scott]

Exam-orientated years possibly every week but if we send all kids back in a fortnight the R rate and cases (if not so much deaths) will increase again.

So what if cases increase? What is the obsession with case numbers; majority of vulnerable are vaccinated or been advised to isolate, when are these kids going to be allowed to live their lives? They've given up a lot for this and it must stop now, paranoia over case numbers also needs to stop.

 

[HSTEd]

Given the extension of furlough, I doubt there will be any relaxation of restrictions before August.

 

[bramling]

Given the extension of furlough, I doubt there will be any relaxation of restrictions before August.

My money’s on mid-July for stuff like hospitality. BJ no doubt thinks that giving the masses a holiday somewhere like Scarborough and a bit of discount dining during July and August will be enough.

 

[Huntergreed]

Exam-orientated years possibly every week but if we send all kids back in a fortnight the R rate and cases (if not so much deaths) will increase again.

And the problem with that is what exactly, given that, as you've stated, this won't cause more deaths?

 

[6862]

Given the extension of furlough, I doubt there will be any relaxation of restrictions before August.

I think it's all beginning to look rather like we will be in lockdown ('Tier 2 or 3 mininum) all year, with possible relaxation briefly over the summer (perhaps national Tier 2), then lockdown again next winter and removal of all restrictions taking at least another year.

 

[HSTEd]

I think it's all beginning to look rather like we will be in lockdown ('Tier 2 or 3 mininum) all year, with possible relaxation briefly over the summer (perhaps national Tier 2), then lockdown again next winter and removal of all restrictions taking at least another year.

It's pretty clear if lockdown continues after total vaccination is complete, it will never end.

This is just the way we live now.

 

[Bantamzen]

How about the Government finally implementing what I have advocated since summer:

Every other year at school every other week. Until at least May, with a full return in early June for the final push to the summer holidays.

You cannot be serious? I will say to you what I have said to others.

Schools are not just about cramming information into kids.

 

[6862]

Deleted - none of what I'm posting is helpful to anyone and I will no longer be posting. Sorry to all.

 

[Deepgreen]

"Roadmap" - yet another modern pointless use of a word (by Johnson in this case) inappropriately to describe what is actually just a 'plan'. The media love to invent new terms for perfectly good existing ones - 'ramp up', 'up tick', etc. Language evolution is one thing, but it should encompass a slicker meaning in doing so. And another thing...

 

[NorthOxonian]

Yes, this is it. We will never again be allowed to do the things we love, perhaps most importantly seeing family or friends.

That's hyperbolic in the extreme. The government are going much too slow but do you really think they'll just never ease restrictions? What do they stand to gain from doing that? And even if they wanted to, all that would happen is the next general election would be a bloodbath and a new Prime Minister would scrap the regulations within days.

 

[6862]

That's hyperbolic in the extreme. The government are going much too slow but do you really think they'll just never ease restrictions? What do they stand to gain from doing that? And even if they wanted to, all that would happen is the next general election would be a bloodbath and a new Prime Minister would scrap the regulations within days.

Yes, I think it's a very likely outcome. Can you give me a watertight reason why they would ease restrictions? As I've said countless times before, all they need to do is maintain the status quo, not introduce anything new. Maintaining something they have already done is far easier than introducing something new.

 

[DB]

Yes, I think it's a very likely outcome. Can you give me a watertight reason why they would ease restrictions? As I've said countless times before, all they need to do is maintain the status quo, not introduce anything new. Maintaining something they have already done is far easier than introducing something new.

Money.

They simply cannot carry on indefinitely on the current trajectory, or anything like it.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Yes, I think it's a very likely outcome. Can you give me a watertight reason why they would ease restrictions? As I've said countless times before, all they need to do is maintain the status quo, not introduce anything new. Maintaining something they have already done is far easier than introducing something new.

Because if they don't, then they'll certainly lose their jobs at the next election (or worse, they'll be overthrown). You also have to remember Boris Johnson has a huge ego - do you think he wants to go down in history as the man who banned social contact for years and utterly destroyed British society?

 

[py_megapixel]

As horrid as this predicament is, I would gladly spend another month in lockdown if it would guarantee the death, or at least the fading into the background, of the Tory party for the forseeable future

(Of course, I know such things can't actually be guaranteed, but if they could....)

 

[DB]

As horrid as this predicament is, I would gladly spend another month in lockdown if it would guarantee the death, or at least the fading into the background, of the Tory party for the forseeable future

(Of course, I know such things can't actually be guaranteed, but if they could....)

They'd be replaced by Labour though, who would then impose even more restrictions!

 

[Richard Scott]

As horrid as this predicament is, I would gladly spend another month in lockdown if it would guarantee the death, or at least the fading into the background, of the Tory party for the forseeable future

(Of course, I know such things can't actually be guaranteed, but if they could....)

Ok wouldn't, as much as I dislike present government the alternative is even worse unfortunately.

 

[6862]

Deleted - none of what I'm posting is helpful to anyone and I will no longer be posting. Sorry to all.

 

[MikeWM]

Because if they don't, then they'll certainly lose their jobs at the next election (or worse, they'll be overthrown). You also have to remember Boris Johnson has a huge ego - do you think he wants to go down in history as the man who banned social contact for years and utterly destroyed British society?

I think that is pretty much guaranteed anyway. If the human race continues in any recognisable form, historians in 50 years from now are going to be astounded as what has been done over the last year in response to what is a not-particularly-significant pandemic. It will go down along with witch trials and tulips as a time when the population succumbed to mass hysteria. And our leaders will deservedly take a good deal of the blame for stoking it.

 

[Tomp94]

He's already banned social contact for almost a year (admittedly it was permissable in many areas of the country briefly during this year, although it has never been permissable in places such as Leicester). A couple more years/decades/permanently is not out of the question now he has set the precedent for it.

Exactly.


And given that all a government needs in order to do whatever it wants is to spread fear, and given that this country never votes for anyone other than the Tories, Labour or Lib Dems, all of which support lockdown and restrictions, who's to say that this shower won't go on indefinitely?

 

[py_megapixel]

Ok wouldn't, as much as I dislike present government the alternative is even worse unfortunately.

At the moment, maybe. But in the future, I'd rather have a left-wing government who should favour raising taxes to pay for all of this, rather than a right-wing one who will presumably prefer austerity and, I fear, ignoring the issue of climate change.

 

[londonteacher]

How about the Government finally implementing what I have advocated since summer:

Every other year at school every other week. Until at least May, with a full return in early June for the final push to the summer holidays.

Quite simply no. As a teacher I can tell you that is even more disruptive than remote learning. All primary school children back on the 8th, with key year groups in secondary returning also.
Other year groups should return after the Easter holidays.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Quite simply no. As a teacher I can tell you that is even more disruptive than remote learning. All primary school children back on the 8th, with key year groups in secondary returning also.
Other year groups should return after the Easter holidays.

If "after the Easter holidays" means on the 19th of April then fine. That's only five weeks before the May half term anyway

And the problem with that is what exactly, given that, as you've stated, this won't cause more deaths?

Our stupid Government have cases on the brain, even though we know that it doesn't always correlate to deaths.

 

[Yew]

Exam-orientated years possibly every week but if we send all kids back in a fortnight the R rate and cases (if not so much deaths) will increase again.

Does that matter, we've vaccinated loads of people now...

 

[londonteacher]

Does that matter, we've vaccinated loads of people now...

Yes it does. The more children who are asymptomatic could potentially pass on the virus to the school staff. Not enough staff in to safely run a class, classes go home. Classes go home, education disrupted. Children at home, parents unable to work.

The number of people vaccinated in my school staff wise is below 5.

 

[DB]

Yes it does. The more children who are asymptomatic could potentially pass on the virus to the school staff. Not enough staff in to safely run a class, classes go home. Classes go home, education disrupted. Children at home, parents unable to work.

The number of people vaccinated in my school staff wise is below 5.

So in order to avoid some possible disruption in some cases, it's necessary to impose certain disruption on everyone?

That is in line with government thinking, I suppose...

 

[londonteacher]

So in order to avoid some possible disruption in some cases, it's necessary to impose certain disruption on everyone?

That is in line with government thinking, I suppose...

It's a choice between disruption with less than 24 hours notice or a planned disruption.

I am an advocate for all children being in for their mental health and education despite.

 

[Richard Scott]

At the moment, maybe. But in the future, I'd rather have a left-wing government who should favour raising taxes to pay for all of this, rather than a right-wing one who will presumably prefer austerity and, I fear, ignoring the issue of climate change.

Can you pay my tax as well then please? I'd rather not as just about manage now.

Yes it does. The more children who are asymptomatic could potentially pass on the virus to the school staff. Not enough staff in to safely run a class, classes go home. Classes go home, education disrupted. Children at home, parents unable to work.

The number of people vaccinated in my school staff wise is below 5.

No it doesn't, staff that are vulnerable should be isolating and rest should be at next to no risk.

 

[py_megapixel]

Can you pay my tax as well then please? I'd rather not as just about manage now.

I won't be paying anyone else's taxes - that's not even remotely what I suggested.
It doesn't even have to be income tax raises for most of the population; adjusting the system so that large corporations (such as Amazon) and the ultra-rich pay more tax would be ideal.

Well, not ideal necessarily, but a damn sight better than any alternative I can think of.