Coronavirus.

[yorksrob]

It is de facto rationing, as the notion of one exercise per day is to stop everyone doing it all at once and overwhelming public spaces. Otherwise there’s no reason for it to be there.

I get that you’re unhappy having to rely on public transport, I sympathise to at least some extent. However people need to realise that there are people working quite simply to keep the most basic cogs of our society turning, and that *has* to take priority. There’s social media for conversing with friends and family, nowadays this can be done visually as well as audibly. For virtually all of the population this is the first time ever we’ve seen curtailments of our liberty, and there’s quite clearly good reasons for doing it. Many other countries are in the same boat, some more tightly locked down than us. It really isn’t *that* bad a deal being asked to stay at home as far as possible, compared to those who are playing Russian roulette with a relatively unknown virus simply to keep the processes going which ultimately do things like keep food on *your* table.

My point about rationing is that there's no control over when people take their daily exercise etc. It's hardly surprising if everyone turns up in the same place - people aren't all knowing and they don't know what everyone else is planning to do.

If the transition from lockdown to normality is going to take a long time, there is no reason why some controlled provision of public transport can't be made, for some limited leisure purposes to those with no alternative.

 

[bramling]

My point about rationing is that there's no control over when people take their daily exercise etc. It's hardly surprising if everyone turns up in the same place - people aren't all knowing and they don't know what everyone else is planning to do.

If the transition from lockdown to normality is going to take a long time, there is no reason why some controlled provision of public transport can't be made, for some limited leisure purposes to those with no alternative.

There is a reason - key workers will kick off. They already did, and it’s a part of the reason we have the lockdown now. Boris was already doing the social distancing to flatten the curve, the lockdown came in after “that” weekend.

Why do you think a part of the press conference is dedicated to that graph showing usage of all the transport modes? There’s been a *massive* amount of work behind the scenes to drive down public transport use to enable social distancing to be possible. That simply isn’t going to be undone for as long as social distancing is in place. Leisure use of public transport simply isn’t on the list of priorities, and isn’t going to be for the foreseeable.

Yes this will probably put you at a disadvantage compared to those with cars. No doubt the government would ideally like to drive down some elements of car use too, but it isn’t a priority as it isn’t generally getting in the way of social distancing or inhibiting key workers from getting to work.

I’m afraid you’re going to have to come to accept it for the time being.

 

[Chester1]

My point about rationing is that there's no control over when people take their daily exercise etc. It's hardly surprising if everyone turns up in the same place - people aren't all knowing and they don't know what everyone else is planning to do.

If the transition from lockdown to normality is going to take a long time, there is no reason why some controlled provision of public transport can't be made, for some limited leisure purposes to those with no alternative.

Rationing indicates some kind of system for allocation, which would be totally impractical. I suspect it will simply just be a case of loosening the travel restrictions for private transport but retaining them for public transport i.e. during a lesser lockdown if people want to drive somewhere then that is their choice but they will be fined if they board a train or bus for a non essential reason. I don't drive and it would be irritating to see other people regain more freedom, but I would certainly accept such a distinction to allow better social distancing for workers who can't travel by car.

I suspect many key workers would start to have difficulty doing their jobs if more people don't go back to work soon. My own area of work has an indirect supporting role for key public services and will start to damage their capacity if left with a very skeleton in office staff for long. Relatively few jobs can be left for several months without damaging something more important. There are probably a few million people who will need to go back to work in the next month or so to keep things running.

6 weeks is probably the limit of the sustainability of the current lockdown in a complex modern, democratic country. Risks will have to be taken during May. The vast majority of low risk people will need to go back to work, some limited socialising allowed but significant restrictions still in place. Its a careful balance but there are clear boundaries that can be put in place e.g. no use of public transport for non essential travel. Leisure travel by car can be limited by continuing closures of car parks. Foot and mouth style closures of some public space and national parks would be a good idea. I think most people will be able to understand the difference between a slight loosening and returning to normal.

 

[yorksrob]

Rationing indicates some kind of system for allocation, which would be totally impractical.

Well, we managed it for food, and that was before the advent of computerisation.

 

[Chester1]

Well, we managed it for food, and that was before the advent of computerisation.

The government knew that the war would probably last for years (if UK won). We are talking about measures during one or maybe two stages of a health crisis. Limiting use of public transport for a matter of weeks, or at most months, doesn't require building an administrative system to ration it. All it needs is a ban on non essential journeys by public transport, same as now, but with higher passenger numbers as low risk people return to work. Thats likely to put social distancing under strain, with zero leisure travel.

 

[yorksrob]

The government knew that the war would probably last for years (if UK won). We are talking about measures during one or maybe two stages of a health crisis. Limiting use of public transport for a matter of weeks, or at most months, doesn't require building an administrative system to ration it. All it needs is a ban on non essential journeys by public transport, same as now, but with higher passenger numbers as low risk people return to work. Thats likely to put social distancing under strain, with zero leisure travel.

I'd say it depends on how many months, particularly if we're not able to use public transport all the while social distancing is in force.

 

[bramling]

Rationing indicates some kind of system for allocation, which would be totally impractical. I suspect it will simply just be a case of loosening the travel restrictions for private transport but retaining them for public transport i.e. during a lesser lockdown if people want to drive somewhere then that is their choice but they will be fined if they board a train or bus for a non essential reason. I don't drive and it would be irritating to see other people regain more freedom, but I would certainly accept such a distinction to allow better social distancing for workers who can't travel by car.

I suspect many key workers would start to have difficulty doing their jobs if more people don't go back to work soon. My own area of work has an indirect supporting role for key public services and will start to damage their capacity if left with a very skeleton in office staff for long. Relatively few jobs can be left for several months without damaging something more important. There are probably a few million people who will need to go back to work in the next month or so to keep things running.

6 weeks is probably the limit of the sustainability of the current lockdown in a complex modern, democratic country. Risks will have to be taken during May. The vast majority of low risk people will need to go back to work, some limited socialising allowed but significant restrictions still in place. Its a careful balance but there are clear boundaries that can be put in place e.g. no use of public transport for non essential travel. Leisure travel by car can be limited by continuing closures of car parks. Foot and mouth style closures of some public space and national parks would be a good idea. I think most people will be able to understand the difference between a slight loosening and returning to normal.

Agree with all this.

Getting some of the more important working population back will be far more of a priority than leisure travel. Having said that, many of these are presumably already still at work, or I suppose working at home and probably turning out a reduced skeletal output?

The family day out to Brighton beach is unfortunately going to be off the agenda for quite a while I think, by train at least.

 

[JamesT]

I was very, very surprised he fluffed a question with such an obvious answer! Unless he doesn't want to admit it to himself...

Isn’t it because there actually isn’t a mechanism for this situation? Raab is merely chairing meetings and hasn’t had Boris’s authority delegated to him. Hopefully no major decisions that would normally go the PM will come up until he’s recovered.

 

[Chester1]

Agree with all this.

Getting some of the more important working population back will be far more of a priority than leisure travel. Having said that, many of these are presumably already still at work, or I suppose working at home and probably turning out a reduced skeletal output?

The family day out to Brighton beach is unfortunately going to be off the agenda for quite a while I think, by train at least.

It will need to be more than "the more important workers" in the next few weeks, it will need to be everyone who is low risk who can be persuaded or coerced back into work. There is a lot of sentiment about lives before money, often by people who recently said "austerity kills". A depression would inevitably mean huge cuts in public service funding down the line, which combined with the inevitable link between unemployment and suicides would mean many deaths.

A skeletal staff and work from home will only sustain some organisations for a limited period of time either financially or practically. All non essential public sector workers have been sent home but many do work that must be done in the medium term because it supports the work of the absolutely essential public sector staff. Its one thing to send them home for 4-6 weeks and another for months. Most public sector contingency plans will assume disruption for days or weeks and will start to fail.

 

[Cowley]

Evening everyone.

We’ve decided to lock this thread as it’s become a bit of a drifting ‘Master Thread’ on Coronavirus...
It’s probably best to use the many existing threads from now on because virtually everything is covered by them and if there’s any gaps then feel free to start new threads on those subjects.
It makes it a bit more manageable for us to keep the various subjects separated. Hopefully you’ll understand.
Thanks all, and thanks for all your input in the various areas.