Face coverings compulsory on public transport in England from 15 June

[mmh]

I suspect the "clever" people on social media pointing out the different legal situation in different countries of the UK aren't anywhere near as clever as they think. Like other differences, for example minimum alcohol pricing, it will never be tested in court. If it becomes a problem, all that will happen is it will become law in Scotland and Wales after a suitable length of time[*]. If they're against the law, they should argue against it, but unfortunately there is a trend of some in both Scotland and Wales obsessing over being different rather than reasons for being different or not. (And I say that as someone considering standing for councillor for the Welsh National Party, so not from anti-devolution sentiment.)

[*] 3 or so days is usually enough to maintain a veneer of independence.

 

[Killingworth]

Picture sent by a friend. Might work? Uncomfortable though.

 

[nlogax]

Picture sent by a friend. Might work? Uncomfortable though.

I have some absolute gems of a similar sort, though probably far less suitable for this forum

 

[Skymonster]

Legal, but not useful for the intended purpose.

And so we go round and round in circles, because yet again the regulations appear to be unfit for purpose. That in itself illustrates that the whole thing in more for theatre than anything.

 

[Journeyman]

And so we go round and round in circles, because yet again the regulations appear to be unfit for purpose. That in itself illustrates that the whole thing in more for theatre than anything.

Absolutely. I could wear an ill-fitting tea towel which will do no good at all, and people who wear masks with valves could be sending highly directed streams of virus out with some force.

It's all extremely stupid.

 

[Bantamzen]

And so we go round and round in circles, because yet again the regulations appear to be unfit for purpose. That in itself illustrates that the whole thing in more for theatre than anything.

Absolutely. I could wear an ill-fitting tea towel which will do no good at all, and people who wear masks with valves could be sending highly directed streams of virus out with some force.

It's all extremely stupid.

Indeed, its all for show so a few people can consider themselves "heros" for being mask-compliant....

 

[BJames]

I stood in my town for a while today and watched quite a few buses go by, to see what level of compliance we had of face coverings on buses (all TfL operated). I would estimate compliance to be between 60-75% on average. There was certainly nothing like this 100% of people wearing face coverings that people on here have experienced.

Incredibly annoyingly, they've not removed the caps of people on buses: 20 on double decker, 10 on double-doored single deckers and 8 on single-door single deckers. So the increase of shoppers means that about 75% of buses going past had "BUS FULL" signs on. This isn't good and it's not going to work. The limits need to allow more people on buses now that coverings are compulsory.

Also a full zero people waiting for the train at my local station which is outdoors were wearing coverings before they boarded the train. I can't imagine any bylaw that TfL tries to enforce about having to wear masks on outdoor Overground stations going down too well.

 

[PupCuff]

Incredibly annoyingly, they've not removed the caps of people on buses: 20 on double decker, 10 on double-doored single deckers and 8 on single-door single deckers. So the increase of shoppers means that about 75% of buses going past had "BUS FULL" signs on. This isn't good and it's not going to work. The limits need to allow more people on buses now that coverings are compulsory.

It's worth considering too that limiting the number of people on buses will simply cause crowding at bus stops (no doubt many are in restricted in waiting space due to their location) if people arrive at the stop but then cannot board the bus.

 

[Journeyman]

Indeed, its all for show so a few people can consider themselves "heros" for being mask-compliant....

This is exactly the sort of unjustifiable social pressure that will potentially make "no mask, no entry" rules widespread for a very long time. The civil liberties implications are alarming.

 

[Weekender]

That is what is termed a conspiracy theory, which are invariably nonsense. Is the tin-foil hat comfortable?




This is a discussion forum and, subject to Forum policy etc, I will post what I wish, thank you, whether you or anyone else happens to request it or not.



They are not. Check the figures for the past few days, they are staying pretty constant now (i.e. R=1, pretty much), so it won't take much to have them shooting back up - even the WHO has said as much, and this was quite remarkable as I believe it's the first time they have commented on a specific country's measures so they are clearly concerned too. Without other measures, we will not be able to ease anything else, and track and trace is clearly an utter sham in its implementation - nowhere near invasive and investigatory enough to work, and does nothing more than what you could do by ringing your mates and your boss yourself. I would rather wear a mask on the train and in the supermarket and get beer gardens back open, for instance.

If the WHO have said this it would be very foolish to suggest relaxing the Social Distancing

 

[Skymonster]

Incredibly annoyingly, they've not removed the caps of people on buses: 20 on double decker, 10 on double-doored single deckers and 8 on single-door single deckers. So the increase of shoppers means that about 75% of buses going past had "BUS FULL" signs on. This isn't good and it's not going to work. The limits need to allow more people on buses now that coverings are compulsory.

The travelling public have effectively been forced to give ground (on masks) but have got no concessions in return, added to which more people are travelling now more shops are open, making the current situation more onerous than what went before. Clearly this is nonsense - the government need to get a grip and start properly managing the relaxation.

 

[Journeyman]

The travelling public have effectively been forced to give ground (on masks) but have got no concessions in return, added to which more people are travelling now more shops are open, making the current situation more onerous than what went before. Clearly this is nonsense - the government need to get a grip and start properly managing the relaxation.

There were plenty of advocates of masks on here assuring us it would allow increased capacity. I very much doubt it'll happen.

 

[adc82140]

If the WHO have said this it would be very foolish to suggest relaxing the Social Distancing

That WHO quote is from an interview with the Guardian. Not a public proclamation. I've said this a lot today- deaths, hospitalisations and ITU occupancy are falling. The UK doesn't have a special kind of Covid that's worse than the rest of Europe. France is celebrating the easing of lockdown. Why is the UK frightened of its own shadow?

 

[Journeyman]

That WHO quote is from an interview with the Guardian. Not a public proclamation. I've said this a lot today- deaths, hospitalisations and ITU occupancy are falling. The UK doesn't have a special kind of Covid that's worse than the rest of Europe. France is celebrating the easing of lockdown. Why is the UK frightened of its own shadow?

The Guardian and its readers seem very fiercely opposed to any easing of the lockdown at all, so there's an agenda to their coverage.

 

[adc82140]

The Guardian and its readers seem very fiercely opposed to any easing of the lockdown at all, so there's an agenda to their coverage.

I'm no fan of this government, but the Guardian's agenda seems to be to whip up opposition to any decision they make, no matter what it is.

 

[Journeyman]

I'm no fan of this government, but the Guardian's agenda seems to be to whip up opposition to any decision they make, no matter what it is.

Completely. You can see there's genuine disappointment when the deaths fall, because it robs them of an opportunity to be outraged.

 

[Huntergreed]

That WHO quote is from an interview with the Guardian. Not a public proclamation. I've said this a lot today- deaths, hospitalisations and ITU occupancy are falling. The UK doesn't have a special kind of Covid that's worse than the rest of Europe. France is celebrating the easing of lockdown. Why is the UK frightened of its own shadow?

My prediction would be that there's three main reasons for this:

1 - The fear driven messaging which was initially used made out that 'this big bad virus is here to kill us all', and we now have a terrified population. The government did not foresee how effective this form of messaging would be and are now reluctant to ease restrictions, simply due to the fact that the population don't feel 'safe', and if the government are, in the public eye, placing the population in danger, then all trust for that government will be lost.

2 - The 'pro-lockdown' army are exceptionally vocal, just take a scroll down facebook comments on a news article. I found these ones within five minutes in the comments section of a BBC article which demonstrates just how strongly they feel:

IT IS FAR TOO EARLY TO OPEN UP SHOPS. Tories are using this virus as an excuse to kill off the population. If we start going outside now, we'll spread the disease and we'll all be lying in intensive care in a fortnight. I don't think shops should open until a vaccine

I can't beleeve BJ is opening up Primark again. There's still 100's dieieing every day and it's far too dangerous to go to work nvm shop for clothes. We need to lockdown again, or this is the end of life in UK

(The grammar quality within this one in particular suggests to me the author doesn't have a fully developed understanding of the situation).

The level of vocality displayed will be taken by the government as the view from the 'general public', so they have a perception that we all want to live in our own little 2m box for the next 2 years.

3 - The government are taking their own advice, 'guided by the science', far too literally, by being guided purely by medical scientists and epidemiologists. I would like to think that the government are getting an all round opinion from experts in various sectors (economists, psychologists, behavioural scientists, medical scientists), but I have a hunch they are only listening to Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance, who are trained to always err on the side of caution without considering the economic or social implications of the restrictions that they advise.

 

[mmh]

They are not. Check the figures for the past few days, they are staying pretty constant now (i.e. R=1, pretty much), so it won't take much to have them shooting back up - even the WHO has said as much, and this was quite remarkable as I believe it's the first time they have commented on a specific country's measures so they are clearly concerned too.

Last week you shared Donald Trump's scepticism over the WHO, what's changed since to make you value their comments?

I said they'd probably change their mind *tomorrow*! They're outperforming themselves on this one.

Seriously though, the WHO aren't doing very well at this, are they?

I don't like to back up the Donald, but I think he did have a point about them.

 

[Journeyman]

My prediction would be that there's three main reasons for this:

1 - The fear driven messaging which was initially used made out that 'this big bad virus is here to kill us all', and we now have a terrified population. The government did not foresee how effective this form of messaging would be and are now reluctant to ease restrictions, simply due to the fact that the population don't feel 'safe', and if the government are, in the public eye, placing the population in danger, then all trust for that government will be lost.

The government have admitted they laid it on thick with the doom-mongering initially because they didn't expect anywhere near the level of public compliance they actually got. They also have no exit strategy.

 

[Bikeman78]

2 - The 'pro-lockdown' army are exceptionally vocal, just take a scroll down facebook comments on a news article. I found these ones within five minutes in the comments section of a BBC article which demonstrates just how strongly they feel:



(The grammar quality within this one in particular suggests to me the author doesn't have a fully developed understanding of the situation).

Frightening isn't it. There's thousands of similar comments. On the plus side, the person in your example does know how to use an apostrophe correctly

 

[Skymonster]

If the WHO have said this it would be very foolish to suggest relaxing the Social Distancing

WHO advice was always 1m, not 2m. They are duplicitous and disingenuous if they are now suggesting we should not relax from 2m to 1m. On that basis alone their credibility is suspect.

 

[al78]

The Guardian and its readers seem very fiercely opposed to any easing of the lockdown at all, so there's an agenda to their coverage.

Utter rubbish. Guardian readers, like any other readers, are as adversely affected by the lockdown as anyone else and are just as likely to want it over.

 

[adc82140]

My prediction would be that there's three main reasons for this:

1 - The fear driven messaging which was initially used made out that 'this big bad virus is here to kill us all', and we now have a terrified population. The government did not foresee how effective this form of messaging would be and are now reluctant to ease restrictions, simply due to the fact that the population don't feel 'safe', and if the government are, in the public eye, placing the population in danger, then all trust for that government will be lost.

2 - The 'pro-lockdown' army are exceptionally vocal, just take a scroll down facebook comments on a news article. I found these ones within five minutes in the comments section of a BBC article which demonstrates just how strongly they feel:



(The grammar quality within this one in particular suggests to me the author doesn't have a fully developed understanding of the situation).

The level of vocality displayed will be taken by the government as the view from the 'general public', so they have a perception that we all want to live in our own little 2m box for the next 2 years.

I never take much notice of the people who inhabit bottom half of the internet. Google a few Dave Gorman "found poems" if you want some entertainment at their expense.

My answer to the lockdown enthusiasts is that nobody's stopping them from staying at home for the next year, two years, whatever they want. Just keep out of everyone else's business.

 

[Journeyman]

Utter rubbish. Guardian readers, like any other readers, are as adversely affected by the lockdown as anyone else and are just as likely to want it over.

Have you read any of the comments on there recently? About 80% think we should be under much stricter conditions, and some seem to equate going shopping for non-essentials to a war crime.

 

[scarby]

My prediction would be that there's three main reasons for this:

1 - The fear driven messaging which was initially used made out that 'this big bad virus is here to kill us all', and we now have a terrified population. The government did not foresee how effective this form of messaging would be and are now reluctant to ease restrictions, simply due to the fact that the population don't feel 'safe', and if the government are, in the public eye, placing the population in danger, then all trust for that government will be lost.

2 - The 'pro-lockdown' army are exceptionally vocal, just take a scroll down facebook comments on a news article. I found these ones within five minutes in the comments section of a BBC article which demonstrates just how strongly they feel:



(The grammar quality within this one in particular suggests to me the author doesn't have a fully developed understanding of the situation).

The level of vocality displayed will be taken by the government as the view from the 'general public', so they have a perception that we all want to live in our own little 2m box for the next 2 years.

3 - The government are taking their own advice, 'guided by the science', far too literally, by being guided purely by medical scientists and epidemiologists. I would like to think that the government are getting an all round opinion from experts in various sectors (economists, psychologists, behavioural scientists, medical scientists), but I have a hunch they are only listening to Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance, who are trained to always err on the side of caution without considering the economic or social implications of the restrictions that they advise.

I wonder if those people you quote would care to explain why then nearly everyone in Sweden hasn’t died. And in fact the number of people aged under 60 who have died stands at just 206.

 

[yorksrob]

There were plenty of advocates of masks on here assuring us it would allow increased capacity. I very much doubt it'll happen.

Increased capacity is the inevitable consequence of it. The Government is conceding increased usage of public transport to get to the shops, even if not explicitly encouraging it.

Admittedly, it's easier for rail users as we have ultimate control over how many people get on, whereas a bus driver can go straight past if he reaches the socially distanced capacity of his bus.

 

[mmh]

Utter rubbish. Guardian readers, like any other readers, are as adversely affected by the lockdown as anyone else and are just as likely to want it over.

No, the Guardian readership is the demographic you'd expect. ABC1s, with a higher income and higher representation of the professions and the public sector than average.

 

[yorksrob]

WHO advice was always 1m, not 2m. They are duplicitous and disingenuous if they are now suggesting we should not relax from 2m to 1m. On that basis alone their credibility is suspect.

From what I've read, it was more a suggestion that we ought to get track and trace up and running properly before further relaxation generally (rather reducing the distancing specifically). I think it's some of our scientists who are more keen on the 2m rule.

 

[MDB1images]

Have you got any pictures?

Not my photo.

390122

To promote the message of wearing face masks when travelling on trains from today @avantiwestcoast have viynled 2 Pendo's, being 390042 and 390122 with face masks and a message 'Safe Travels. Wear a fave covering.' 390122 'Penny the Pendolino' departs Coventry this morning working 9P60 London...

www.flickr.com

 

[thejuggler]

My prediction would be that there's three main reasons for this:

1 - The fear driven messaging which was initially used made out that 'this big bad virus is here to kill us all', and we now have a terrified population. The government did not foresee how effective this form of messaging would be and are now reluctant to ease restrictions, simply due to the fact that the population don't feel 'safe', and if the government are, in the public eye, placing the population in danger, then all trust for that government will be lost.

2 - The 'pro-lockdown' army are exceptionally vocal, just take a scroll down facebook comments on a news article. I found these ones within five minutes in the comments section of a BBC article which demonstrates just how strongly they feel:



(The grammar quality within this one in particular suggests to me the author doesn't have a fully developed understanding of the situation).

The level of vocality displayed will be taken by the government as the view from the 'general public', so they have a perception that we all want to live in our own little 2m box for the next 2 years.

3 - The government are taking their own advice, 'guided by the science', far too literally, by being guided purely by medical scientists and epidemiologists. I would like to think that the government are getting an all round opinion from experts in various sectors (economists, psychologists, behavioural scientists, medical scientists), but I have a hunch they are only listening to Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance, who are trained to always err on the side of caution without considering the economic or social implications of the restrictions that they advise.

Government never had a detailed strategy or plan which is why its a mess ending lockdown.