Face coverings compulsory on public transport in England from 15 June

[Bletchleyite]

How will this be enforced on buses, outside London, I can't imagine there are many that will be patrolling buses watching out for anyone not wearing a mask.

The newspaper method is very effective at enforcing anything at all on buses.

That is, driver sees something wrong, shouts out what the thing that's wrong is, stops the engine, gets out the Sun (other gutter rags are available) and waits for other passengers to resolve the issue.

 

[Starmill]

Why do they not wear masks at the press briefing?

'Do as I say, not as I do.'

 

[Dave91131]

Two important points already mentioned upthread but which I think do need clarification are:

1) how the deaf / hard of hearing will manage without being able to lip-read should verbal interaction with staff be required
2) assuming revenue collection will take place, how staff will verify that any passenger using a season ticket or other ticket / pass with a photocard is the person shown on the photocard, given that a considerable portion of their face will be covered

 

[Starmill]

The newspaper method is very effective at enforcing anything at all on buses.

That is, driver sees something wrong, shouts out what the thing that's wrong is, stops the engine, gets out the Sun (other gutter rags are available) and waits for other passengers to resolve the issue.

A common sight, throughout my childhood!

 

[HYPODERMIC]

The evidence that masks reduce infection rates is quite a bit stronger than some people on here seem to be suggesting.

To date, no study has been done to examine the effectiveness of masks against the SARS‐CoV‐2 causing COVID‐19. However, a recent study in patients with seasonal coronaviruses has demonstrated that surgical face masks significantly reduced detection of viral RNA in aerosols and shows a trend in reducing viral RNA in droplets.4 A recent meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials also showed that surgical masks are as effective as N95 masks in reducing transmission of influenza‐like diseases.6 If the result from a case–control study during the SARS‐CoV‐1 outbreak in Hong Kong is any indication, frequent masks use (mainly surgical) in public places can be protective by 64%.

Messaging by WHO and by many countries suggests that mask use in the community has no benefit, and should only be used by sick patients (also referred to as ‘source control’3). Such messaging may be driven more by concerns about critical shortages of personal protective equipment for health workers than by scientific evidence. In fact there are more large randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of face mask use in the community than there are of use by sick people or ‘source control’. In general, the results of community RCTs show protection for community members in settings of intense transmission of respiratory infections such as households and university dormitory settings.4 In trials of hand hygiene, health education and masks together, hand hygiene alone was not effective but masks were effective when used with hand hygiene. The RCTs which measured both hand hygiene and masks measured the effect of hand hygiene alone, but not of masks alone. Therefore, the protective effect of masks and hand hygiene combined could be due to both interventions together, or the effect of masks alone.4 In a RCT of masks alone, surgical and P2 masks reduced infection risk in households with a sick child if parents complied with mask use.5

Across 29 unadjusted studies and ten adjusted studies, the use of both N95 or similar respirators or face masks (eg, disposable surgical masks or similar reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks) by those exposed to infected individuals was associated with a large reduction in risk of infection

…

We did a sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of our findings and to integrate all available information on face mask treatment effects for protection from COVID-19 … even using informative priors from the most recent meta-analysis on the effectiveness of masks versus no masks to prevent influenza-like illness (RR 0·93, 95% CI 0·83–1·05)31 yielded a significant association with protection from COVID-19 (aOR 0·40, 95% CrI 0·16–0·97; posterior probability for RR <1, 98%).

…

The use of face masks was protective for both health-care workers and people in the community exposed to infection, with both the frequentist and Bayesian analyses lending support to face mask use irrespective of setting.

One comment about masks and nonlinearities that these imbeciles are not getting.Reducing exposure to viruses by 30% thanks to an "imperfect" mask does not mean reducing risk of contracting the disease by just 30%. By convexity, it must be more than 30%, can even be 95%.
…
If I wear a mask and it’s not very effective, and you wear a mask, and yours is not very effective, we’re going to reduce the probability of infection by one order of magnitude

So there is plausible evidence that even cheap surgical masks do have some statistically significant effect on reducing the spread of coronaviruses and influenzas.

It is not known whether or not there will be a second wave, but the first wave infected only a single-digit percentage of the national population and almost overloaded the NHS in doing so. The vast majority of the national population remains susceptible to the virus, and the virus continues to spread in the community, so the possibility of a second wave cannot be ruled out - I don't know whether a second wave is likely or not, only that it could happen, and if it does it would take thousands more lives and finish off thousands of businesses already weakened by the first wave. I don't think anyone is saying that wearing masks will completely prevent the spread of the virus, but it might help to slow it, and in so doing it could contribute to a set of measures (eg. social distancing, working from home, hand washing) that will collectively reduce the likelihood of an uncontrolled second wave in the next few months.

It may reduce your own chance of infection a bit, but just as importantly, it may also reduce your chance of infecting someone else if you are an asymptomatic carrier. Or perhaps you will only infect two people instead of three - which may not sound like a big deal, but that third person not infected would have gone on to infect three more in turn, and each of them several more in turn, so on. Every little bit helps when you are dealing with phenomena that have the potential to grow exponentially at short notice.

The point is not that wearing a surgical mask will guarantee that you don't become infected, but that it's really quite plausible that each of us 'doing our little bit' could help quite a bit indeed in the grand scheme of things. If wearing a mask does help reduce the infection risk even a little bit (as the evidence does suggest) and if enough people do it (as this rule is intended to encourage) the difference at a population level is likely to be quite large.

 

[greyman42]

That's worse! How long before some poor person with asthma is verbally or physically attacked on a train?

Surely you would not want to get involved in a physical confrontation with someone who you believe has Covid19. Unless you are just looking for an excuse to assault a stranger?

 

[43066]

I know that and saw the briefing but what Im saying, is how can a “fine” be issued when the NRCoT is a contractual document and thus any sort of financial penalty cannot be issued by the police for any failures to comply?

One of the briefing questions also confirmed that transport staff will not be responsible for enforcing this.

I suspect it can't, which is why I think he mumbled the answer when one of the Press questions picked up on precisely that.

Almost as if it hasn’t been thought through properly!

It *might* help - even though there’s not much evidence that it does.

Maybe we should all be required to carry sweet smelling herbs on us to ward off the virus “ring-a-ring-a-roses, pocket full of posies” etc. as was done in the days of the bubonic plague. After all, it *might* work.

 

[WM Bus]

That is, driver sees something wrong, shouts out what the thing that's wrong is, stops the engine, gets out the Sun (other gutter rags are available) and waits for other passengers to resolve the issue.

They usually then get angry, start hitting the assault screen and give verbal abuse to the driver.
In many cases the driver ends up having to switch the engine pack on and carry on - because they have refused to get off - this is when they refuse to pay. If it doesn't work then, how is this going to be any different.

Similuar situation with smoking, its very difficult to stop the idiots who do this on a full bus. So if its difficult to enforce "no smoking" despite it being against the law, how is "wear a mask" going to work.

 

[RogerOut]

I can't wait to do a 5 and a half hour stint behind the wheel of a bus whilst wearing a mask.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[greyman42]

The government recently made it a crime to leave your home, without a parliamentary vote,

And not many people took any notice of that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And not many people took any notice of that.

Followed it? The vast majority of people did - far more than were expected to!

 

[Pete_uk]

I can see certain police forces sending police out to pull over buses and check how much money they can make many fines they need to hand out.

 

[underbank]

On a practical level, if I'm going to have to wear one, where do I buy them? None of the open shops in my area scream out as being the mask shop, but a fair few people have got them from somewhere.

Loads online, our local chemist has a pile of them on the counter, as does our local Spar shop.

 

[leightonbd]

Surely you would not want to get involved in a physical confrontation with someone who you believe has Covid19. Unless you are just looking for an excuse to assault a stranger?

Surely the non-mask-wearer’s protection is simply to have their inhaler prominently to hand. I know when I go on the London Underground I always need a quick shot of salbutamol - and my asthma is very mild.

 

[trebor79]

As a healthcare professional:

1. I think there should be a system of fines for anyone wearing a medical grade mask without good reason.

2. Time to stop the charade of wiping down supermarket trollies. You'll be touching a heck if a lot more than that in the shop. Insist on all customers sanitising hands on entry and exit instead.

3. Get rid of the stupid one way systems in supermarkets. You are simply not going to catch Covid by walking past someone going the other way in the aisles.

Yes yes yes!
It's clear supermarkets have done their best, but the people running them aren't healthcare professionals or epidemiologists.

Stupid one way systems increase the amount of time I'm in there, so increases the risk of transmission. And it just leads to lots of petty arguments when someone quite reasonably takes a few steps the "wrong" way.

 

[Starmill]

1) how the deaf / hard of hearing will manage without being able to lip-read should verbal interaction with staff be required

This is certainly a difficulty that needs to be worked on. I have been told that 'lip reading' is however often not literally reading words from the shape of lips but a series of informed guesses based around contextual information including lips. I wonder if anyone is a particular expert in that area can contribute? Masks with clear sections for all staff could be a solution.

 

[Starmill]

The evidence that masks reduce infection rates is quite a bit stronger than some people on here seem to be suggesting.

Exactly. Though not the same, many British people seem to have an opposition to masks that's redolent of resistance to seatbelts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly. Though not the same, many British people seem to have an opposition to masks that's redolent of resistance to seatbelts.

There's a lot of confusion about masks that comes from the fact that cloth ones don't really affect the risk of the wearer very much, but do affect the risk the wearer may pose to others.

 

[717001]

The text of the speech is on the DfT website https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...statement-on-coronavirus-covid-19-4-june-2020

Transport Secretary's statement on coronavirus (COVID-19): 4 June 2020
Face coverings will be required on public transport from 15 June 2020..
Published 4 June 2020
From:Department for Transport and The Rt Hon Grant Shapps MP

Delivered on: 4 June 2020 (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered)
Opening remarks
Good afternoon.
And welcome to today’s Downing Street press conference.
I’m joined today by Sir Peter Hendy, Chair of Network Rail. Peter was Commissioner of transport for the London Olympics and the person who has helped oversee the restart of our transport system.
Let me start by updating you on the latest information from the government’s COBR data file.
First slide please….
This slide shows data on the use of different types of transport.
These graphs show significant falls in the use public transport – rail, buses, the tube in London – even before lockdown was introduced on 23 March. This is welcome, it shows the public have responded positively to our requests to avoid public transport wherever possible.
The use of motor vehicles fell substantially initially and has since risen steadily, though not back to the levels seen in mid-March. Again, this is what we would expect as we have introduced some easements to the lockdown and encouraged people to return to work.
One form of transport which has seen a significant increase is cycling – it is great to see people switching to a clean, green mode of transport with significant public health benefits.
Second slide please…
This slide shows tests and cases.
The number of tests carried out or posted out in the UK has risen past 5 million for the first time, to 5,005,565. This includes a record 220,057 tests carried out or posted out yesterday.
281,661 people have tested positive, an increase of 1,805 cases since yesterday. The graph shows a steadily falling number of identified cases on a 7-day rolling average, despite the increase in testing.
Third slide please…
This slide shows the latest data from hospitals.
505 people were admitted to hospital with coronavirus in England on 2 June, up marginally from 475 a week ago, but down from the peak of 3,121 on 2 April.
604 coronavirus patients are in mechanical ventilation beds in the UK, down from 783 a week ago, and down from a peak of 3,301 on 12 April.
Fourth slide please…
This slide shows what is happening in hospitals across the country.
There are now 7,312 people in hospital with coronavirus in the UK, down 15% from 8,558 a week ago and down from a peak of 20,699 on 12 April.
As the graphs show, while there is some variation, most nations and regions of the UK are broadly following a similar pattern.
Last slide please…
This slide shows the daily figures for those who have sadly lost their lives after testing positive for coronavirus.
Across all settings, the total number of deaths now stands at 39,904. That’s an increase of 176 fatalities since yesterday.
When measured by a 7-day rolling average, the daily number of deaths currently stands at 241, down from a peak of 943 on 14 April.
These figures are a reminder that COVID-19 still represents a very real threat…
That the fight still goes on to defeat it…
And that there are tragically still too many people across the country who are losing loved ones.
Our thoughts are with them all.
Transport leading green recovery
As we’ve made clear in recent weeks, our road to recovery must be carefully and cautiously managed.
Most importantly, we must avoid a second infection spike.
This careful, deliberate approach has been central to the restart of public transport.
In advance of previous easing of the total lockdown, we ensured transport availability was increased to allow for adequate social distancing.
In addition, we also announced measures to help people choose other forms of transport.
For example, with a record £2 billion investment in cycling and walking…
As well as the acceleration of e-scooter trials, brought forward to the end of this month.
Meticulous planning – alongside the considerable effort of passengers avoiding public transport – has worked well so far.
There has been an absence of crowding, even as passenger numbers have ticked up… partly thanks to the work of Sir Peter.
But these challenges are about to increase.
We expect – conditions permitting – that the next easing of restrictions will occur on Monday 15 June.
Non-essential shops will re-open and some children will return to secondary school, if it is safe to do so. That means there will be more pressure on our public transport.
To help meet that demand, we’re ramping up services on buses, trains and trams; with substantial government funding.
But still we need to do more.
So today I want to highlight measures to help keep us all safer, and reduce the risks of the Coronavirus coming back.
There are three points I want to highlight.
Work from home if possible
First, let me reiterate – and this is important – if you can work from home, you should continue to do so.
If you cannot work from home, you should avoid public transport wherever possible.
And if you must use public transport, you should follow the guidance, including avoiding the rush hour.
Updated guidance – face coverings
Second, I can announce that, as of Monday 15 June, face coverings will become mandatory on public transport.
That doesn’t mean surgical masks, which we must keep for clinical settings. It means the kind of face covering you can easily make at home.
There’ll be exceptions to the rule for very young children, disabled people and those with breathing difficulties.
But broadly, as we come through this phase, we’re doing what many other countries have asked transport users to do.
And as passenger numbers increase, and we expect this trend to continue, we need to ensure every precaution is taken, on buses, trains, aircraft and ferries.
With more people using transport, the evidence suggests that wearing a face covering offers some – albeit limited – protection against the spread of the virus.
A face covering helps protect our fellow passengers. It is something that we can each do to help each other.
And whilst it also remains true that measures like maintaining social distance and washing your hands remain most critical, we also know that, on public transport, keeping two-metres apart is not always possible, all of the time.
Indeed, the guidance explicitly recognises this fact.
So, when more people return to the network, from the 15 June onwards, they will be required to wear a face covering on our transport network.
We’ll make these rules changes under the National Rail Conditions of Travel and the Public Service Vehicle Regulations for buses.
This will mean you can be refused travel if you don’t comply and could be fined.
Alongside transport operators, this will be enforced by the British Transport Police, as necessary.
But I expect the vast majority of people won’t need to be forced into this, because wearing a face-covering helps to protect others, and most people simply want to help defeat this disease.
Of course, frontline staff – those in contact with passengers, doing such an important job at this crucial time – will also need to wear face coverings.
In the coming days, the government will work with unions, who have been supportive for which I am grateful, transport operators and police to ensure they have the supplies they need to be safe and provide reassurance to the public.
These measures apply in England, and we are working with the devolved administrations ahead of implementation.
Active and alternatives to public transport
Third, to ease pressure on public transport, I want to update you on the measures we’re taking to boost alternative ways to travel.
Now that vehicle showrooms are open again, there’s a growing range of electric cars, mopeds, motorbikes on sale…
And as our economy gets moving, their popularity will continue to increase.
Later this month we’ll be introducing the Fix Your Bike Voucher – worth 50 quid.
We’ll have hundreds-of-thousands more bikes roadworthy as a result of this programme.
Then there’s the Cycle To Work scheme which enables employees to buy a tax free bike – an effective saving of 25 – 39%.
And that scheme has been extended to cover e-bikes as well, meaning that cyclists can cover longer distances by getting assistance on those uphill stretches.
And this is a great time to start using them…
As we redesign our street landscape to cope with millions more cyclists and pedestrians in the months ahead.
The evidence is that commuters are already responding…
Despite fewer people travelling overall during this crisis, we’ve seen around a 100% increase in weekday cycling.
And at weekends, that increase has been up to around 200%, compared to pre-COVID-19 levels.
We want to use this recovery to permanently change the way we travel.
With huge levels of investment…..
We’re bringing forward green transport improvements that otherwise would have taken years, if not decades, to achieve.
In the short-term, whilst there’s still a threat from the virus, they’ll help millions of people avoid public transport journeys.
And in the longer term, they’ll help transform our country into a lower carbon, cleaner and greener place to live.
Conclusion
Our history shows us how quickly we can adapt as a nation.
Just as we did nearly 200 years ago, when Britain invented the railway…
And just as we did in the 20th century, when we embraced the motor car…
And then in the 1950s, when we launched the first passenger jet airliner, coincidentally designed and built in my Hatfield constituency.
Each of these transport revolutions was triggered by a unique alignment of people and events.
Brilliant engineers and entrepreneurs.
Cutting-edge new technologies.
Supportive governments.
And the needs of citizens.
Combining to bring about important change.
And now we stand on the verge of a new transport revolution…
This time, not limited to one particular means of travel, but rather to all forms of transport…
A green transport revolution…
Which will help us rebuild a stronger, more prosperous Britain, as well as a cleaner and healthier one.
Published 4 June 2020

 

[Whistler40145]

That’s my excuse lined up already .

I do have Asthma

 

[greyman42]

Followed it? The vast majority of people did - far more than were expected to!

Plenty did not.

 

[Bow Fell]

Over many threads on here regarding Covid-19 as well of course on wider social media and the general public feeling, we’ve seen the phrase “use common sense”

So again, why are people concerned over discrimination, common sense should apply again, I’d hope surely.

As I alluded to earlier, it’s very likely we are about to see the 2m guidelines reduced, with the expectation that on public transport, it just might not be doable. I expect this goes hand in hand with the face coverings guideline.

 

[Bantamzen]

I've just asked the question on social media, but let's try it here. If masks are so good at stopping the spread of the virus, why is social distancing still going to be applied?

 

[43066]

I do have Asthma

Apologies, I don’t mean to make light of what can be a very serious condition.

But this will be largely unenforceable. There are nowhere near enough staff to enforce it, BTP are like hens’ teeth, and people who genuinely can’t wear masks will be open to abuse.

 

[W-on-Sea]

Very sensible, and long, long, overdue. Most other countries understood this from the start

 

[Bletchleyite]

Very sensible, and long, long, overdue. Most other countries understood this from the start

I'm going with "worth a try" - the number of cases is still running too high and needs to be got down. If it doesn't work, quietly drop it.

 

[Trackman]

does this mean I cannot eat or drink on a long journey?

 

[Bantamzen]

does this mean I cannot eat or drink on a long journey?

It may not be too long before you will be asked to restrict your breathing, you know just in case...

 

[Non Multi]

I've read that the disposable face coverings are only effective for half an hour before they require replacing. So anyone on a long journey needs a bag of them.

 

[northernchris]

I suspect this is more connected to the psychology of how safe public transport is. It's clear more people will need to use public transport once non-essential retail reopens although it's not clear if the 'out of use' seats will return so capacity is increased. If not it seems a pointless exercise but if it means more non-essential travel is permitted then it's a small price to pay