• Dear Guest, and welcome to RailUK Forums. Our non-railway discussion forums are currently restricted until members have five or more posts, and you will not be able to make a new thread or reply to an existing one in this section until you have made five or more posts elsewhere on the forum.

New 4-tier system for England

Status
Not open for further replies.

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
11,739
Location
0036
Just to clarify once again if you'll forgive me... the 'do's and don'ts' say you should not travel outside your area or stay away overnight (in tiers other than 4). Is this still guidance or the rules? Given the earlier reported debacle at Southport, might one encounter trouble attempting to rock up there, and stay alone in private accommodation for a few days?
There is no specific law against travel within England, regardless of tiers.

Residents of tier 4 who look to travel out of their tier May (or may not) be in breach of the requirement to stay at home unless they have a reasonable excuse.

Visitor accommodation is to remain closed in tiers 3 and 4 excepting certain categories of person.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
2,108
Location
Maidstone
That’s the big unknown and, frustratingly, not open for discussion.

This is an interesting article discussing the potential dangers of what we are doing:




Meanwhile, Germany is having a torrid time....

The situation in Germany I find is proof about how we have limits to controlling this virus: even with a strong biotech industry, good test and trace programme and perception of compliance with rules, they cannot contain it.


Yes. Very concerning. See here on the BBC

To quote



Sounds like the goal posts have been moved, yet again.
Just a tad! Although the more cynical side of me thinks he's said 2022 to give as noncommital an answer as possible rather than he seriously believes we'll be under lockdown/social distancing all year.
Given Johnson (and Hancock probably as well) is on course for leaving office early next year, I doubt they'll get very far with trying to keep restrictions going that long, the backbenchers in particular won't stand for it. Besides, given how out of their depth they are, the recent resorting to scare tactics to trying to justify their actions, and the physical behaviour/body language they've been showing recently (suggesting this is draining them), I'd be surprised if they actually can keep things going that long, because it'll completely tire them and the public even more than already so.
 

richa2002

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,151
I really do hope the numbers do drop in the tier 4 areas but honestly more regions should of entered tier 4 and not do it when it's too late.

The reluctance to close schools for a longer period of time is infuriating, loads of mixing goes on there and most people that age are not really going to do social distancing and wear masks(regardless if they are that effective or not).

If the numbers don't improve and evidence the rate is going up countrywide, then I can't see anything other than a lockdown but hopefully once Xmas and New year is over then less people will be shopping we may see the numbers drop.
Why is so much of this argument carried out with the assumption that 'lockdowns' work. If 'cases' (which are based on unreliable data anyway) go up, we haven't locked down enough, if they fall, it shows the restrictions have worked. Does it ever cross anyone's mind that lockdowns don't actually do much and the virus takes its course regardless? It strikes me that to justify such extreme measures, there should be solid evidence that they work, not just medieval-esque superstition. The same can be said for the mask debate. Beyond the rational science too, there is a fundamental moral question of whether a government should ever have the right to mandate how we live our lives to this kind of detail.

We're living in a mad house and the percentage of the population who refuse to question what they are told is truly shocking. I never really understood how totalitarian regimes take hold in previously free countries but it's blatantly clear now.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
5,156
Location
Nottingham
It strikes me that to justify such extreme measures, there should be solid evidence that they work, not just medieval-esque superstition.
If Prof Fergurson weighs the same as a duck; then that means he's made of wood and is, therefore, a witch?
 

trainophile

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2010
Messages
4,933
Location
Getting about (paused again)
There is no specific law against travel within England, regardless of tiers.

Residents of tier 4 who look to travel out of their tier May (or may not) be in breach of the requirement to stay at home unless they have a reasonable excuse.

Visitor accommodation is to remain closed in tiers 3 and 4 excepting certain categories of person.

Thank you, gonna go for it then. Might be my last chance to check all is okay if another full lockdown is on the cards.
 

DavidB

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
4,814
Why is so much of this argument carried out with the assumption that 'lockdowns' work. If 'cases' (which are based on unreliable data anyway) go up, we haven't locked down enough, if they fall, it shows the restrictions have worked. Does it ever cross anyone's mind that lockdowns don't actually do much and the virus takes its course regardless? It strikes me that to justify such extreme measures, there should be solid evidence that they work, not just medieval-esque superstition. The same can be said for the mask debate. Beyond the rational science too, there is a fundamental moral question of whether a government should ever have the right to mandate how we live our lives to this kind of detail.

We are seeing this with a number of things this year - masks being the most obvious other example. No evidence that they work, but introduced first on trains, then in shops, and the news reported on here earlier that Costco are now refusing to accept exemptions. And there's still no evidence that they work!

As you say the argument is always the same - if it appears to work, they crow about it being successful, and if it doesn't have any impact (pr possibly a negative one, as with masks) then that's because we need more of what didn't work! It's very much a 'heads I win, tails you lose' type approach!
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
1,163
Liverpool still keeps Tier 2 for "good behaviour"?
Joke Liverpool case rate higher than Manchester by around 20% although in reality thee are dozens of Tier 3 areas below Liverpool like Bolton which is now in bottom 10% of England and been on the longest of lockdowns buts still gets no concessions. You have to pity North East Lincolnshire (grimsby/cleethorpes) who are left in Tier 3 despite having one of the lowest rates in England yet New Forest with almost the same rate gets to stay in Tier 2. There is little logic to the way they are apportioning the tiers and its clear they are hell bent on filling in the whole map to be tier 4 in the end rather than be accused of another lockdown. This is having huge impact on the finances of this country and the ordinary people will pay dearly.
 
Last edited:

UP13

Member
Joined
27 Jul 2018
Messages
348
Just for back from please picking up more gifts for my kids from my parents (they seem to be compensating for not seeing grandchildren with spoiling with gifts). My mum and sister wore face masks in their own house and closed door as I neared to pick up boxes of gifts from their porch and even insisted on wearing facemasks while I was 15m away next to my car.

As soon as the government make any announcement they not only comply but go OTT with it. My mum would spray garden chairs before I sat on them during the summer and wouldn't listen to me when I tried to explain that coronavirus doesn't enter the body through shirts and skin...

My mum was very outspoken about Cummings in the early days and critical of the government yet will always be a good citizen herself and follow the word of the government she criticises. It's people like her that autocracies thrive off - you don't need people to support or like you, but you do need them to obey you.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
1,163
We're living in a mad house and the percentage of the population who refuse to question what they are told is truly shocking. I never really understood how totalitarian regimes take hold in previously free countries but it's blatantly clear now.
The general populace lost interest in what was happening in the world decades ago and the clever manipulators of Cummings and his ilk have been exploiting this void and this why we find ourselves in this position with people no longer able to think for themselves.
 

UP13

Member
Joined
27 Jul 2018
Messages
348
We are seeing this with a number of things this year - masks being the most obvious other example. No evidence that they work, but introduced first on trains, then in shops, and the news reported on here earlier that Costco are now refusing to accept exemptions. And there's still no evidence that they work!

As you say the argument is always the same - if it appears to work, they crow about it being successful, and if it doesn't have any impact (pr possibly a negative one, as with masks) then that's because we need more of what didn't work! It's very much a 'heads I win, tails you lose' type approach!

Masks encourage face touching.

They are mandatory now because there is no longer a worry about the NHS having a PPE shortage. I cynically think it's an easy and visible way of making it look like something is being done about the virus...

Rates were low when masks were introduced and have increased massively since then. I think this shows that masks haven't had a big an impact as people thought. I've also found even in the early days that people don't socially distance when they have masks on and I personally believe social distancing has a bigger impact on keeping rates down.
 

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
1,177
its clear they are hell bent on filling in the whole map to be tier 4 in the end rather than be accused of another lockdown.

Also by doing it via the tier system they can circumvent parliamentary approval, although I'm still unsure how they managed to insert tier 4 without that.
It's an utter sham.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
11,739
Location
0036
Why is so much of this argument carried out with the assumption that 'lockdowns' work. If 'cases' (which are based on unreliable data anyway) go up, we haven't locked down enough, if they fall, it shows the restrictions have worked. Does it ever cross anyone's mind that lockdowns don't actually do much and the virus takes its course regardless?
I reply to people that if cases go up, it means the lockdown was ineffective, and if they go down, it was unnecessary. It’s no less specious than the other logic.
Also by doing it via the tier system they can circumvent parliamentary approval, although I'm still unsure how they managed to insert tier 4 without that.
It's an utter sham.
All changes to tiers, introductions of tiers, or changes of the rules of tiers require parliamentary approval. This can be retrospective (up to 28 days after the change takes effect). The government has committed to not imposing new nationwide rules without prior parliamentary approval, but that is a commitment to parliament and they are only accountable to parliament should they breach the commitment.

Rates were low when masks were introduced and have increased massively since then. I think this shows that masks haven't had a big an impact as people thought. I've also found even in the early days that people don't socially distance when they have masks on and I personally believe social distancing has a bigger impact on keeping rates down.
I agree. People seem to treat them like invincibility shields.
 

Class 33

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Messages
1,954
Hancock just said we would be back to normal by 2022. That means never.

I wouldn't take that too literally. My interpretation of it was that that particular journalist commented to Hancock that some "professor" predicted life wouldn't return to normal in this country until 2022, and would this be the case. Hancock then replied mentioning that we should be back to normal by 2022. But he also mentioned once or twice during the conference that he is confident we should be in a much better place over the next few months and we should hopefully be back to normal by Easter. But let's see what happens. Though of course mention today that a second strain of Coronavirus has been found, and this could unfortunately really flare things up and delay things again!!
 
Last edited:

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
1,163
Also by doing it via the tier system they can circumvent parliamentary approval, although I'm still unsure how they managed to insert tier 4 without that.
It's an utter sham.
Because labour are largely sitting on the sidelines and even the CRG are spineless but i guess they now need to revert back to the ERG if reports of deal being done are to be believed.
 

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
1,177
Because labour are largely sitting on the sidelines and even the CRG are spineless but i guess they now need to revert back to the ERG if reports of deal being done are to be believed.

Yes, there is conflicting priorities I think. What I'm hoping is that once the Brexit deal is sorted (or not), then the CRG can fully commit to the COVID issues, given there is a lot of overlap between the politicians involved.

If Boris does a deal with the EU that goes against ERG principles, as might well happen, then I expect them to be out for his blood on the CRG.
 

UP13

Member
Joined
27 Jul 2018
Messages
348
I agree. People seem to treat them like invincibility shields.

It's like in rugby, I see plenty of kids and adults wear scrum caps because they think it stops them getting concusion and thus act like they are invincible. The scrum cap is designed to stop certain players getting cauliflower ears.

Masks lower your chance of passing it on. People think it prevents them getting it.

During early days of lockdown I saw somebody in the supermarket wear a mask and then when he saw somebody he knew, he pulled it down and spoke to them from 30cm away. Pointless...
 

Cdd89

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
348
Why is so much of this argument carried out with the assumption that 'lockdowns' work. If 'cases' (which are based on unreliable data anyway) go up, we haven't locked down enough, if they fall, it shows the restrictions have worked.
Because simplistically, a lockdown by the definition of the word with everyone sealed in their rooms would stop the virus from spreading. Those advocating for lockdowns always measure against that oversimplified hypothetical and how closely we approach it.

They fail to appreciate that what they are proposing is disgusting to western values (though depressingly, I may be wrong there), and is impossible anyway due to gaps like shared households, key workers, and people needing to access healthcare.

It should be obvious by now that lockdowns palatable to western society are not sufficient to contain the virus, and aren’t respected anyway (even if prime say they do). That should he enough to give up on them. But instead they keep nudging for more of the same (or fantasising that restrictions might get even more severe).

I didn’t vote for this government, and hate their approach to this issue, but overall I’m glad we have the one we do - And that’s something I didn’t think I’d be saying this time last year. I genuinely think with Corbyn we’d currently be on our 40th week of “just 9 more weeks and we’ll be like New Zealand”.
 

C J Snarzell

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2019
Messages
1,276
During early days of lockdown I saw somebody in the supermarket wear a mask and then when he saw somebody he knew, he pulled it down and spoke to them from 30cm away. Pointless...
Didn't Nicola Sturgeon do this at a funeral recently?

CJ
 

Envy123

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2015
Messages
465
Location
Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire
I wonder if the virus has evolved in such a way to adapt to lockdowns happening? It apparently evolved to make face coverings even more useless.

If there are less hosts to infect due to social distancing and lockdowns, it may have evolved to be more effective in spreading to try to compensate.

If that is the case, all these tiers and lockdowns could have made things worse. Maybe the government should not intervene anymore in trying to beat the virus?
 
Last edited:

UP13

Member
Joined
27 Jul 2018
Messages
348
At the school I teach in, we have to wear masks in the corridor. This has resulted in people wearing masks in empty corridors then immediately taking them off and taking a sigh of relief when they enter the staffroom where other people are...
 

DavidB

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
4,814
All changes to tiers, introductions of tiers, or changes of the rules of tiers require parliamentary approval. This can be retrospective (up to 28 days after the change takes effect). The government has committed to not imposing new nationwide rules without prior parliamentary approval, but that is a commitment to parliament and they are only accountable to parliament should they breach the commitment.

But even so, if parliament was sitting it's unlikely that Johnson and his acolytes would have been able to push it through in the way they have - certain MPs would have been demanding a discussion on it the following day. Hence it was remarkably convenient that this "new" strain only became such an issue straight after parliament had been dissolved for a couple of weeks!
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
2,348
At the school I teach in, we have to wear masks in the corridor. This has resulted in people wearing masks in empty corridors then immediately taking them off and taking a sigh of relief when they enter the staffroom where other people are...
And handling them all the time probably making chances of transmission higher if person were infected? Another pointless policy.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,948
This does feel like the whole 'the best way to discover a new species is to look in your garden'. The more you look, the more you find, are these 'new' variants, or have they been there the whole time? Who knows

They appear to be new, the UK had been doing a lot of genome sequencing of the Covid-19 virus (about half of all that has been done worldwide, even Wales had done more in the last week than France has done in the last year).
 

Skimpot flyer

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2012
Messages
1,354
Why is so much of this argument carried out with the assumption that 'lockdowns' work. If 'cases' (which are based on unreliable data anyway) go up, we haven't locked down enough, if they fall, it shows the restrictions have worked. Does it ever cross anyone's mind that lockdowns don't actually do much and the virus takes its course regardless? It strikes me that to justify such extreme measures, there should be solid evidence that they work, not just medieval-esque superstition. The same can be said for the mask debate. Beyond the rational science too, there is a fundamental moral question of whether a government should ever have the right to mandate how we live our lives to this kind of detail.

We're living in a mad house and the percentage of the population who refuse to question what they are told is truly shocking. I never really understood how totalitarian regimes take hold in previously free countries but it's blatantly clear now.
Thank God. I am not alone in my view of this utter lunacy!!!
And the bloody BBC are again giving airtime to the repugnant Neil Ferguson, whose track record and wild forecasts are the stuff of legend, and who broke lockdown rules to have a bunk up with a married woman <D
 

DustyBin

Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
1,017
Location
First Class
Don't forget there's another week to go, plenty of time to decide on some more "concerning" & "worrying" new variants....

Well despite the lack of warning regarding today’s announcement, I’ve been told again (by somebody who’s job it is to know these things) that there will indeed be a further announcement between Christmas and New Year. Something to look forward to! :rolleyes:

The general populace lost interest in what was happening in the world decades ago and the clever manipulators of Cummings and his ilk have been exploiting this void and this why we find ourselves in this position with people no longer able to think for themselves.

I’ve rattled on about this for years. The population is dumbed down. People exist in their own little bubbles, obsessing over trivial matters, without a thought or care for what is happening in the world.

I wonder if the virus has evolved in such a way to adapt to lockdowns happening? It apparently evolved to make face coverings even more useless.

If there are less hosts to infect due to social distancing and lockdowns, it may have evolved to be more effective in spreading to try to compensate.

If that is the case, all these tiers and lockdowns could have made things worse. Maybe the government should not intervene anymore in trying to beat the virus?

See my earlier link to the Spectator article. There are scientists who agree with you and it appears perfectly feasible to me (as a layman) but of course this goes against the narrative....
 

BJames

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2018
Messages
788
At the school I teach in, we have to wear masks in the corridor. This has resulted in people wearing masks in empty corridors then immediately taking them off and taking a sigh of relief when they enter the staffroom where other people are...
Absolutely ridiculous and a complete waste of time. Would certainly add this to the "most pointless restrictions" thread.
But even so, if parliament was sitting it's unlikely that Johnson and his acolytes would have been able to push it through in the way they have - certain MPs would have been demanding a discussion on it the following day. Hence it was remarkably convenient that this "new" strain only became such an issue straight after parliament had been dissolved for a couple of weeks!
Quite - I don't agree with their policy of being able to debate it up to a month after it's implemented either, but it will be interesting to see how the renewal of the tier system goes in early February. Perhaps another new variant will be identified then which makes these tiers essential so Labour backs them and any Conservative rebellion is futile - although let's hope some common sense is seen.
I wonder if the virus has evolved in such a way to adapt to lockdowns happening? It apparently evolved to make face coverings even more useless.

If there are less hosts to infect due to social distancing and lockdowns, it may have evolved to be more effective in spreading to try to compensate.

If that is the case, all these tiers and lockdowns could have made things worse. Maybe the government should not intervene anymore in trying to beat the virus?
Noticed Sadiq Khan the other day was pushing for mandatory face coverings outdoors in "busy shopping areas" - hopefully Tier 4 in London puts that argument to a close for a while...

And I agree that lockdowns aren't exactly helping. I'm fed up of seeing the argument online "they would work if everyone complied" - everyone did in March and the virus didn't simply *go away* because it's too late for that now. It's too prevalent. They may reduce the spread to some degree, but at significant cost.
 

Skimpot flyer

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2012
Messages
1,354
I reply to people that if cases go up, it meansthe lockdown was ineffective, and if they go down, it was unnecessary. It’s no less specious than the other logic.

All changes to tiers, introductions of tiers, or changes of the rules of tiers require parliamentary approval. This can be retrospective (up to 28 days after the change takes effect). The government has committed to not imposing new nationwide rules without prior parliamentary approval, but that is a commitment to parliament and they are only accountable to parliament should they breach the commitment.


I agree. People seem to treat them like invincibility shields.
I am going to borrow that, if I may. I have too many pro-lockdown colleagues, which is ironic given that we are considered ‘key workers’ so have to go in to work regardless of what tier or indeed lockdowns are in force at any given moment

The brainwashed ones will not listen, of course, to your equally plausible counter-argument. I have really lost respect for some people I used to think were intelligent - it seems the analytical, questioning part of their brain has completely shut down.

I said to one of these people that the 90-yr old lady who had the first shot of the vaccine had developed a compulsive disorder, and had started purchasing Microsoft products... and he actually thought I was serious !!!
 

NorthOxonian

Member
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
944
Location
Oxford/Newcastle
Absolutely ridiculous and a complete waste of time. Would certainly add this to the "most pointless restrictions" thread.

Quite - I don't agree with their policy of being able to debate it up to a month after it's implemented either, but it will be interesting to see how the renewal of the tier system goes in early February. Perhaps another new variant will be identified then which makes these tiers essential so Labour backs them and any Conservative rebellion is futile - although let's hope some common sense is seen.

Noticed Sadiq Khan the other day was pushing for mandatory face coverings outdoors in "busy shopping areas" - hopefully Tier 4 in London puts that argument to a close for a while...

And I agree that lockdowns aren't exactly helping. I'm fed up of seeing the argument online "they would work if everyone complied" - everyone did in March and the virus didn't simply *go away* because it's too late for that now. It's too prevalent. They may reduce the spread to some degree, but at significant cost.
I was expecting Tier 4 to mean mandatory masks outside, what with Sadiq Khan pushing so hard. I was pleasantly surprised to see that measure rejected. Though of course, knowing them, they'll end up bringing in a Tier 5...
 

BJames

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2018
Messages
788
I was expecting Tier 4 to mean mandatory masks outside, what with Sadiq Khan pushing so hard. I was pleasantly surprised to see that measure rejected. Though of course, knowing them, they'll end up bringing in a Tier 5...
To be fair, same... I thought I heard one of the journalists at the press conference the other day asking if we would need a tier 4+ (*insert expletive*) and let's just hope that extended use of face coverings doesn't become a part of that (on which note, I see that Costco has now stated that entry is only with face coverings and if you are exempt you must wear a face shield or you cannot come in).

The only other thing I could imagine a Tier 4+ or 5 including would be schools closing, but I can't imagine the inequality of that across the country would be ideal.

Anyone on twitter (or at least the things that come up on my feed anyway) will have seen a huge amount of memes and jokes over the last week about the tier system and how we're going to wake up one day and be in Tier 12 with increasingly ridiculous measures - I think the ridiculousness of the situation is starting to somewhat get across to people...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top