The Times: “Don’t eat or drink on train journeys” (despite eating/drinking being allowed)

[6Gman]

In shock news . . .

The headline and the story don't quite tie up.

The headline implies that the DfT is going to prohibit eating and drinking on trains. Then you read the article and the briefing paper "seen by The Times" refers to capacity issues and potential queues and congestion.

The paper then goes off at something of a tangent to say that "some" TOCs are instructing passengers not to eat or drink on services". And the evidence for this claim is that one operator (GTR) has asked passengers to "please try to avoid" drinking or eating on their services.

"Please try", not "you are not allowed". And not a long-distance Inter City operator.

But why let the facts get in the way of a "good" story.

Asking is fine, sticking up signs saying "do not eat or drink on the train" is not.

Do such signs exist ?

So on a long journey people have to plan somewhere to get off, have something to eat and drink (standing outside the station in the rain?), and then get on the next train? Will Advance tickets start allowing that?

No they won't.

 

[Richard Scott]

If it meant I had to bring my hands to my face to touch or move my face covering, yes. I would wait. There’s absolutely no point in people wearing face coverings to then go and touch a dozen things other people have touched to then start touching your face/something that’s attached to your face for long periods/be ingested.

The face covering is to protect others not the wearer.

 

[johntea]

Do such signs exist ?

Yep, I knew I had seen this on my Northern journey last week!

"Please do not eat or drink on board" with a picture crossed out in red...

https://www.twitter.com/every_station/status/1275326292393672704/photo/1

I suppose "Please" is not strictly a demand, but if that is the case then "Please wear a face covering" - so it is up to me if I want to do that too?

 

[Butts]

This is nonsensical, on my BA Flight from London to Glasgow the other week they actually handed out water and a packet of crisps.

 

[Hadders]

Shock horror!

Difficult to see how that was doing much harm - I assume the train was half empty?

Alcohol is currently banned on LNER trains.

 

[AdamWW]

I suppose "Please" is not strictly a demand, but if that is the case then "Please wear a face covering" - so it is up to me if I want to do that too?

No because it is the law (in England) at the moment that you must wear a face covering. It is not the law that you mustn't eat or drink. In fact it is the law that you may remove your mask in order to do so.

 

[talldave]

This is nonsensical, on my BA Flight from London to Glasgow the other week they actually handed out water and a packet of crisps.

The country has descended into hysterical nonsense, it's called coronaphobia. The cure is for the sane amongst us to refuse to obey all the rules, guidelines and stupidity until sanity prevails. If you stand up to all the little hitlers they soon back down.

 

[lachlan]

No because it is the law (in England) at the moment that you must wear a face covering. It is not the law that you mustn't eat or drink. In fact it is the law that you may remove your mask in order to do so.

Indeed, I wrote to LNER on this one and they said eating and drinking is permitted and that you may remove a face covering to do so.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Alcohol is currently banned on LNER trains.

No it isn't, their own website says it is permitted!

Is Alcohol allowed onboard?

www.lner.co.uk

Yes, you are allowed to drink alcohol onboard our trains, as long as it’s in moderation. We want you to have a good time but our priority is passenger safety so any antisocial behaviour or breaking any laws or railway by-laws might mean we ask you to leave the train (at a station, of course).

 

[Enthusiast]

Why are people deliberately being obtuse about this?

The chances of anyone objecting to someone drinking water on a train on a hot day are next to nil.

I take the guidance to say they don't want people eating takeaways, picnics etc on trains, which IMHO is fair enough in the circumstances.

I don't think anybody is being obtuse and a debate like this is not the exclusive preserve of this forum.

What has happened in the UK over the past three months plus is that the population has seen its liberties and freedoms curtailed on an unprecedented scale. That's often followed by "in peacetime". But some of these measures are even worse than in wartime - at least the pubs and restaurants stayed open then and you were allowed to visit friends and relatives. But it's worse than that. The merit of individual measures introduced by government have been well discussed here. But what has happened is that individual organisations have seen fit to "gold plate" or even completely alter those regulations and have almost taken to behaving ultra vires. The "essential travel only" has been well covered on another thread. Now this. The fact is you are allowed to remove a face covering in order to eat and drink on a train. That exercise isn't defined by type or duration. You are not limited to a sip of water every 30 minutes.

A well known columnist who writes for one of the tabloids often says this: "If you give power to people unused to having it, they will always, always abuse it." And so it seems. Guidance to be followed "where possible" is turned into rock solid rules; in its interpretation legislation is altered, amended or enhanced beyond Parliament's original intention; notices are published telling the public they cannot do this or they must do that when there is no legal basis for the instructions. This issue is a prime example of that and another facet of some Train Operators' attempts to deter passengers by making their experience as unpleasant as possible. The current situation is manna from heaven for those with power but unused to having it. It does need highlighting and it does need challenging. Life is difficult enough for many people at present without it being made unnecessarily more so and there is nothing obtuse about discussing the issue.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

No it isn't, their own website says it is permitted!

Is Alcohol allowed onboard?

www.lner.co.uk

It appears that they have forgotten to update that; they contradict that message with this coronavirus-specific page. The removed passengers may have recourse in this situation, although I would be surprised if they pursue it.

 

[Hadders]

I’ve seen posters on LNER operated stations this week saying alcohol is banned on their services.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I’ve seen posters on LNER operated stations this week saying alcohol is banned on their services.

I'd be intrigued to see what evidence they have that consuming alcohol on a train spreads the virus!

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I'd be intrigued to see what evidence they have that consuming alcohol on a train spreads the virus!

The physical act of consumption doesn't, but the effects of inebriation certainly might cause people to act in ways more likely to spread the virus (in the exceedingly unlikely event they have it). I don't think it's a fundamentally objectionable policy, but there can't be contradiction between different parts of the website on whether or not alcohol is allowed.

 

[Bayum]

The face covering is to protect others not the wearer.

It is. But if you’ve touched surfaces the virus is living on and then bring your hands to yourself face to take the covering off or to eat and drink, then you’re running the risk of bringing the virus on yourself.

 

[Scrotnig]

An unpopular view but I'd be happy to see a complete alcohol ban on all public transport, nothing to do with the virus though.

 

[island]

I'd be intrigued to see what evidence they have that consuming alcohol on a train spreads the virus!

They do not need evidence; they have an unqualified right under byelaw 4 to ban alcohol from services by giving reasonable notice.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

An unpopular view but I'd be happy to see a complete alcohol ban on all public transport, nothing to do with the virus though.

Yes, I too would like to see a ban on people enjoying themselves engaging in activities I disapprove of.

They do not need evidence; they have an unqualified right under byelaw 4 to ban alcohol from services by giving reasonable notice.

Maybe they can. But it's just another way of making a long distance journey a little less enjoyable which will, in the long term, make potential customers think twice about using their trains.

 

[Jonny]

Maybe they can. But it's just another way of making a long distance journey a little less enjoyable which will, in the long term, make potential customers think twice about using their trains.

... which is going to continue as long as the TOCs can keep their snouts in the trough of the support package.

 

[Scrotnig]

Yes, I too would like to see a ban on people enjoying themselves engaging in activities I disapprove of.

I don't disapprove of drinking. I disapprove of the anti-social behaviour which unfortunately seems to go hand in hand with it.

 

[Romsey]

It honestly wouldn't surprise me at this point. Whatever next, you've got to hold your breath whilst on the train, because masks aren't enough?

Please don't suggest that, someone in authority might think it's a good idea! ( Who knows as the government is running out of actions to show they are being pro-active.)

 

[DB]

The face covering is to protect others not the wearer.

.
And the evidence for them actualy doing this is very weak.

In contrast, the evidence for people becoming infected by transferring it to their mouth or nose by touching is stronger.

 

[yorkie]

Drinking / eating on trains is allowed; the discussion now seems to be straying from the original topic and is covered by other threads.

If anyone would like us to consider reopening this thread, please report this post and let us know the detail of what you would like to contribute.

Please continue the debate about masks on public transport in the following thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...land-from-15-june.205120/page-62#post-4644600