To wonder what it is about “no overnight stays till 17 May” that is so hard to understand?

[HaveringWavering]

So many colleagues and acquaintances merrily talking today about plans to go and stay with relatives for the bank holiday. Nobody has any shame. We’re waiting till the 17th. Does nobody care any more?

I was actually quite pleased when the govt said "data not dates" as I thought that might mean that if the data seemed better than expected (as it currently seems to be) that we might fast forward a bit. However now it seems they are back tracking to dates not data.

More fool me for believing them.

Do you know what, I'm not going to waste another second of my weekend debating this with you because even though the majority of people have told you YABU it's clearly important to you to be right. You go about your life thinking that there's a difference between staying overnight on the 16th and 17th and that if there was a risk two weeks before the date, that the government wouldn't have set a new one and me and the rest of the sensible people will go about ours.

@Hiphopopotamus

You do you OP - let other people make their choices. People are at the point of making their own risk assessments rather than wait to do exactly what the ‘one size fits some’ directive from the government. All power to them I say

The problem with this attitude is that someone's personal risk assessment affects others. It's like deciding that you are ok to drive after drinking alcohol, it's not about the risk to you, it's about the knock on effect to others.

Despite non compliance the figures today as reported in the times are 1 in 1,010 people have Covid.
Twenty two million people ie 1 in 3 of us live in an area that have not reported a single Covid death for over a month.

This despite all this terrible non compliance.
So really. Why is it necessary to wait 2 weeks?

@BiggestJulieigg

Spot on, excellent post.

I wouldn't bother with the op she loves being controlled, appears to enjoy it even.

Ok OP, let’s cut to the chase.

Many people are not particularly concerned about the rules anymore and compliance rates are plummeting. This was very predictable in fairness.

You haranguing them on here, trying to shame, calling them selfish, stupid, commandeering the moral high ground, makes absolutely no difference. If anything it’s probably won a few over to the opposite cause. No one gives a rats ass what you think of them.

So that’s where we are.

Time for everyone to move on, this strict control of people’s movements was never going to be acceptable for ever. The government know this and it will already have been factored into dates set.

This despite all this terrible non compliance.
So really. Why is it necessary to wait 2 weeks?

I've read the whole thread and am still scratching my head for an answer that doesn't involve either because they said so or because more people will be vaccinated by then.

Given that the numbers being vaccinated arguments is moot as surley this could be used indefinitely until everyone has been invited to be vaccinated I'm stuck with the only reason being because the government said so?

it's about the knock on effect to others.

People have spent a year giving up significant amounts because of the ‘knock on effects on others’ and now the vulnerable of those others are vaxxed, they are through.

There is simply no need to take such drastic measures to stop healthy under 40s getting Covid.

I'm stuck with the only reason being because the government said so?

Lots of people are natural rule followers I’ve realised. No matter how silly the rules or incompetent / corrupt the people making them.

@SpnBaby1967

I was actually quite pleased when the govt said "data not dates" as I thought that might mean that if the data seemed better than expected (as it currently seems to be) that we might fast forward a bit. However now it seems they are back tracking to dates not data.

More fool me for believing them.

Now, you see, I had a totally different take on the data not dates statement. I always thought it meant "we hope to do A, B and C by X date, but if the figures are too high at that date we will have to extend restrictions". I though they said we hope to do certain things by "this date at the earliest".

I would have presumed ‘data not dates’ should work both ways? Otherwise, what’s the point of it?

@TheKeatingFive

I'm stuck with the only reason being because the government said so?

Lots of people are natural rule followers I’ve realised. No matter how silly the rules or incompetent / corrupt the people making them.

Indeed, it's truly baffling to me that so many people are happy to do as they are told even if there is a significant amount of evidence to support that what they are being told isn't the whole truth. Although I suspect if they thought for themselves they wouldn't be able to spount out nonsensical terms like covidiot, granny killer or anti vaxer.

@TheKeatingFive

I would have presumed ‘data not dates’ should work both ways? Otherwise, what’s the point of it?

Why can’t you accept that the data analysis is the responsibility of the government’s scientific advisers, not the general public?

The whole point of the “data not dates” communications was to manage people’s expectations and avoid things kicking off if the dates were moved further into the future. I’m not saying that did not mean it could not work both ways, but it has always been fairly obvious that the main point was to deal with things taking longer than had been hoped.

Indeed, it's truly baffling to me that so many people are happy to do as they are told even if there is a significant amount of evidence to support that what they are being told isn't the whole truth. Although I suspect if they thought for themselves they wouldn't be able to spount out nonsensical terms like covidiot, granny killer or anti vaxer.

It’s truly baffling to me how many people have become overnight experts on statistics, virology and human behavioural science. The reliance on the Daily Mail reporting of “data” and “science” to bolster their arguments is chilling.

I have at no point ever used the expressions “covidiot”or “granny killer”. Anti -vaxxers tend to self-identify.

Why can’t you accept that the data analysis is the responsibility of the government’s scientific advisers, not the general public?

Ooh, let’s refer you back to my previous post

Lots of people are natural rule followers I’ve realised. No matter how silly the rules or incompetent / corrupt the people making them.

It is somewhat hilarious that those who shouted about ‘following data’ the loudest, turned out to not mean if the data was better than expected. So in reality it was ‘follow the data, but only if it’s actually worse, otherwise stick to dates’.

It’s truly baffling to me how many people have become overnight experts on statistics, virology and human behavioural science. The reliance on the Daily Mail reporting of “data” and “science” to bolster their arguments is chilling.

But no one is claiming to be a scientist and you don't need to be anything more than computer literate and able to read to understand the facts. I sure for most, myself included that their analysis is of data which is coming from the governments own numbers not the daily mail.

Genuine question have you actually checked the rates in your own area?

To be fair the stats are easy enough to understand. You don’t need a PHD.

@TheKeatingFive

I'm stuck with the only reason being because the government said so?

Lots of people are natural rule followers I’ve realised. No matter how silly the rules or incompetent / corrupt the people making them.

The issue is that there's time between the relaxing of particular rules to allow some time for data to be collected and analysed before conclusions can be drawn as to the impact of that relaxing and if it's ok to relax further. It's be like me prescribing you a medication and you only giving it 3 days before deciding it doesn't work or the side effects are to much - you haven't given it enough time to decide either way. If everyone breaks the rules it skews the results and could potentially delay further relaxing down the line (and increase the risk of another lockdown).

I'm not an arbitrary rule follower, I just a) understand the reason for the rules, whether I agree or not and b) understand the impact of everyone making their own risk assessments.

It’s truly baffling to me how many people have become overnight experts on statistics, virology and human behavioural science

Well you are clearly demonstrating your utter clueless with Behavioural science anyway.

One of the first rules of behaviour change is that haranguing people and calling them stupid ... doesn’t tend to get results.

The issue is that there's time between the relaxing of particular rules to allow some time for data to be collected and analysed before conclusions can be drawn as to the impact of that relaxing and if it's ok to relax further.

A degree of non compliance has been baked into these dates also, probably an increasing degree as the governments BE know that compliance is slipping and that is gathering pace.

you don't need to be anything more than computer literate and able to read to understand the facts.

Nonsense. Not everything can be reduced to bullet points. People are desperate for this to be simple, but it is not.

Checking the rates in my own area only tells me the rates in my own area. It does not tell me how those numbers fit into the overall projections, logistics and national strategy.

@HelloMissus

To be fair the stats are easy enough to understand. You don’t need a PHD.

Jesus wept.

@TheKeatingFive

I would have presumed ‘data not dates’ should work both ways? Otherwise, what’s the point of it?

I'm sure they said they would look at the data on certain dates before moving on to the next stage. I don't remember ever hearing that they would bring things forward. The dates were always 'at the earliest, if the data is positive'.

I understand where you're coming from Op but I think if members of the Government had been as rigorous in adhering to the rules themselves, then Joe Public might be more willing to do so too. Lead from the front and all that!

We need to get over Corona asap, the country will soon be facing some huge financial challenges, caused by an excessive response to Corona.