Exercise could be banned - Matt Hancock

[LittleRen]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52172035

"Matt Hancock told the BBC's Andrew Marr that the government would "take action" if further measures are needed to bring the coronavirus under control.

It comes after reports of groups of people gathering in parks during sunny weather this weekend."

So do we think this will happen - normally this is how it goes, the threat comes, and a week later it's reality. It's a shame that people still flouted the rules this weekend :(

I can't see a thread on this already but please let me know if there is one!!

As far as I was aware, the NHS is coping at the moment. In fact, my understanding (which may be incorrect) was that the increase in deaths yesterday was actually less than expected.
Please then, could someone explain to me why we are now being threatened with such a huge loss of remaining liberties?
Oh look, another windmill.

It's unenforceable. Unfortunately we are all suffering from the Government's incompetence in failing to plan adequately for the outbreak. They are now panicking and trying to blame the public - the vast majority of whom are behaving themselves.

Why not say that you can go out but you have to keep moving - within reason. OK to stop just for a couple of minutes but not OK to sunbathe in the park all afternoon. Dogs absolutely have to be exercised and I would extend that to young children as well.

You have to risk assess and weigh up the physical and mental benefits of exercising against the likelihood to catching the virus.

Something about this doesn't add up to me.

"Let's not have a minority spoil it for everybody."

If it's a 'minority' breaking the rules then why worry. Obviously they shouldn't be but if the majority are following guidelines then the minority don't matter so much.

"What matters is that we get out of this as soon as possible."

There is no getting out of it until most people have had it or there is a vaccine. From that pov people being out and about speeds up the end game - but risks more lives because of the high peak need for hospital care.

I hope everyone follows the guidelines, I really do - but I resent being given reasons for threats that make no sense.

Maybe I live a boring life but I really don't think it's that bad at the moment. I know I'm lucky to have a sizeable garden and trampoline for the dcs. But we can go out for exercise and go to a shop. Not much different to what I normally do (except no groups etc) I go out for a jog round the block every other day, usually with dd. On the days I don't jog, I might walk to the shop for exercise. To get things like bread/milk. Only go to a supermarket in the car about once a week. I don't understand why people can't stick to it. If they make it stricter those people finding this hard are going to find it even harder!

what part of exercise involves sitting in a park sunbathing

Why can't people lie on grass though?
I don't have a garden.
Dc and I walk 2 miles to a very quiet field near us. When I get there I sit down on my coat because my knees hurt and have some water while they play. Who am I hurting? No one. But if someone saw me, they could take my picture and I could be the poster girl for Nurse Killer #1, couldn't I?
Absolute nonsense.

I'm really against this whilst lots of people are still going to work in non-essential jobs.

At the moment, the rules are anyone who can't work from home goes into work, which can mean using public transport, it can mean being in close contact, it can mean touching things other people have touched without gloves. The risks of transmission in a space like a warehouse are far higher than the risks of transmission whilst out on a walk/run if you are being sensible.

I know some people aren't following the rules properly, but surely then it's more about enforcing the rules we do have? Instead of making more rules that the police can't enforce?

Also, is this the same Matt Hancock who on Friday wouldn't give a straight answer about whether going out for picnic with members of your own family is allowed?

(Clue, it isn't).

Blakes post as much as I try and disagree with it is actually a good point.

The lack of preparedness by the government knowing this was coming back in January is criminal. The lack of protection our NHS staff have to fight this virus is also disgraceful.

But I have to say it’s also the fact that many people are breaking the rules or pushing the limitations into the grey area. This mixed in with a lack of protection for clinical staff is bound to keep the infection rates high.

It is imperative the blame does not fall solely onto the British people, the authorities must take their share of blame too for burying their heads in the sand back in January and February.

For me, I think trying a one size fits all policy for the UK is where they are going wrong.

London is a densely populated city with huge numbers of people living in flats and limited green space.

It needs a solution which works for the city. Maybe sending each household a letter with a time of day they can be out doing their exercise to stagger things? Maybe only allowing people living in flats out for exercise? Maybe opening up private parks and green spaces for people to use on a rota? Not ideal for everyone but better than banning exercise altogether.

The solution for rural Shropshire would be different.

I think more control should be handed over to local councils and police with national guidelines and oversight to enable arrangements to be made which work for the geography and demographics of individual areas and can be adjusted according to infection rates in the area.

As far as I was aware, the NHS is coping at the moment.

It’s not. Which is why hospital appointments are cancelled, cancer treatment is cancelled, etc.

I'm not sure a total lockdown would work. It'll be all fine and dandy in the large towns and cities but rural communities won't see any police at all...so how can it be enforced there? Our nearest manned police station is 25 miles away and there are 10 police stationed there

I think the shock won't be mine.
It will be the people finding the excuses to justify their 3 hour runs/ bike rides / dog walks / or family exercise (day trips).

Alpha “ I know I'm lucky to have a sizeable garden and trampoline for the dcs. But we can go out for exercise and go to a shop.”

So of course it’s not different for you. Try living in a small space with no garden.

Why can't the police or army guard, parks and open spaces to break up crowds?

FFS.

It’s that “this is why we can’t have nice things” phenomenon raising its head again where the pisstakers spoil things for the decent people.

It's unenforceable.

I think you'll find that it is enforceable under the new legislation. That was sort of the whole point in passing it.

If you live in a flat, especially without a balcony, I appreciate the need to get out for 20mins every day. What isn’t reasonable is people/families with nice big gardens insisting on 1-2 hour/run etc every day.

If my town is 100,000 people and there are 10-20,000 out at any one time, proper social distancing is literally impossible. This isn’t outdoors family fun/exercise time.

Cracker “ It needs a solution which works for the city. Maybe sending each household a letter with a time of day they can be out doing their exercise to stagger things? Maybe only allowing people living in flats out for exercise? Maybe opening up private parks and green spaces for people to use on a rota? Not ideal for everyone but better than banning exercise altogether.”

Yes. You wouldn’t want to hand over to my local council though! Christ knows what they’d come up with.

I know some people aren't following the rules properly, but surely then it's more about enforcing the rules we do have? Instead of making more rules that the police can't enforce?

Absolutely. Close the gap between the guidelines and the law and give the police the power to enforce them better.

I shall go out for my run/walk at night then (I already go at dusk/nightfall to avoid people.)

No way am I giving up my hours dog walking/exercise in the fresh air with no other people about when the supermarkets are carnage and the 2m rule not remotely enforced there apart from the queue to get in.

Also, Matt Hancock is pushing a narrative very strongly that "if everyone follows the rules, this will be over sooner".

Unless we can actually stop the spread of the virus (which I think would need a proper testing program in place), then these rules will have to be in place (with perhaps periodic relaxation) for a long time. Either he doesn't understand how flattening the curve works, or he's lying to us.

I think the government are trying to push a narrative that will blame individuals for deaths to try and cover up their own failings, and we should be very wary of buying into that narrative (whilst still continuing to follow sensible social distancing rules).

There was an absolute shit load of Middle aged men in Lycra enjoying their "group" cycle this morning, in my rural area. Just saying, not all rural areas are doing the right things.

Best to get a long sunbathing sesh at the park in today then xx

permana what difference does night time make? I mean, if they ban it?