Why is lockdown being eased when the alert level hasn’t changed?

[Skybluepink123]

Just seen that the CV alert level hasn’t been reduced from 4 to 3 yet the government are easing lockdown measures imminently. At level 4, the virus is widespread and risk is high and restrictions must be in place. Why then has the government been allowed to ease measures when there is still a clear, identifiable risk to our health?

The relaxation is incredibly gradual. Six people can meet 2m away outdoors - that is both already happening and there is no evidence whatsoever that that poses a risk of transmission. The important things - like schools properly opening, offices and public transport are all months away.

The economy is screwed. Healthy people need to get back to work, vulnerable people need to continue to isolate.

Simple answer to OP's question - Boris Johnson did it to distract attention away from the Cummings fiasco that he failed to deal with properly. Does he care that this will put more poeople at risk?

So if the vulnerable Are expected to bunker down to let everyone else out "to save the economy" Then the economy is well and truely screwed.

There are too many vulnerable. Many, probably most, of them actually are working either as employees or as carers for parents or children.

There is no real way to shield people...look how well that's worked in care homes so far! Shielding doesn't work when people live in the same home as others. Once the virus is in the home, it is shared nicely around.

Interestingly, the people with the biggest mental health problems as a result of lockdown are the shielded

It took 70 years to work off the debt from the Second World War.

Did you even realise you were working to pay off that debt in recent years? No. It had very little impact in your life. It didn't have a huge negative impact on your life , your parents or grandparents . In fact during most of that time people saw a steady rise in their quality of life.

So why will this debt be different?

It's a bit much to label everyone on furlough ' reluctant sheepie'. Many will lose their jobs in the future (or have already. )!
I'm scared that type of thinking will turn people away from each other. Some people may have been filmed for the news out flying kites or whatever but many won't have jobs and I find that so hard to imagine; UC isn't enough for people to live on and all of it isn't any fault of their own yet it's already causing divisions. I think it's just sad.

Surely the relaxation is timed to coincide with the schools starting to reopen for the 3 year groups?

It would be odd if you could send your kids to school but not meet family in your garden. And no doubt the unions would make great capital out of the fact that it is 'too dangerous to meet friends yet school are expected to be open'.

The economy is screwed. Healthy people need to get back to work, vulnerable people need to continue to isolate.

It doesn't matter how many people go back to work, if people don't believe that they are safe to go out and spend money, the economy won't improve.

It's not a question of just shielding the vulnerable because too many people care for or live with somebody in a vulnerable group.

By setting a target and then relaxing restrictions despite not meeting the target, the government has damaged their credibility.

Surely the relaxation is timed to coincide with the schools starting to reopen for the 3 year groups?

Schools were only supposed to reopen when targets had been met.

The economy had to get going.

It doesn't matter when John Lewis reopens - if people don't want to buy things, the economy will remain where it is.

I don't know when it will be safe to go shopping again, all I can do is listen to evidence.

Yesterday the Prime minister blocked a question to one of his scientific advisors because he was frightened of the answer.

Very true merrymouse

Boris needs to get the economy moving again to make money. Fuck the vulnerable

I just don’t understand this, are people under the impression that if you’re vulnerable you also lack capacity and are unable to socially distance and wear masks?

It’s such an odd thing to write. Like the vulnerable have no capacity and are unable to wear masks and socially distance, to take personal responsibility. They will just go about their business and catch it.

It’s batshit. My husband has asthma, he’s able to socially distance and wear ppe as appropriate. His view correctly is it’s his responsibility. He doesn’t go up to people, he doesn’t get close, he’s in control

As are every single vulnerable person with capacity

@midgebabe

It took 70 years to work off the debt from the Second World War.

Did you even realise you were working to pay off that debt in recent years? No. It had very little impact in your life. It didn't have a huge negative impact on your life , your parents or grandparents . In fact during most of that time people saw a steady rise in their quality of life.

So why will this debt be different?

I agree with this not forgetting this is a global problem and countries that escape much domestic economic damage will still be vulnerable to things outside their control globally. This is very much likely to be a level playing field.

So what do people want, to stay locked in their house for the forseable future, till a vaccine might be found, and if it's not stay in their house for the rest of their life.

Never see loved ones again, leave their elderly relatives to die alone and scared having not seen a loved one for months, or had a hug or comfort!

Is that where we are getting to now?

@merrymouse

The economy is screwed. Healthy people need to get back to work, vulnerable people need to continue to isolate.

It doesn't matter how many people go back to work, if people don't believe that they are safe to go out and spend money, the economy won't improve.

It's not a question of just shielding the vulnerable because too many people care for or live with somebody in a vulnerable group.

By setting a target and then relaxing restrictions despite not meeting the target, the government has damaged their credibility.

Its not just credibility, they are f*ing the economy doing this too early. 8,000 are being infected every day. By releasing lockdown too early we will get another spike and have to go back to lockdown.

Monumentally stupid and NOT following the science, again.

@CoachBombay

So what do people want, to stay locked in their house for the forseable future, till a vaccine might be found, and if it's not stay in their house for the rest of their life.

Never see loved ones again, leave their elderly relatives to die alone and scared having not seen a loved one for months, or had a hug or comfort!

Is that where we are getting to now?

No not forever, eradicate the virus completely. No chance of doing it now.

Peter and how do you plan on irradiating a virus? Especially bid no vaccine is found.

Why do people who think that we need lockdown until the infection is properly controlled get accused of suggesting lockdown till vaccine?

The level of virus in society needs to be low enough that test and trace works, that we can afford to support fully all the people who should be isolating , that the shielded and vulnerable can be set free as well as the young.

Which is essentially what the scientists were saying.

So what do people want, to stay locked in their house for the forseable future, till a vaccine might be found,

No, just for the government to stick to the guidelines that they have said - otherwise what the f* are they doing?

@Bluntness100

Boris needs to get the economy moving again to make money. Fuck the vulnerable

I just don’t understand this, are people under the impression that if you’re vulnerable you also lack capacity and are unable to socially distance and wear masks?

It’s such an odd thing to write. Like the vulnerable have no capacity and are unable to wear masks and socially distance, to take personal responsibility. They will just go about their business and catch it.

It’s batshit. My husband has asthma, he’s able to socially distance and wear ppe as appropriate. His view correctly is it’s his responsibility. He doesn’t go up to people, he doesn’t get close, he’s in control

As are every single vulnerable person with capacity

Not really, no. I'm in a vulnerable group (for a few underlying conditions). I don't quite make it into the shielding group. I am a teacher. We have been given the following government advice:

• no PPE may be worn
• social distancing should be done with older pupils but not expected of the younger ones
• shielding teachers should stay at home. Vulnerable are expected to go in or resign.

I am fortunate that my Headteacher concluded we have enough teachers who arent vulnerable to manage the first fortnight but I fully expect I will be in on 15 June when more year groups go back. PPE is banned, social distancing with children is questionable and I can't afford to resign. Like many, many others out there.
It's nice your DH can social distance and wear appropriate PPE but that option isn't available to all of us.
Since South Korea have already had to re-close schools and they had cases far lower than us when they re-opened I'm not holding my breath for this being successful.

Yes we paid off our WW2 debt but it stopped us doing a lot of things with the money we repaid. You don’t necessarily notice it in your pocket but we don’t have high speed rail, we have poor transport in the north, we have run down cities, we pay a lot for childcare, we couldn’t withstand the bank crisis etc. We really have given up a lot to pay off debt and now our DC will be doing the same. We even gave up a world class health service and never did get excellent schools. Anytime who thinks debt doesn’t matter is utterly wrong. The missed opportunities are difficult to regain and it’s part of the reason we haven’t coped with this crisis well enough. Lack of investment. This problem will spiral in the next few decades and we will be outside the Eu. On Our Own.

There is no logical reason for exiting lockdown now, when the situation is so much worse than it was when we went in to lockdown.

If the country needed to go into lockdown on 23 March, when the day before, there were 665 confirmed new daily cases, then why are we looking at leaving when there are 1,887 confirmed new daily cases, ie 3 times as many?

Does this sound like an outbreak that is 'under control' to anyone?

I think Boris's full steam ahead is crazy, and not only going against his own 5 step programme, but judging by what the scientists are saying, acting very dangerously.

It's not just 6 people meeting, its schools, dentists going back in 2 weeks, non essential shops re-opening on the 15th, and yet the R rate is only just below 1% atm.

Thank god i'm in Wales, our only difference today is we can meet with 1 other person within 5 miles from your home. They are still watching the R rate carefully, and nothing will happen until it is much lower. Also they are getting track and trace fully established before they do anything else. Unlike in England where it all seems to be happening at the same time and not running terribly smoothly.

Definitely not @effingterrified

We have got this so very wrong. We should have locked down sooner and harder.

Its a bit too soon and easing lock down too soon on top of the Dominic Cummings effect spells disaster.

Did we get any questions about Dominic Cummings in the briefing today? Nope. Question answered.