Two households only indoors - do people even know about this?

[JeanBodel]

We recently had to cancel a holiday planned for three families in a cottage, because of the two-household rule. I am surprised to find that hardly any (none?) of DH's family have even heard of this rule, and are holidaying and partying with multiple households at a time.

I thought everyone knew about the max-two-households indoors rule. Possibly people are assuming the restrictions have eased by now?

(Whether the rule is right or wrong is a whole other debate. It is hard to understand the government's relative assessments of risk. But in my profession I am supposed to obey government guidelines. Like MPs [hollow laugh] )

I bet you my savings, your teens and 20s are not complying 100%. Unless you have the most perfect kids of course

ExmoorPony - I hope you have a lot of savings - I am rich .

DD1 is in London, and is definitely sticking to the rules. All her mates are too. They meet in parks if in a group, and if inside only two households. The work she does is in rare and infectious diseases, so pretty clued up, most of the rest of her mates are Junior Doctors. DD2 hasn't been out with more than one friend since lockdown.

@Flimflamfloogety

The issue most likely stems from the inconsistency. I expect people know, but when we're actively encouraged to sit on trains with multiple strangers, or cram into packed restaurants and pubs with strangers most people will think it's fine to meet your nan and your mum for tea and biscuits.

Does the virus somehow know who's related to you and who's not? 🤔

There is no inconsistency. You aren’t supposed to be crammed into packed restaurants and pubs, they are supposed to be practising social distancing and anyone with an iota of common sense wouldn’t stay in a place which wasn’t sticking to the rules. On public transport you are supposed to be wearing masks and keeping your distance as much as possible. It’s especially ridiculous to frequent restaurants/pubs and use public transport AND meet your nan and mum inside the house.

I don't even care any more. It's a fucking farce.

Also, workplaces are essential, i.e. to raise taxes to pay for public services etc., and to provide people with services/goods they need. That's very different from socialising which isn't essential.
Depends what your view of essential is. For many people, myself included, seeing family and close friends is essential for my mental health.
The fact our economy can't survive without everyone spending money on non-essentials like coffees, eating out, fast fashion is not my fault. Those things aren't essential to me. My family is and I've had enough of the government deciding for me what my priorities should be.

That's very different from socialising which isn't essential.

It's essential for very many people, myself included, particularly those who live alone.

The thought of another prolonged lockdown makes me wonder if I want to go on, to be honest.

Tbh I had completely forgot. I haven't listened to updates for weeks and once people went back to work and kids back at school then it is a pretty irrelevant rule now.

I knew.

Imagine supposed to be going away with 14 friends sharing a cottage in a few months. I won’t be going if the rules are the same but the others don’t seem too bothered so wouldn’t be surprised if some of them still go.

I think people think the rule is daft because you can be with a load of strangers in a pub, etc but not with your friends. But then you’d be more likely to socially distance from strangers in a pub I guess.

FB feed has been full of photos of people holidaying in the U.K. or round each other’s houses, more than two households.

Ds & I have been living with my mum since Christmas due to me being ill, ds has spent most of the lockdown & summer holidays playing online or video calling his friend, he only met up with her once in the park, then saw her at sixth form induction morning before returning to school last week, I have only been out three times since lockdown, all for hospital visits accompanied by ds, my mum hasn't been out at all since Christmas. My brother still will not bring my neice & nephew to visit, not even during the holidays when they had been at home for nearly 6 months, so my mum hasn't seen them at all. We haven't had anyone inside home other than the district nurse coming to see me, my mum's friend comes round on fine days when we all sit 2 metres apart in the garden.

There's no excuse for confusion the rules are easy to find on many websites.

The problem in pubs / restaurants in England is that your laws are advisory. In Scotland they are mandatory and where i live they are stuck to rigidly.

@QuentinWinters

Also, workplaces are essential, i.e. to raise taxes to pay for public services etc., and to provide people with services/goods they need. That's very different from socialising which isn't essential. Depends what your view of essential is. For many people, myself included, seeing family and close friends is essential for my mental health. The fact our economy can't survive without everyone spending money on non-essentials like coffees, eating out, fast fashion is not my fault. Those things aren't essential to me. My family is and I've had enough of the government deciding for me what my priorities should be.

If you don't have any money coming in because of a collapsed economy, then you'd have no money to live, let alone socialise.

People need to realise the "economy" isn't some external being that doesn't really matter. It's integral to the very fabric of society. It impacts on every single thing we do. Just look at other countries where their currency has collapsed, or they have hyper-inflation - it's not a pretty sight. Would you rather have rioting on the streets than meeting friends in a cafe??

Yes. I know that only two households can meet indoors. It was announced by a Govt Minister and there has been no news that this rule has been rescinded so it is clearly still the case.

I don't believe there has been a lack of clarity in the rules the Govt have announced. However, the press were second-guessing and making suggestions about when certain restrictions would be lifted etc and reporting as if it had come from Govt.

Keep up to date on the rules directly from the horses' mouths:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/

People need to realise the "economy" isn't some external being that doesn't really matter. It's integral to the very fabric of society.
Yep. And other people need to realise that social relationships are integral to human beings psychological health.
It isn't an either/or, as long as the government fail to recognise that humans need social support they will have this issue. People will either break the rules and see friends as well as go out and spend, or they will be too scared and will minimise socialising and spending.

I'm in the former camp, but not a cat in hells chance Im going to the pub with randomers if its too dangerous to see my friends.

The government can't have their cake and eat it. They need to align their priorities with basic human needs, otherwise we are fucked.

[quote NotEverythingIsBlackandWhite]Yes. I know that only two households can meet indoors. It was announced by a Govt Minister and there has been no news that this rule has been rescinded so it is clearly still the case.

I don't believe there has been a lack of clarity in the rules the Govt have announced. However, the press were second-guessing and making suggestions about when certain restrictions would be lifted etc and reporting as if it had come from Govt.

Keep up to date on the rules directly from the horses' mouths:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/[/quote]
If only we had a well respected national broadcasting company that was able to keep our population properly informed with the facts re covid?

Oh we do - the BBC - shame they (Keunsberg et al) were too busy trying to second guess what changes were about to made and then ignoring the announcements at press conferences, harking back to decisions made months ago, and indulging into all kinds of "what-if-ery", rather than actually reporting the news, i.e. facts, and keeping people properly informed.

There's a place for investigative journalism, challenging the politicians, etc - that place is the programs such as Newsnight. "The News" should be just that, the news.

The BBC have got it so badly wrong during Covid. I suspect it's because of the fallout of Brexit that they lost sight of what their purpose is, especially News bulletins. The "News" programs need to be first and foremost telling people the facts - i.e. when there was a press conference, the News should have been mostly about reporting and interpreting what had been said. Kuensberg and her ilk didn't do that - they launched straight into "what-if-ery" which massively diluted the message that needed to be sent to the public.

We can't let it be forgotten on that last daily press briefing when Boris announced some pretty significant relaxations, Kuensberg completely ignored what he had just said and her question was about whether we should have locked down sooner back in March. It was as if she'd just slept through his announcements and was determined to ask her own question whatever he'd said. Very, very, poor.

Yes, me and DH know the rules and are sticking to them, as are my siblings and their partners, my parents, my nieces and nephews and their partners.

Normally all my family spend Christmas together - 16 people from 8 different households. I really doubt that will be allowed this year. Unless the government say that many households can get together it will be the first Christmas in my 65 years that I haven't spent with my parents.

No way will my parents flout the rules nor will one of my siblings and their husband