Lockdown - Further Clarification

[marshman]

 Vaughan - your post is very apposite at the moment - over vigorous enforcement of  questionable guidelines could well mean the BA will begin to lose the support of some of their remaining supporters and then what will they do? 

And given that, and the fact I need to travel only a very short distance, perhaps when the lockdown is lifted, will there be differing rules for those that live here and those that live further away? Why not? There is much less chance, statistically, of me having an RTA on my journey to my boat than someone driving 100 miles! Thats the argument many have been using to prohibit people from going and that just does not stand the test!

However what you can guarantee is it the BA will have given little thought to how they are going to get out of this conundrum! They now seem to be offering differing guidance from the police - dangerous dangerous territory!  They will be banning us from tidal waters soon on the pretext that I can catch coronavirus from someone going the other way in a boat. Closing the Broads to those in the area, and indeed outside, seems to be setting an unwelcome precedent

[Meantime]

5 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Can't argue with that, it also being my understanding of the latest dictates. Seems quite reasonable to my way of thinking and quite probably a welcome relaxation of the guidelines. At least a few more folk can now walk backwards and forwards past their boats.

The problem is I'm not sure it is a relaxation of the guidelines, just another interpretation of the governments advice, this time from the NPPC with the advice of the CPS.

I'm an avid walker. My record is about 23.5 miles in a day and I can quite comfortable manage 15 or 16 miles regularly. My record is Broxbourne station down to Canary Wharf. That kind of walking takes a fair few hours. On the basis I live 2hrs drive from Broadland, I could quite comfortably drive to my boat and Broadland and do a 15 mile walk or 5-6 hrs and drive back home again. I use an app on my phone to log my walks so would have no problem if challenged to prove that it is not that unusual for me. However I have no intention in doing so in these current times. To date I haven't driven anywhere to go walking, but do have 14.5 miles of seawall to walk within 400 metres of where I live.

[JennyMorgan]

2 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

The problem is I'm not sure it is a relaxation of the guidelines, just another interpretation of the governments advice, this time from the NPPC with the advice of the CPS.

I'm an avid walker. My record is about 23.5 miles in a day and I can quite comfortable manage 15 or 16 miles regularly. My record is Broxbourne station down to Canary Wharf. That kind of walking takes a fair few hours. On the basis I live 2hrs drive from Broadland, I could quite comfortably drive to my boat and Broadland and do a 15 mile walk or 5-6 hrs and drive back home again. I use an app on my phone to log my walks so would have no problem if challenged to prove that it is not that unusual for me. However I have no intention in doing so in these current times. To date I haven't driven anywhere to go walking, but do have 14.5 miles of seawall to walk within 400 metres of where I live.

At one time the suggestion was that a 'reasonable' walk would last no more than an hour and a run no more than half an hour. On that basis a two hour drive would be frowned upon. 

Far two many interpretations abound.

[JennyMorgan]

20 minutes ago, marshman said:

Closing the Broads to those in the area, and indeed outside, seems to be setting an unwelcome precedent

Exactly!! No further comment required.

[marshman]

AND look who posted it!!!!!!!

[JennyMorgan]

5 minutes ago, marshman said:

AND look who posted it!!!!!!!

I am truly impressed!

[MauriceMynah]

12 minutes ago, marshman said:

AND look who posted it!!!!!!!

 

6 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

I am truly impressed!

And I'm really worried!

[MauriceMynah]

Seriously though, I read this thread with a sinking heart.

Members are saying the police shouldn't do this, that and the other. The government should say what we should do and what we should not do and make it all really clear.

I am one of a very small group, I am a certified idiot, yet even someone as thick as me can see what the government and the police want us to do, and it's not to look for loopholes. It's not to whinge about  things and it's not to try to find ways around the advice.

It's to stay alive. No more, no less. They have told us how to help in little words so the likes of me can understand. yet still I read about timing journeys (unnecessary ones) to compare them with lengths of time it takes to exercise.

It is often said that when a person "drink drives" he risks taking innocent peoples lives away. Well in my mind trying to bypass the "rules" puts those people in the same camp... no worse... a D&D may take a couple of people out, A spreader of this virus can kill hundreds, and do further irreparable damage to even more.

SO... I consider anyone intentionally breaking the spirit of these rules as a lower form of life than a drunk driver ploughing into a primary school.

 

 

[BroadsAuthority]

56 minutes ago, marshman said:

 Vaughan - your post is very apposite at the moment - over vigorous enforcement of  questionable guidelines could well mean the BA will begin to lose the support of some of their remaining supporters and then what will they do? 

And given that, and the fact I need to travel only a very short distance, perhaps when the lockdown is lifted, will there be differing rules for those that live here and those that live further away? Why not? There is much less chance, statistically, of me having an RTA on my journey to my boat than someone driving 100 miles! Thats the argument many have been using to prohibit people from going and that just does not stand the test!

However what you can guarantee is it the BA will have given little thought to how they are going to get out of this conundrum! They now seem to be offering differing guidance from the police - dangerous dangerous territory!  They will be banning us from tidal waters soon on the pretext that I can catch coronavirus from someone going the other way in a boat. Closing the Broads to those in the area, and indeed outside, seems to be setting an unwelcome precedent

The advisory note from NPCC for police officers is specifically in respect of what is seen as 'reasonable' from a legal perspective. It is not Government advice and you will note that all of the instructions on the Government website have not changed:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/coronavirus-guidance-on-access-to-green-spaces

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do#can-i-drive-to-a-national-park-or-other-green-space-to-walk

We are not ‘enforcing’ anything, just helping to share the message and assisting the police where necessary.

All of the National Parks family are continuing to repeat and share the Government instructions. The vast majority of the public are welcoming this as a sensible approach to help prevent more people from unnecessarily losing their lives. We agree the mixed messaging from the police and Gov is not helpful but this is not the time for the public to be trying identify loopholes.

Tom

[Oddfellow]

49 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Exactly!! No further comment required.

The BA does not have the authority to close the Broads. Have I missed something?

 

[Oddfellow]

19 minutes ago, BroadsAuthority said:

 

All of the National Parks family are continuing to repeat and share the Government instructions. The vast majority of the public are welcoming this as a sensible approach to help prevent more people from unnecessarily losing their lives. We agree the mixed messaging from the police and Gov is not helpful but this is not the time for the public to be trying identify loopholes.

Tom

I don't think anybody is trying to find loopholes. But we are pointing out that they are there for even the blind to see and large enough to drive a bus though. That CPS document has caused a great many problems and the idiot that leaked it needs to take a long hard look at their reasoning. 

[Turnoar]

Credit Jeff Fox > Ferocious Dog

Here are the official Coronavirus guidelines, or maybe not:

1. Basically, you can't leave the house for any reason, but if you have to, then you can.

2. Masks are useless, but maybe you have to wear one, it can save you, it is useless, but maybe it is mandatory as well.

3. Stores are closed, except those that are open.

4. You should not go to hospitals unless you have to go there. Same applies to doctors, you should only go there in case of emergency, provided you are not too sick.

5. This virus is deadly but still not too scary, except that sometimes it actually leads to a global disaster.

6. Gloves won't help, but they can still help.

7. Everyone needs to stay HOME, but it's important to GO OUT.

8. There is no shortage of groceries in the supermarket, but there are many things missing when you go there in the evening, but not in the morning. Sometimes.

9. The virus has no effect on children except those it affects.

10. Animals are not affected, but there is still a cat that tested positive in Belgium in February when no one had been tested, plus a few tigers here and there…

11. You will have many symptoms when you are sick, but you can also get sick without symptoms, have symptoms without being sick, or be contagious without having symptoms. Oh, my..

12. In order not to get sick, you have to eat well and exercise, but eat whatever you have on hand and it's better not to go out, well, but no…

13. It's better to get some fresh air, but you get looked at very wrong when you get some fresh air, and most importantly, you don't go to parks or walk. But don’t sit down, except that you can do that now if you are old, but not for too long or if you are pregnant (but not too old).

14. You can't go to retirement homes, but you have to take care of the elderly and bring food and medication.

15. If you are sick, you can't go out, but you can go to the pharmacy.

16. You can get restaurant food delivered to the house, which may have been prepared by people who didn't wear masks or gloves. But you have to have your groceries decontaminated outside for 3 hours. Pizza too?

17. Every disturbing article or disturbing interview starts with "I don't want to trigger panic, but…"

18. You can't see your older mother or grandmother, but you can take a taxi and meet an older taxi driver.

19. You can walk around with a friend but not with your family if they don't live under the same roof.

20. You are safe if you maintain the appropriate social distance, but you can’t go out with friends or strangers at the safe social distance.

21. The virus remains active on different surfaces for two hours, no, four, no, six, no, we didn't say hours, maybe days? But it takes a damp environment. Oh no, not necessarily.

22. The virus stays in the air - well no, or yes, maybe, especially in a closed room, in one hour a sick person can infect ten, so if it falls, all our children were already infected at school before it was closed. But remember, if you stay at the recommended social distance, however in certain circumstances you should maintain a greater distance, which, studies show, the virus can travel further, maybe.

23. We count the number of deaths but we don't know how many people are infected as we have only tested so far those who were "almost dead" to find out if that's what they will die of…

24. We have no treatment, except that there may be one that apparently is not dangerous unless you take too much (which is the case with all medications).

25. We should stay locked up until the virus disappears, but it will only disappear if we achieve collective immunity, so when it circulates… but we must no longer be locked up for that?

I do hope this clears up any confusion.........

[JennyMorgan]

Tom, I can't disagree with anything that you have just written. However, I will make one point, if you'll excuse me. 

10 minutes ago, BroadsAuthority said:

We are not ‘enforcing’ anything, just helping to share the message and assisting the police where necessary.

Yes, but your people are dressed in blue uniforms and drive around in smart white boats with blue, flashing lights on their roofs, and even board private boats in adjacent waters in order to 'share' the message.   

 

 

[BroadsAuthority]

13 minutes ago, FreedomBoatingHols said:

The BA does not have the authority to close the Broads. Have I missed something?

 

Sorry, I should have also clarified in that response to Marshman, we haven't 'closed' the Broads and nor do we have the powers to - we are just asking that people follow the Government advice and don't visit here at the moment. The police may decide to actively enforce in certain cases, but it's more about getting the (albeit strong at times) message across about us all doing our bit to stay at home.

I wasn't suggesting that anyone on here is trying to find loopholes by the way Andrew (and other members). Although from speaking to my colleagues / BroadsBeat we have certainly had some interesting interpretations on essential travel recently!

I/we fully understand the confusion created by this police document. It has certainly muddied the waters (no pun intended) and is probably why we are still responding to enquiries on our social media about whether people can drive to us and visit the area this weekend at 8.20 on a Friday evening 

Again, thank you all for your ongoing support, understanding and patience. It is a shame that things have become so frustrating and confusing but we hope that future guidance will be clearer and we'll be safely allowed to be back on the water sooner rather than later.

Tom

[JennyMorgan]

21 minutes ago, FreedomBoatingHols said:

The BA does not have the authority to close the Broads. Have I missed something?

Indeed it doesn't but the BA has been pushing out the very clear message that we must not go boating and if we do then we will be reported to the police. The BA's message is plain and clear.

[Guest Jayfire]

Whilst there are so many people (and I'm talking in general, not just on this forum) struggling to understand the very simple and clear instructions that have been given out in order for us all to get back to living our normal lives as soon as we possibly can, may I just remind you (once again) that we are now approaching 15000 who have lost their lives (in hospital, excluding care homes, at home etc)

I have now been involved in many cases of Covid affected individuals through work, but one of those 15000 was my very dear friend who was laid to rest today, I wasn't allowed to attend unfortunately due to restrictions laid in place regarding the numbers of people who were able to be there for which I am in no state of mind to add comment once I have posted this one.

So whilst some people try to find justification for pointless journeys, "exercise" which many people were not interested in before restrictions were put in place etc, can we all just remember that there are much more important issues going on right now and just apply some common sense to the instructions that have been given out in a very short timescale under difficult situations, for which it is blatantly obvious what the reasoning and idea behind them is.

[rightsaidfred]

4 hours ago, FreedomBoatingHols said:

This is more about sending confusing messages and the interpretation of them. 

If the government does no't want people to say, "well why can we do this innocent thing but not this innocent thing?", then it should rule out everything except what's permitted. 

The rules about driving to get exercise were a great example of a wealth of mixed, conflicting messages. At the start, it was unclear, then some government ministers said "don't drive to get exercise", the police got pilloried for filming people in the Peak District with drones and eventually we are told that that was over-zealous and that we could drive a little to get exercise. The irony is that this latest guidance muddies it again! Now you can drive, but not for longer than you intend to get exercise. Ok, so, if I drive for 30 minutes is that OK if I do 40 minutes of walking or is that 30 minutes there, 30 minutes back so I need to do 70 minutes walking? 

There is ambiguity everywhere and the disjointedness of the message surrounding what we can and can't do away from home is crazy; It's no wonder people aren't staying at home because, increasingly, they are being told that they don't have to, whilst still being told that they have to. 

I honestly think that some of these policymakers couldn't catch measles at an anti-vaxers party.

 

 

 

Sorry to disagree but I understand fully what I should or shouldn't do I don't need a diagram or special dispensation.

Fred

[rightsaidfred]

Sadly we still have those who think its one rule for them and another rule  for everyone else, everyone is making sacrifices not travelling is a very small one however insignificant it may seem to some.

Fred

[Wussername]

STAY AT HOME.

What part of that do people not understand.

[marshman]

Jay - I am sorry for the impact these recent events have had on your life and indeed very grateful that it has had little practical on my own but I will not retract my original post as i really do believe that in the midst of all this sadness, we have to careful that we do not lose sight of what may be happening under our noses. I know some will think ill of me for even posting this, but we have to be so careful of the freedoms won so hard by our forefathers are not eroded amongst this torment. 

In the blink of any eye, these hard won rights could so easily be taken away as a result of pettiness or misinterpretation by those in authority and I really would hate to see this happen. People like the BA, and the police too, rely on the support of the people and without this support their job becomes ever more difficult and I am not alone in being concerned.

Nonetheless I am happy to leave it there out of respect to you and others but I bet we have not heard the last of this, either now, or in the future especially when the half hearted attempts to get out of this mess start to emerge!

[JennyMorgan]

I have to admit to a degree of admiration and certainly support for Marshman's recent comments. Like him I preach caution and I share his well worded concerns.  It is regretful that we and others see reason to be worried at this stressful time. A question of trust, or lack of it in this case.

Jay, you have my sympathy, of course you do. I have family members directly involved, working on the frontline, one with four colleagues that are infected, yes, I am worried. 

[YnysMon]

Hard won rights?  Yes, that’s for another time. Just read what Jay posted. We are not talking about rights but people’s lives. For goodness sake!

[Vaughan]

I have great respect for what Jay and others are saying and of course the public only have to show a bit of common sense in this crisis.  I have mentioned elsewhere that my daughter is a sister in ICU at the James Paget hospital.

Like Marshman, however, I am also badly worried about where this will take our country in the future, especially regarding a lack of respect or confidence in overbearing authority.

We should all remember that our system of government (respected all over the World) is a constitutional monarchy and not a banana republic.  "Boris" is not Idi Amin and our system will never (should never) let him become one.  The police wear the Queen's uniform and have her crown in their cap badge.  It is not there to look pretty.  The public, traditionally, have not respected "the person" but the uniform.  Unfortunately in recent years this respect has become eroded, mostly by the police themselves mis-interpreting their actual authority.

At this critical time, unprecedented even in time of World War, the police must uphold the Law and it is up to Government to lay down the Law.  But if the Law is unclear, or open to too much interpretation then the police will appear more and more like Wyatt Earp or Judge Dredd, instead of servants of The Crown.

Like Marshman, I fear that this is also something from which the country may take a long time to recover.

[grendel]

10 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

Indeed it doesn't but the BA has been pushing out the very clear message that we must not go boating and if we do then we will be reported to the police. The BA's message is plain and clear.

The BA (and every other body) is passing on the Governments message - Do Not Travel Unnecessarily

The Government Message is Plain and Clear.

[SwanR]

Jay was spot on with his post. Everyone should be focusing on what is important to get through this right now. Nit picking about the detail really doesn’t help. The spirit and the intent of the Government’s instructions are clear. 

Yes, our lives are restricted right now. But those of us who need do no more than to stay at home other than going out for one walk a day or to get food are the fortunate ones.