Lockdown - Further Clarification

[Vaughan]

6 minutes ago, SwanR said:

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. 

Please don't think I disagree with you. I am just pointing out that this may not be the only thing we will have to worry about in future.

[Oddfellow]

11 hours ago, Wussername said:

STAY AT HOME.

What part of that do people not understand.

It's all the other info from official sources that say that some going out is ok, including driving that causes confusion. 

Making posts that say "what part of that do people not understand" suggests you haven't read a lot of the posts here that discuss the growing list of things you can do that aren't at home. 

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, grendel said:

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

The Government Message is Plain and Clear.

Not even a glimmer of argument with that message, nor the perhaps more relevant message of 'stay at home'. 

That is not what I, and possibly Marshman, are concerned about. The government have issued one size fits all guidelines, understandably, and the inner sanctum at the BA appear to have, perhaps gleefully, interpreted that as an excuse to  'police' the Broads, coincidentally  during the nesting season, threatening police (proper) action.  I wish I could believe that there was no hidden agenda here but I can't. There has long been a creeping agenda to restrict our use of the Broads, plenty of evidence to support that accusation.  As far as the BA is concerned, too good an opportunity to miss, or public duty duty,  you decide.

Beyond that, these sweeping guidelines, and the Authority's interpretation, do appear to have forgotten those who have the very good fortune to live by the Broads.

[Vaughan]

I have "liked" your post not because I like what you say, but because I agree with you, that there is always the underlying risk that you might be right!

[Meantime]

11 hours ago, Wussername said:

STAY AT HOME.

What part of that do people not understand.

But it is not a one size fits all, if only it were that simple.

The government has stressed the health benefits of exercise and that it is ok to go out once a day to exercise.

In addition the government have said that if you can go to work, and this is not just key workers, then you should, if it is not possible to work from home.

The government advice and guidelines do not need to be muddied by the likes of the BA, county councils, local councils, the NPCC or media.

There is a very real danger that bodies such as the BA, with no real authority in this matter could make people defiant. There is only so many times that people who are following the rules want to hear the same message and they want to hear it from those people who govern. 

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, SwanR said:

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. 

Jean I agree, but I also fear that there are those that will use this present disaster to slip something unpleasant under the door. If only I could trust them then it would be one less worry.

I am glad that Vaughan has reminded us that his daughter is in the ICU unit at a local hospital, one of mine is also in a local NHS hospital and, as I have said, four of her immediate colleagues have the virus, one seriously so. You might think that we have enough to worry about but the Broads is deeply ingrained in both of us, and undoubtedly others,  we are aware that tomorrow will come. For the record I am deeply proud of my daughter, she goes to work knowing full well that she could return to her two little boys and bring the virus with her, yet I still worry about OUR Broads.

[Poppy]

31 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

There is a very real danger that bodies such as the BA, with no real authority in this matter could make people defiant. There is only so many times that people who are following the rules want to hear the same message and they want to hear it from those people who govern. 

[Cockatoo]

I think part of the problem is that a lot of people don't know who to believe and people are looking for ulterior motives everywhere.

Too many mixed messages and the police 'clarification' has just made it worse.

 

I think the only thing that is definite is that it will get worse before it gets better.

[MauriceMynah]

1 hour ago, JennyMorgan said:

The government have issued one size fits all guidelines, understandably, and the inner sanctum at the BA appear to have, perhaps gleefully, interpreted that as an excuse to  'police' the Broads, coincidentally  during the nesting season, threatening police (proper) action. 

Sorry Peter, I don't understand that sentence.

[ExSurveyor]

As far as the legislation is concerned, it automatically ends in April 2022.

The national bodies and media have muddied the waters by trying to clarify things, more so recently, rather than stick to the government message.

Loop holes will exist, forget them and stay at home.

IF, local bodies are interpreting it with too much zeal they will have to stop on that date, if not the majority of the public will turn against them.

Parliament built in this safeguard and the courts have dismissed a number of fines issued.

As a country we are generally passive, but those that abuse our general good nature will find that as a whole we will push back if provoked.

 I am content to stay at home and follow guidance whilst it is needed. No one should mistake that for an opportunity to erode my freedoms afterwards.

 To put it in perspective, a few silly coppers have got carried away, they are only human, they have been ' spoken' to.

I know a number of police officers, they are not enjoying this situation any more than we are.

The bigger issue is the security of the Chief Constables advice to the troops, this should never have been published.

On the whole the Government and police are doing a good job in very difficult circumstances.  Other minor authorities are struggling but again doing the best they can.

 

[grendel]

2 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

Not even a glimmer of argument with that message, nor the perhaps more relevant message of 'stay at home'. 

That is not what I, and possibly Marshman, are concerned about. The government have issued one size fits all guidelines, understandably, and the inner sanctum at the BA appear to have, perhaps gleefully, interpreted that as an excuse to  'police' the Broads, coincidentally  during the nesting season, threatening police (proper) action.  I wish I could believe that there was no hidden agenda here but I can't. There has long been a creeping agenda to restrict our use of the Broads, plenty of evidence to support that accusation.  As far as the BA is concerned, too good an opportunity to miss, or public duty duty,  you decide.

Beyond that, these sweeping guidelines, and the Authority's interpretation, do appear to have forgotten those who have the very good fortune to live by the Broads.

No disagreement from me here, just that worrying about that is for when this is all over, for those of us that come through this unscathed and healthy, then we can worry about this, at the moment our main aim should be just that, coming through this unscathed and healthy.

[vanessan]

14 minutes ago, psychicsurveyor said:

Loop holes will exist, forget them and stay at home.

 

9 minutes ago, grendel said:

our main aim should be just that, coming through this unscathed and healthy.

In a nutshell boys, in a nutshell....................

[Poppy]

43 minutes ago, psychicsurveyor said:

As far as the legislation is concerned, it automatically ends in April 2022.

 

 

Unless the Government choose to renew it !

[Oddfellow]

55 minutes ago, psychicsurveyor said:

 

On the whole the Government and police are doing a good job in very difficult circumstances.  Other minor authorities are struggling but again doing the best they can.

 

I think it is doing a barely adequate job in fairness and I suspect there aren't many in Healthcare that would agree take it this far, nor many that have lost loved ones "before their time".  

On the third of Feb, Boris Johnson stood up in Greenwich and told people that this country was prepared to not lock-down and go it alone in the name of the economy. Thank god that this position was changed, but it was changed too late.

Figures from Sweden released yesterday shows the shocking growth in cases and death from employing this tactic. With a population of just 10m, there's 118 for every million people; so far. The graph is truly scary.  

This is what this country could have looked like. We're already on track for the biggest deathtoll in Europe and the correlation between this and government policy and decisions cannot be ignored. 

Back to the lockdown and the muddying of the waters by various authorities other than the government (which itself was forced to backtrack over driving somewhere for exercise). The one thing that is 100% know and undisputed is that we we don't make close contact with each other via movement outside of the home, the virus struggles to transmit.

#StayAtHome can be the only sensible advice. 

If the graph of Sweden's rapid acceleration keep people at home, then it's likely only sanctions and force will.  

 

 

[DAVIDH]

Agree with much of this Andy. I started off being blindly loyal to the government's methods of managing the crisis, but am dismayed at the sometimes seemingly inept decisions being made. Your quote of what Boris said in February chimes very much with the allegations being made about a decision to go for herd immunity, with all the deaths that would have brought. This policy has been denied by the government. We were aware that transmission from human to human was being reported in China. We all watched in horror in January at what was happening in Wuhan. Why did we not order the personal protection equipment we needed then. We had carried out a "practice" pandemic alert in 2017 and the lessons were there to be learned. We stopped the testing of suspected Covid 19 patients mid March, when the WHO consistently say testing is the only way out of a lockdown ,apart from the development of a vaccine. Thousands of stranded UK citizens are due to fly home from India next week, but we are doing nothing to quarantine or even test them. The swab tests have been slow to set up. We are around 21,000 per day where Matt Hancock has promised 100,000 by the end of the month. Some of these testing stations are up to two hours drive away from those that need them. Then there is the scandal of care workers not having these tests or any protective equipment, and therefore spreading the virus to residents of care homes. How must relatives who have mothers or fathers in these homes feel right now? 

I know these are unprecedented times, and the government is learning as it goes along. I can forgive them for taking a wrong direction. Their handling of the impacts on the economy, and the preservation of jobs, has been spot on, However, I just feel now that announcements are being made in a reactive, not proactive fashion. Each time a fresh outcry hits the media, they come out with a policy to appease. It happened with testing, with PPE and with the care sector, where they were told they would become a brand that the UK would love as much as the NHS. Great words but none of it shields the staff or the residents. 

I've heard the statements that there is enough PPE and that it's logistics, that testing the anti-body tests, is ongoing etc, etc, but as we stand here today, very little has changed. I'm sure everyone in government making these decisions feels every death, but I also suspect a certain amount of blame deflection is going on, so that we don't hear the truth and apportion blame. 

[Poppy]

20 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:

Agree with much of this Andy. I started off being blindly loyal to the government's methods of managing the crisis, but am dismayed at the sometimes seemingly inept decisions being made. Your quote of what Boris said in February chimes very much with the allegations being made about a decision to go for herd immunity, with all the deaths that would have brought. This policy has been denied by the government. We were aware that transmission from human to human was being reported in China. We all watched in horror in January at what was happening in Wuhan. Why did we not order the personal protection equipment we needed then. We had carried out a "practice" pandemic alert in 2017 and the lessons were there to be learned. We stopped the testing of suspected Covid 19 patients mid March, when the WHO consistently say testing is the only way out of a lockdown ,apart from the development of a vaccine. Thousands of stranded UK citizens are due to fly home from India next week, but we are doing nothing to quarantine or even test them. The swab tests have been slow to set up. We are around 21,000 per day where Matt Hancock has promised 100,000 by the end of the month. Some of these testing stations are up to two hours drive away from those that need them. Then there is the scandal of care workers not having these tests or any protective equipment, and therefore spreading the virus to residents of care homes. How must relatives who have mothers or fathers in these homes feel right now? 

I know these are unprecedented times, and the government is learning as it goes along. I can forgive them for taking a wrong direction. Their handling of the impacts on the economy, and the preservation of jobs, has been spot on, However, I just feel now that announcements are being made in a reactive, not proactive fashion. Each time a fresh outcry hits the media, they come out with a policy to appease. It happened with testing, with PPE and with the care sector, where they were told they would become a brand that the UK would love as much as the NHS. Great words but none of it shields the staff or the residents. 

I've heard the statements that there is enough PPE and that it's logistics, that testing the anti-body tests, is ongoing etc, etc, but as we stand here today, very little has changed. I'm sure everyone in government making these decisions feels every death, but I also suspect a certain amount of blame deflection is going on, so that we don't hear the truth and apportion blame. 

Excellent analysis David. Yet there are people who still can't see throught the inadequacies of the Government's handling of the crisis !

[unclemike]

simple answer could you critics do any better?

[floydraser]

We had an election not so long ago, I don't remember any party's manifesto mentioning their expertise in dealing with a global pandemic. If only we could have seen it coming we could have maybe voted for someone else?? Don't answer that; it's rhetorical.

Also, the media have a lot to answer for as regards confusion of information. They all seem to be trying to earn Journalist of the Year for stirring up the biggest controversy.

I think we as members of the general public should remember our own house is not in such good order before we wade into too much criticism of anyone else. Aren't we clever enough to do what's best without being policed?

[Oddfellow]

51 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:

I know these are unprecedented times, and the government is learning as it goes along. I can forgive them for taking a wrong direction. Their handling of the impacts on the economy, and the preservation of jobs, has been spot on, However, I just feel now that announcements are being made in a reactive, not proactive fashion. Each time a fresh outcry hits the media, they come out with a policy to appease. It happened with testing, with PPE and with the care sector, where they were told they would become a brand that the UK would love as much as the NHS. Great words but none of it shields the staff or the residents. 
 

Has it? Protecting jobs through the furlough scheme is good. Sadly, protecting the companies that employ these people isn't. Dig below the headlines and you find grants are little more than headline grabbing and a bank loan system that is being abused by the banks rendering them worthless to businesses, especially those where the banks insist directors put their assets up as collateral.  

Our own industry is set to be decimated by this. Tourist destinations could become ghost towns without significant assistance from the Government; Yarmouth is the country's second largest seaside holiday town. It is also one of the most deprived areas of the south with one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in Europe. Its fishing industry has been decimated and it's only really been on the up through off-shore work. Lowestoft is similar. Yarmouth relies on tourism but in 2020 there will be little or none. How will this town cope?

Norfolk's whole tourism economy is larger than Cornwall's (around £3.3bn against about £1.8bn). It accounts for about 18% of the whole county economy and supports about 67,000 jobs. That's about a third of the population of Norwich to put it into perspective. 

Yesterday, Grant Schapps cast doubt over the year by saying in an interview that he wouldn't be booking a summer holiday this year.

There was an announcement that it was going to bail-out the shellfish industry. Maybe this is the start of good news as Westminster might be beginning to realise that entire sectors need major support. My fingers are crossed, but my breath isn't being held as I might need it shortly. 

 

 

[Oddfellow]

9 minutes ago, chameleon said:

simple answer could you critics do any better?

Simple response: it's not our jobs to do better. These people wanted their jobs; campaigned for them, canvased votes and got elected. Now it's time for them to really earn the money and our respect. 

 

[Vaughan]

6 minutes ago, FreedomBoatingHols said:

especially those where the banks insist directors put their assets up as collateral.  

Unbelievable.

I don't mean I don't believe you Andy, but whatever happened to the legal definition of a "limited" company"?

There is a word I would use for the banks and it was coined in Gt Yarmouth, on the banks of Breydon Water.

"Longshore sharks".

[Poppy]

22 minutes ago, chameleon said:

simple answer could you critics do any better?

For a start, I would have taken notice and acted on the findings of Exercise Cygnus .

I would have not permitted the Cheltenham Festival to have gone ahead, as well as a number of other large gatherings around that time.

I would not have been so stupid as to have refused to take advantage of the pan EU procurement scheme for ventilators, PPE etc.

I would have taken up ( or at least investigated ) numerous offers from small/ medium companies who were offering to supply essentials - and still are.

As I said, that's just for starters !

[Poppy]

11 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Unbelievable.

I don't mean I don't believe you Andy, but whatever happened to the legal definition of a "limited" company"?

There is a word I would use for the banks and it was coined in Gt Yarmouth, on the banks of Breydon Water.

"Longshore sharks".

Exactly.  What collateral were directors of the banks required to put up in 2008 ?

[Oddfellow]

11 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Unbelievable.

I don't mean I don't believe you Andy, but whatever happened to the legal definition of a "limited" company"?

There is a word I would use for the banks and it was coined in Gt Yarmouth, on the banks of Breydon Water.

"Longshore sharks".

The banks are being really awful, Vaughan. Like many organisations, they are struggling to cope with the influx of enquiries (which is to be expected, for sure) but the responses have been appalling. Given that the government has stated that it will guarantee 80% of these covid-related loans, the banks' attitude has been exactly what we have come to expect of banks over the last 20 years or more: interested only in their own gain rather than actually facilitating businesses which is exactly what the government has tried to ensure they do in this instance. 

[ExSurveyor]

6 minutes ago, FreedomBoatingHols said:

The banks are being really awful, Vaughan. Like many organisations, they are struggling to cope with the influx of enquiries (which is to be expected, for sure) but the responses have been appalling. Given that the government has stated that it will guarantee 80% of these covid-related loans, the banks' attitude has been exactly what we have come to expect of banks over the last 20 years or more: interested only in their own gain rather than actually facilitating businesses which is exactly what the government has tried to ensure they do in this instance. 

My thoughts on the behavior of the banks would get me moderated.

They have such short memories. I have dealt with banks for 40 years in business, when you need to borrow they aren't interested unless they can screw you over, when you don't need to borrow from them any more they try to screw you on transaction fees.

I do hope the government grab them by the throat and give them a good shake, then hit them with extra taxes when this is over.