NWR new zero tolerance covid thread

Tom Cannavan said:
The current covid thread is being moved to the politics forum. Too many people completely ignoring my repeated pleas to avoid political posts.

* this might be comparing with other countries, or considering the impact of policy changes, but there must NOT be reference to government or opposition deficiencies or performance, and zero discussion of any politician or advisor.
Click to expand...
Good.
I had plenty to ‘say’ but refrained. It was a shame others couldn’t do likewise.
 
Benedict Jenks said:
If the lockdown is necessary why are we not invited to comply pending ratification by parliament later in the week?

Surely better to start now than in 5 days time?
Click to expand...

Yes. The point of the lockdown is to stop, and hopefully reverse, the current rising transmissions rates. I know businesses have to prepare for closing down, but surely balancing that against an extra 5 days before we tackle flattening the curve makes no sense.
 
Adam Holland said:
One reason might be so that hospitality businesses are not left high and dry with perishable stock.
Click to expand...

We posted at the same time Adam, but while I am sympathetic to hospitality of course, what's more important: a few hundred tons of wasted food (or food distributed to food banks) or acting 5 days earlier in trying to reduce the R?
 
Adam Holland said:
One reason might be so that hospitality businesses are not left high and dry with perishable stock.
Click to expand...

I agree with your sentiment and don't want to enter into a debate about whether such businesses do or do not contribute to spread. Government can compensate those who shut and have to dispose of stock - it's cheaper than shutting business down for the extra days that are necessary because the virus continues to spread over the next five days.
 
Recent legislation introduced and passed means any new measures have to be voted on and approved. Parliamentary scrutiny is important in this so giving that proper time is more likely the reason for a Thursday start. It could mean that the bill is amended to include clear outcomes, process and next steps rather than for those things to remain indeterminate. I’d certainly find that helpful.

I’m also not sure encouraging people to comply would be helpful as it could create huge social division between those who agree with the lockdown and those who are critical of it.
 
Gareth Powell said:
Recent legislation introduced and passed means any new measures have to be voted on and approved. Parliamentary scrutiny is important
Click to expand...

Gareth, yes: I was responding to Benedict's suggestion that we bring in the new rules immediately "pending ratification" in parliament. But I guess if parliament caused changes to the initial proposal that could add to confusion.
 
A problem so great that it requires further lockdown, but that can wait until November 5th? It's the equivalent of 'my kitchen is on fire, but I've booked the Fire Brigade to put it out on Thursday rather than now'. Total nonsense, as millions cram in an extra 5 days shopping, eating out and mingling.

Still, a last hurrah before the hospitality industry is wrecked. Judging by the emails arriving in my In Box from several high end restaurants today, essentially pleading for custom in the next few days, things must be desperate. Perishable stock is the least of their concerns.

How long do we think this one will go on for before defeat is admitted? It should be obvious from the current behaviour and compliance levels in Tier 2 & 3 as to the eventual result.
 
Last edited:
Leaving aside the deficiencies in the test, track and trace system, on the news the other day it was stated that 82% of people who are told to isolate because they have been in contact with a confirmed Covid sufferer do not 'fully comply'. A lot of this is in our own hands, and that appears to be a very large part of the problem.
 
I was going to share the legal case in Korea but didn‘t because the atmosphere in the old thread at the time was already a bit overheat.

If people remember, back in May there was a major outbreak in South Korea from a gay club; that was after Korea already suppressed the curve by massive testing and tracing in April.
One male carrier, lied about his location and contact history to public health authorities, was given "commuted" sentence of six months in jail, because the judge had "mercy" on the fact that he wanted to hide his sexuality.
I don‘t know how long sentence he would get if there was no mercy.

In Taiwan, my friend went back home and now doing 14 days quarantine. He has his own place so doesn‘t need to go to quarantine hotel. While he got one phone call plus one txt msg per day from local public health officials. For both he is obligated to answer, otherwise police will go knock his door to check. The authorities will also trace his mobile phone location. If he get caught outdoor, the maximum fine is £25000.
Back in Taiwan there is no prison sentence for breaking quarantine. Well, if they pay the fine. Someone refused to pay, the case went to court and after financial check the court decided that he had ability to pay, thus he was jailed for 12 days, til he complied.

These two countries are democratic countries. We are not talking about China or North Korea.
Don‘t get me wrong, I am not saying they are culturally superior. But the virus doesn‘t care what kind of culture is better. It would be great if most of people all do their civil responsibility, but if enough people don‘t, a higher price will be paid by all. It‘s not that we don‘t have the law for it, we have. What‘s the point to have this law if people can break it without consequences?
 
It occurred to me today that a period of enforced (by phone) quarantine would be a proportionate and reasonable response to Covid law violation. I would call it public protection rather than punishment, so end the quarantine as soon as it can be demonstrated that they are not infected, which allowing for the incubation period would be a minimum of 7 days I think.
 
Steve Slatcher said:
It occurred to me today that a period of enforced (by phone) quarantine would be a proportionate and reasonable response to Covid law violation. I would call it public protection rather than punishment, so end the quarantine as soon as it can be demonstrated that they are not infected, which allowing for the incubation period would be a minimum of 7 days I think.
Click to expand...
I have been a bit puzzled that if I am told to self-isolate, I would still have to remain in isolation even if I have a test saying I am not infected. Have I got that right?
 
I think (po can help here) that if you meet someone on day 1 who tests positive on day 3 you might not develop symptoms til day 14 but you might not have enough viral load at day four of isolation when you might take a test which would be a false negative.
 
These people in Bristol at the rave though, surely they are the problem, not the scientists or any politician of any party or country. I don’t get why the whole political network don’t get together and say ‘it’s not us, it really is you - just do the simple stuff and guess what, it goes away’ I think a more direct, brutal message might help.
 
Chris Hambleton said:
I think (po can help here) that if you meet someone on day 1 who tests positive on day 3 you might not develop symptoms til day 14 but you might not have enough viral load at day four of isolation when you might take a test which would be a false negative.
Click to expand...
Yes. I'm not sure about the number of days, but that's the basic idea.
 
Chris Hambleton said:
These people in Bristol at the rave though, surely they are the problem, not the scientists or any politician of any party or country. I don’t get why the whole political network don’t get together and say ‘it’s not us, it really is you - just do the simple stuff and guess what, it goes away’ I think a more direct, brutal message might help.
Click to expand...
Agree, also for less egregious breaches than the Bristol rave.

I think we need more peer pressure too.
 
If it is true that 82% do not comply, some method of encouragement - if not enforcement - is obviously necessary. I don't suppose we have the resources to adopt the Taiwanese approach described by Po, but even random phone or door to door checking once or twice through the 14 days, with substantial and welll publicesd - and enforced - fines for non-compliance, would get the message out that people have to take it more seriously.
 
Hi @Tom Cannavan you say "I don't suppose we have the resources" yet £12BN has been reported as the figure spent / budgeted for our "world beating track and trace". I very much doubt South Korea or Taiwan spends anything like the figures we do on their undoubtedly superior IT systems.

As I think has been touched on elsewhere, the overriding of privacy / data protection laws would have been too much for us to bear back in January or Feb. Yet with benefit of hindsight how many of us would have rather saved lives and derrogated from our privacy laws / accepted freedoms? [N.b. rhetorical question as Zero Tolerance thread] South Korea has had a grand total of 466 deaths from 26,635 cases versus 46,717 deaths and 1.03M cases here in the UK and untold billions spent.
 
We simply have to fine people who break the rules. Once enough people have been fined, others who weren't conforming will start to eventually.

It worked in Australia. It might take longer due to the prevailing mood.

Polite requests will just lead to too many people not following the rules and an endless cycle of lockdowns.

The other alternative, admitting defeat, is unconscionable.
 
Last edited:
Some alarming financial numbers in the media tonight. One economist reckons each day of lockdown wipes £1.8 Billion off the Economy. And this from Lord Rose, the former Marks & Spencer boss, hardly fills one with confidence.

'My estimate is that for every day it carries on, you can say it is between two and three weeks of recovery time,' he added. 'So, if it goes on for a month, that's possibly a year's recovery time.'

So, where do you draw the line folks, if the latest Lockdown doesn't work, another month, two, three, longer?

And as for fines, what threat are they to 18 year olds with no assets or income? £1K, £10K, £100K, whatever. To the fortunate and moneyed people frequenting these pages, yes, it would stop and make you think, but to a young person with no job, prospects and an increasingly constrained social existence, they have nothing to lose. It won't stop them partying.
 
Last edited:
Ed Plant said:
Some alarming financial numbers in the media tonight. One economist reckons each day of lockdown wipes £1.8 Billion off the Economy. And this from Lord Rose, the former Marks & Spencer boss, hardly fills one with confidence.

'My estimate is that for every day it carries on, you can say it is between two and three weeks of recovery time,' he added. 'So, if it goes on for a month, that's possibly a year's recovery time.'

So, where do you draw the line folks, if the latest Lockdown doesn't work, another month, two, three, longer?

And as for fines, what threat are they to 18 year olds with no money, or job, and little prospects? £1K, £10K, £100K, whatever. It won't stop them partying, they have nothing to lose.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that there are no unemployment or poor people in Australia? Prison awaits those who don't pay. Bigger fines for repeat offenders if they do pay.
 
Last edited:
How many people are supposed to be isolating in Britain today? If there are half a million who are positive, and each has 6 contacts who should be isolating *, then I guess we just cannot be knocking on 3 million doors every day for a fortnight to check they are doing so. I guess that's what I meant by Resources, rather than money.

* Of course a small fraction of contacts are actually being traced and contacted currently so its probably nothing like 3 million, but if the system was working, those millions would need to be monitored in some way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top