Coronavirus update - NO MORE RESTRICTIONS

[The Lone Gunman]

Are Johnson and Cummings easing the lockdown to remove the bad stories? Are they doing it based on London's figures only? Or are they doing it because other countries in Europe, who have not been anywhere near as badly hit as the UK, are easing their lockdowns?

Or is there some other reason?

You've neglected to mention a crumbling economy, rising unemployment, a variety of other health issues and the fact that a significant and ever-growing percentage of the population are sick to the back teeth of living like this.

The simple fact of the matter is that a full-scale lockdown was always going to be a temporary measure. There are valid arguments to suggest it began too late or it wasn't stringent enough in the UK, but that's effectively in the past now. You only have to have walked the streets in recent weeks to realise that things have changed significantly and many of the predictions about how things will work going forward are fanciful at best.

The ideas of either an indefinite continuation of the current restrictions or a reintroduction of earlier restrictions if the infection rate rises again are unworkable. Personally, I don't see any value at all in suggestion the lockdown should continue. It's just pointless.

[A Quiet Monkfish]

You've neglected to mention a crumbling economy, rising unemployment, a variety of other health issues and the fact that a significant and ever-growing percentage of the population are sick to the back teeth of living like this.

The simple fact of the matter is that a full-scale lockdown was always going to be a temporary measure. There are valid arguments to suggest it began too late or it wasn't stringent enough in the UK, but that's effectively in the past now. You only have to have walked the streets in recent weeks to realise that things have changed significantly and many of the predictions about how things will work going forward are fanciful at best.

The ideas of either an indefinite continuation of the current restrictions or a reintroduction of earlier restrictions if the infection rate rises again are unworkable. Personally, I don't see any value at all in suggestion the lockdown should continue. It's just pointless.

Bloody hell. Never thought I'd read that !

[The Lone Gunman]

Bloody hell. Never thought I'd read that !

Why? It's been my pretty much my position all along.

[A Quiet Monkfish]

Why? It's been my pretty much my position all along.

Hang on. I remember 'discussing' with you around 8 weeks ago about the authorities telling an old couple to clear off from Llandaff Fields. I've been a sceptic [as I am with a lot of things] about lockdown from day 1.

[The Lone Gunman]

Hang on. I remember 'discussing' with you around 8 weeks ago about the authorities telling an old couple to clear off from Llandaff Fields. I've been a sceptic [as I am with a lot of things] about lockdown from day 1.

It was nine weeks ago, during the first full week of the UK lockdown, and at that stage the police were right to tell the pensioners (who had driven to Llandaff Fields) to clear off.

In my opinion, the original lockdown regulations in this country lacked common sense, were not stringent enough (particularly in terms of exercise and travel) and the guidance provided by the government was far too woolly and open to interpretation. However, as I said at the time, a full-scale lockdown (and let's be honest, we never really had one of those) could only ever be a temporary measure.

Since then, the effects of the virus have become more and more clear in terms of the percentage and age of the population it is affecting, and the government's guidance has become ever more ridiculous - especially the situation that has evolved regarding different rules in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

The whole thing has been a badly-managed mess, but that doesn't alter the fact that a lockdown, regardless of how stringent it is, could only ever be temporary in nature.

[A Quiet Monkfish]

It was nine weeks ago, during the first full week of the UK lockdown, and at that stage the police were right to tell the pensioners (who had driven to Llandaff Fields) to clear off.

In my opinion, the original lockdown regulations in this country lacked common sense, were not stringent enough (particularly in terms of exercise and travel) and the guidance provided by the government was far too woolly and open to interpretation. However, as I said at the time, a full-scale lockdown (and let's be honest, we never really had one of those) could only ever be a temporary measure.

Since then, the effects of the virus have become more and more clear in terms of the percentage and age of the population it is affecting, and the government's guidance has become ever more ridiculous - especially the situation that has evolved regarding different rules in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

The whole thing has been a badly-managed mess, but that doesn't alter the fact that a lockdown, regardless of how stringent it is, could only ever be temporary in nature.

The lockdown in Wales is allegedly determined by the 'R' number, which is currently between 0.7 and 1. Thing is, this includes care homes. If you exclude care homes it's around .3. You don't get that publicized everywhere though.

[The Lone Gunman]

The lockdown in Wales is allegedly determined by the 'R' number, which is currently between 0.7 and 1. Thing is, this includes care homes. If you exclude care homes it's around .3. You don't get that publicized everywhere though.

To be honest, I think a large percentage of people have long since stopped considering the specifics (if they were ever concerned with them in the first place). Personally, I've never really understood the 'R' number. It's never made sense to me. I'm sure if I sat down and studied the theory I'd get it eventually, but I've not bothered to try and I'm absolutely certain that's the case with the majority of the public.

[the other bob wilson]

The lockdown in Wales is allegedly determined by the 'R' number, which is currently between 0.7 and 1. Thing is, this includes care homes. If you exclude care homes it's around .3. You don't get that publicized everywhere though.

Have you got anything you can link to regarding your claims about the R number? The infections by area chart I posted yesterday had something like five of the top 10 in the infections per 100,000 "league" with where I live, RCT, at the top- that is suggestive that the R number in certain parts of Wales is high compared to most of the UK.

[Jordi Culé]

The lockdown in Wales is allegedly determined by the 'R' number, which is currently between 0.7 and 1. Thing is, this includes care homes. If you exclude care homes it's around .3. You don't get that publicized everywhere though.

Is it really? Got a link? Genuinely, interested in those statistics as it would suggest the economy could be ready to rock n roll and we just needed to concentrate on care homes.

[CCFCC3PO]

The lockdown in Wales is allegedly determined by the 'R' number, which is currently between 0.7 and 1. Thing is, this includes care homes. If you exclude care homes it's around .3. You don't get that publicized everywhere though.

Where is it publicised?

[xsnaggle]

You've neglected to mention a crumbling economy, rising unemployment, a variety of other health issues and the fact that a significant and ever-growing percentage of the population are sick to the back teeth of living like this.

The simple fact of the matter is that a full-scale lockdown was always going to be a temporary measure. There are valid arguments to suggest it began too late or it wasn't stringent enough in the UK, but that's effectively in the past now. You only have to have walked the streets in recent weeks to realise that things have changed significantly and many of the predictions about how things will work going forward are fanciful at best.

The ideas of either an indefinite continuation of the current restrictions or a reintroduction of earlier restrictions if the infection rate rises again are unworkable. Personally, I don't see any value at all in suggestion the lockdown should continue. It's just pointless.

I agree, I've said for weeks that people will push back against it eventually, and the bigger the divergence between governing bodies the harder people will push.

[A Quiet Monkfish]

I agree, I've said for weeks that people will push back against it eventually, and the bigger the divergence between governing bodies the harder people will push.

As Mark Drakeford says ".. this is not an invitation to go into a garden, have a few beers ...".

[The Lone Gunman]

As Mark Drakeford says ".. this is not an invitation to go into a garden, have a few beers ...".

People haven't needed an invitation for that. They've been doing it for at least a month already.