For one, as per the customary press leaks the three tiers are returning, but with tougher measures. The new plans (pp 22-26 in the Covid Winter Plan) double down on the rule of six, offers new rules for indoor and outdoor activities and meetings ups, a gradation for hospitality services ranging from table ordering to complete closure except for takeaways, the opening of retail (including "non-essential") across all three tiers, a gradation of travelling restrictions except for "where necessary", which include education and work thanks to their magical tendency to ward off Coronavirus. There are differing rules on overnight accommodaion according to the tier, but not so for indoor leisure activities like the pool and the gym, and some live ents and sporting events are open with severely controlled numbers. Speaking from Downing Street earlier, Boris Johnson said he was "sorry" for the "hardship" these measures are bound to cause. Which is a good cue to remind the reader about how the Tories have chosen to allow this to happen. Given the ridiculous sums and monies poured into Tory donor pockets, they should not be let off the hook for choosing to condemn nearly half of all self-employed to no help, or for that matter putting the the wealth of the rentiers above the health of everyone else. They could live up to the rhetoric of putting their arms around the nation, but won't.
As far as the "toughness" of the new tiers go, this is an exercise in Johnsonian newspeak. The tiers are being significantly liberalised and regardless of the efforts individual businesses and public institutions are making to be Coronavirus compliant, the result is inevitable: a Christmas rise in infection rates. Nothing says festive quite like a nip of brandy, mince pies, and a dose of the Covids. At least, at least the temptation of going for a so-called Christmas truce to allow for something of a normal one has got rightly binned.
A lot here for a zero-Covid strategy to dislike, but the immediate tranche of criticism came from Johnson's backbenchers. Mark Harper, the newly minted King of the North (at least where Tory MPs are concerned) moaned about there not being much difference between tier three and the (haphazard) lockdown we're currently living through. Quite, except for the opening of all retail, along with indoor leisure facilities and limited gatherings for weddings, civil partnerships, and funerals. What about Labour? As of 22:00 hours not a sausage of a response. Remembering the best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour, we're likely to get straightforward support with some quibbles about criteria for when areas drop tiers, and some other process complaints. It's opposition, but not as we know it.
In sum, Johnson's liberalisation of the Covid rules hardly fit the fever dreams of some, but does follow the well worn pattern of behaviour we've seen from the beginning of this government's handling of the crisis: an extreme reluctance to do anything substantial followed by a panicky - but necessary - blanket lockdown, and then a relaxation of measures in which the health of class relations are prioritised above public health. Everything changes, but nothing really changes. Except the growing death toll, avoidable infections, and more knowing the misery of long Covid.
Image Credit
14 comments:
gyms re-opened. The place with the highest rate of spread. Genius.
As you said : 'Who will speak for the dead'... 55 thousand and those who will follow. Leadership, Management and Challenge- and a very high death toll.
Indeed over 55 thousand thus far. Not very good would be an understatement. I wonder if there will be an independent investigation? Speak up!
Who will speak up for the dead? Fussing and infighting over Jeremy Corbyn, and in the meantime people are dying. People are worried. Leadership.
Got a cite for the claim that gyms are the places with the highest rate of spread?
(Especially when losing weight will make you less likely to get seriously ill if you do get the virus...)
The other countries with similar levels of development that got it right did it by test-and-trace with quarantine for the hotspots only, and they did it several months ago. China-Taiwan has had zero death for over six months.
How can the Conservatives and New, New Labour ignore that and just continue to support the current ridiculous policy of half-assed regional or countrywide lockdowns, which more civilized countries have only used at the beginning to to setup countrywide test-and-trace?
Just because tory voters are mostly "I am alright, Jack" and workers exposed to either infection or unemployment don't matter?
Blissex,
I don't think governmental incompetence is the issue because I don't think it's plausible that every single government in the Asia/Pacific region is competent while not a single one is in Europe or the Americas.
No, there has to be some other factor at work: perhaps the issue is cultural? One intervention that is common in Asian countries but is not used in the West is the detainment of the infected (and their contacts) in quarantine facilities. This policy would be extremely difficult to sell to westerners (because it constitutes detainment without due process) but I expect it would be extremely effective, especially in stopping transmission of the virus within households.
Then again, Japan (which doesn't use this kind of quarantine) has still suffered far fewer deaths proportionally than even a competent European country like Germany.
Perhaps then it is that the original virus from Wuhan (unlike the Lombardy strain which has laid waste to Western countries) isn't really that contagious, with the Wuhan outbreak itself (the only one of its magnitude anywhere in that part of the world) perhaps being the result of a single massive release of virus: from the wet-market, the research lab or some other location?
It is strange that over a million Wuhanese left for other parts of China just before the lockdown to celebrate Chinese New Year with their families, but didn't spreading the virus all over the country in doing so. This less contagious of the virus will have been merely difficult (instead of nigh-impossible) to clear up by test/trace/isolate, and it will have alerted countries like Australia and New Zealand to closed their borders, thus protecting them against the more highly contagious Lombardy variant once it appeared.
«I don't think governmental incompetence is the issue because I don't think it's plausible that every single government in the Asia/Pacific region is competent while not a single one is in Europe or the Americas.»
There is wide variation in both regions, the common thread is the ability of the state to organize rapidly a *pervasive* public health response.
«No, there has to be some other factor at work: perhaps the issue is cultural?»
When I wrote "more civilized countries" I was including cultural factors, but that includes the willingness and ability of both voters and politicians to fund and organize a pervasive public health response, instead of "I am alright Jack" from those not yet infected or at low risk.
«One intervention that is common in Asian countries but is not used in the West is the detainment of the infected (and their contacts) in quarantine facilities.»
I have seen photos where in Italy areas have been isolated with roadblocks manned by the army with submachine guns. I doubt that south Korea went as far as that. I guess also that if pervasive test-and-trace was in effect the number of people to be put in isolation would be very few.
But look instead to the other side: the UK government has been transparently pandering to "Middle England" families and rentiers, people who largely have kept their office jobs and been home working, or have continued to collect their rents, pensions, dividends, capital gains, and are fine in their nice 3-5 bedroom semis with big gardens, and for whom lockdown is not such a big deal.
«(because it constitutes detainment without due process)»
That's ridiculous, it is not a punishment, and the alternative is to put *everybody* in quarantine with a national lockdown, which is also detainment (house arrest) without due process. In other countries and even in the UK quite a few people have been arrested, cautioned, fined for being outside their house arrest domicile without good reason.
Anyhow, part of being more civilized is also about accepting that if the state is well run and says "sorry you have to go to a quaratine place" people accept that, as it is also in their interests and that of the members of their family.
«Then again, Japan (which doesn't use this kind of quarantine) has still suffered far fewer deaths proportionally than even a competent European country like Germany.»
Yes, locking up people has also been done mostly in China, where the local culture is one of lesser voluntary compliance than in Japan. As to Germany, my impression is that they have not switched to a pervasive test-and-trace system, even if they would have the capabilities, because of "surveillance" sensitivities.
«Perhaps then it is that the original virus from Wuhan (unlike the Lombardy strain which has laid waste to Western countries) isn't really that contagious»
I think that "patient zero" in Italy was from Wuhan, so I am not sure there is such a difference. From what I have read Lombardy was particularly affected because small business owners usually adopted a "come to work or else" approach to factory workers.
An important point that I have read recently is that the low rates reported from third world nations may be due to poor data collection, but also to them having a much higher percentage of younger people, which tend to have no or few symptoms. But place like Japan, south Korea, New Zealand, etc. have a demographic profile similar to that of european countries, so that does not apply.
Saints and sinners in the Labour Party oh dear lets grow up. Corbyn should not be the focus. Yes nearly 56 thousand dead in the UK. We need a government to protect its people. Just basic first principles really.
«Corbyn should not be the focus»
After 5 years of Corbyn being the focus of obsessive attacks by the thatcherite of New Labour it is a bit funny to say that. If only.
«We need a government to protect its people.»
Therefore a focus on a pervasive public health alternative to Conservative straategy endorsed by Keir Starmer, as those policies, however incompetently done, pander to the "Middle England" rentier interests by screwing workers, exposing them to infection or to unemployment.
And the government should protect the people also from the downsides of Brexit, but instead its hard-brexit strategy endorsed by hard-brexiter Keir Starmer is going to cause quite a bit of trouble.
What we need is someone who can believe in pervasive public health approaches like those in south Korea, and in accepting a soft brexit, someone like... Corbyn, not someone like Johnson or Starmer.
As far as the "toughness" of the new tiers go, this is an exercise in Johnsonian newspeak. The tiers are being significantly liberalised
You sure about this? In the graphic I saw comparing the old and new Tier 3 everything was either the same or stricter (e.g. pubs closed except for takeaway).
Balance the closure of pubs and restaurants against letting all retail, leisure centres, pools, and gyms remain open. This marks a very significant liberalisation of the measures!
Phil @ 18:06,
I'm guessing the liberalization of retail is down to a desire to encourage Christmas spending, while the others are (as I alluded to with my earlier comment) about preserving opportunities for exercise (as fewer people like exercising outdoors in winter weather and/or darkness) and thus preventing even more weight gain than is customary over the festive season?
Do you mean a bit of weight gain rather than the potential to get and spread Covid- 19 and the the consequences of a higher death rate?
Post a Comment