O/T:- Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[Elite_Pie]

Well, I certainly didn't see that reply coming.

Do you have an opinion on what he said, or do you just want to act like a ****?

Yes, we already know you certainly didn't see that reply coming.

[Pies4u]

So kindly explain the clarity to me in this bit - "Those who could not work from home would now be encouraged to return to work - but they should avoid using public transport to get there if possible". How clear and succinct is "encouraged" to return to work? How clear and succinct is "avoid using public transport if possible"? Do they turn up to work in the morning or not? How clear and succinct is giving advice as the UK Prime Minister that other the leaders of other UK countries openly disagree with?

Apart from that, thanks for proving me right about his arse lickers being impressed.

Brilliant! The clues are there, read your own post, you’ve answered your own questions.

Just a big clue to part of it: If you can’t work from home then go to your place of work. If you can walk or cycle then do so. If not go by car but if you have no other alternative to then use public transport. If that it is not practicable, given the social distancing protocol, then you will not be able to return to work. It is pretty simple really.

[navypie]

Do you have an opinion on what he said, or do you just want to act like a ****?

Yes, we already know you certainly didn't see that reply coming.

Well, there's no need to take that tone with me. Nite nite you whingy leftie loser.

[jackal2]

I agree with that, I've sensed the same. The point I'm making is that if this is the case, should the government stick to the "Stay home" message to err on the side of caution, or release something very vague that could be interpreted as "do what you want, but stay alert".

The problem is, as you acknowledge, that the "Stay Home" message was beginning to lose its effect anyway. It has served a purpose, more successfully than some ever expected, but lockdown fatigue has definitely been setting in. The Government knows people are becoming more restless and active, so the task is to try to keep the public onside by acknowledging this reality, but doing so in a phased and cautious way.

As such, it's necessary to adopt a more nuanced position that can't be summed up as easily in two words. 'Stay Home' meant stay home. 'Stay Alert' in effect means we know you're going to go out more, but please keep up your social distancing and don't get complacent. Rightly or wrongly, it's trusting the public to use their common sense, which ultimately any Government has to do in a free society.

[Elite_Pie]

Brilliant! The clues are there, read your own post, you’ve answered your own questions.

Just a big clue to part of it: If you can’t work from home then go to your place of work. If you can walk or cycle then do so. If not go by car but if you have no other alternative to then use public transport. If that it is not practicable, given the social distancing protocol, then you will not be able to return to work. It is pretty simple really.

So you (and the government) are saying that everyone who can't work from home and doesn't need to use public transport to get to work should go back tomorrow, it's pretty simple really.

Do you honestly believe that?

[Elite_Pie]

The problem is, as you acknowledge, that the "Stay Home" message was beginning to lose its effect anyway. It has served a purpose, more successfully than some ever expected, but lockdown fatigue has definitely been setting in. The Government knows people are becoming more restless and active, so the task is to try to keep the public onside by acknowledging this reality, but doing so in a phased and cautious way.

As such, it's necessary to adopt a more nuanced position that can't be summed up as easily in two words. 'Stay Home' meant stay home. 'Stay Alert' in effect means we know you're going to go out more, but please keep up your social distancing and don't get complacent. Rightly or wrongly, it's trusting the public to use their common sense, which ultimately any Government has to do in a free society.

You certainly make more sense than anyone else on the right here, but I think a big mistake the government made early on was advising us not to go out rather than telling us not to go out, which is what they did after a while. We now seem to be back to the advisory stage, which given the earlier failure seems highly irresponsible. At least Scotland and Wales have maintained the sensible strategy.

[Notsohumblepie]

You certainly make more sense than anyone else on the right here, but I think a big mistake the government made early on was advising us not to go out rather than telling us not to go out, which is what they did after a while. We now seem to be back to the advisory stage, which given the earlier failure seems highly irresponsible. At least Scotland and Wales have maintained the sensible strategy.

With respect , they aren't maintaining it, they are paying lip service to it.

The UK is policed by consent, so the police would be unable, or unwilling to act like their French, or Spanish counterparts, so it's unenforceable.

The vulnerable parts of society will still self isolate, and the lock-down has to be responsibly , and progressively eased , or your Children, and Grand children will be financially ruined for years.

[Pies4u]

So you (and the government) are saying that everyone who can't work from home and doesn't need to use public transport to get to work should go back tomorrow, it's pretty simple really.

Do you honestly believe that?

Assuming that people apply common sense and liaise with their employer, yes. Why is it difficult?

[seriouspie]

Well, there's no need to take that tone with me. Nite nite you whingy leftie loser.

Yes mate .... extremely rude. Just remember whatever they do ...... they'll never make it, it's in their DNA - poor unfortunate souls.

[Elite_Pie]

Assuming that people apply common sense and liaise with their employer, yes. Why is it difficult?

It's difficult because it's so sudden and so vague. If the date for this had been set at Monday 18th May as an example it might have made a bit of sense. Because of what he said there must be thousands of employers and millions of workers not knowing what they should be doing tomorrow.
As I said before, there is no clarity at all.