conservativehome--2020-05-12--The UK quarantine for international arrivals: what the rules are – and the reasons for their imposit

The UK quarantine for international arrivals: what the rules are – and the reasons for their imposition now

Up until yesterday , the UK has been relatively relaxed on its Covid-19 travel policy .
Citizens have been “ advised against all non-essential international travel ’ – in stark contrast to countries that have banned movement – and there has been no quarantine period for anyone arriving back in the UK , which other countries , too , have implemented .
But all that changed when the Government announced the latter policy .
What does this mean ?
Now , anyone arriving in the UK from abroad – be it by flight , ferry or other means – will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they return to the UK .
In addition , international arrivals will be subjected to “ a series of measures and restrictions at the UK border ” , such as giving their contact and accommodation details – presumably so that officials can later check they are following the rules .
They will also be asked to download and use the NHS contact tracing app .
When do the rules come in ?
The Government has said the quarantine measures will come in soon , although hasn ’ t said when .
Some suspect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of May .
Are there any exemptions ?
Yes .
Travellers from the Common Travel Area , including the Republic of Ireland ( which has a 14-day quarantine period too ) , are exempt from these measures .
France was also excluded from the rule on Sunday .
A joint statement between the UK and France explained the rationale for this .
It said that the two countries need a “ close bilateral ” relationship in order to fight Covid-19 .
“ [ T ] he Prime Minister and the President agreed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measures .
This cooperation is particularly necessary for the management of our common border ” , the statement continued .
Furthermore , there will be exemptions made to support national security and infrastructure requirements .
More details of these will be “ set out shortly ” , according to the Government .
One question people will ask is why has the Government imposed this ban only now , especially as other countries ( Israel , Australia , Australia , the Czech Republic , the Republic of Ireland , Greece and Turkey ) have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of them ordering it in March .
The Government ’ s main rationale is in its Coronavirus FAQs document : “ The scientific advice shows that when domestic transmission is high , cases from abroad represent a small amount of the overall total and make no significant difference to the epidemic .
Now that domestic transmission within the UK is coming under control , and other countries begin to lift lockdown measures , it is the right time to prepare new measures at the border.
” Furthermore , on April 10 , Professor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , uttered similar sentiment when asked why the Government has not closed its borders : “ [ O ] ur scientists have been very clear from the outset that [ closing borders ] would not work as a measure to prevent the ingress of coronavirus into the UK .
Coronavirus is now in the UK and transmitting very widely… We will likely go back to low levels of transmission and the virus will continue to be here in and around us in our communities I suspect for a very long time even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Given that the Government had to repatriate tens of thousands of Britons over the last two months , this might explain what appears a delayed response .
While getting these people back , it would have been much harder to contain the virus .
Only now that the UK peak is declining , and that transmission rates are under control , is the Government more confident that measures , such as the quarantine , have room to work .
Are there any problems with the plan ?
One thing people will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intends to enforce travel rules .
Israel has done this by using government facilities , where people can self-isolate and be monitored .
There ’ s speculation the UK ’ s Border Force will carry out checks .
The question is how resource-intensive this will be – depending on where people isolate , and how many do it .
There ’ s also a cost element ; the Government has said it will arrange accommodation for travellers who can not “ demonstrate ” they ’ re able to do it for themselves .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is there a big bill ?
Furthermore , the Government will have to ensure that people do not try to bypass the rule – by flying to France and then the UK .
Travel industry insiders , too , are extremely nervous about the move – having already had 20,000 redundancies .
Daily arrivals from flights have already gone from 300,000 a day to around 15,000 average .
The quarantine will no doubt reduce their business even more ; people who have jobs where they need to be on site simply can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to self-isolate for two weeks afterwards ) , and city breaks will lose their appeal .
There will be increasing calls for the Government to help .
Farmers , too , are concerned given that they need fruit pickers to fly over for the summer .
We can expect these concerns to become more pressing over the next weeks .
How long will this last for ?
All remains to be seen .

Up until yesterday, the UK has been relatively relaxed on its Covid-19 travel policy.
Citizens have been “advised against all non-essential international travel’ – in stark contrast to countries that have banned movement – and there has been no quarantine period for anyone arriving back in the UK, which other countries, too, have implemented.
But all that changed when the Government announced the latter policy.
What does this mean?
Now, anyone arriving in the UK from abroad – be it by flight, ferry or other means – will have to self-isolate for fourteen days when they return to the UK.
In addition, international arrivals will be subjected to “a series of measures and restrictions at the UK border”, such as giving their contact and accommodation details – presumably so that officials can later check they are following the rules.
They will also be asked to download and use the NHS contact tracing app.
When do the rules come in?
The Government has said the quarantine measures will come in soon, although hasn’t said when.
Some suspect they will be introduced at the end of May.
Are there any exemptions?
Yes. Travellers from the Common Travel Area, including the Republic of Ireland (which has a 14-day quarantine period too), are exempt from these measures.
France was also excluded from the rule on Sunday.
A joint statement between the UK and France explained the rationale for this. It said that the two countries need a “close bilateral” relationship in order to fight Covid-19.
“[T]he Prime Minister and the President agreed to work together in taking forward appropriate border measures. This cooperation is particularly necessary for the management of our common border”, the statement continued.
Furthermore, there will be exemptions made to support national security and infrastructure requirements.
More details of these will be “set out shortly”, according to the Government.
Why now?
One question people will ask is why has the Government imposed this ban only now, especially as other countries (Israel, Australia, Australia, the Czech Republic, the Republic of Ireland, Greece and Turkey) have all had the policy, with many of them ordering it in March.
The Government’s main rationale is in its Coronavirus FAQs document:
“The scientific advice shows that when domestic transmission is high, cases from abroad represent a small amount of the overall total and make no significant difference to the epidemic. Now that domestic transmission within the UK is coming under control, and other countries begin to lift lockdown measures, it is the right time to prepare new measures at the border.”
Furthermore, on April 10, Professor Jonathan Van-Tam, Deputy Chief Medical Officer, uttered similar sentiment when asked why the Government has not closed its borders:
“[O]ur scientists have been very clear from the outset that [closing borders] would not work as a measure to prevent the ingress of coronavirus into the UK. Coronavirus is now in the UK and transmitting very widely… We will likely go back to low levels of transmission and the virus will continue to be here in and around us in our communities I suspect for a very long time even if we can keep the levels right down.”
Given that the Government had to repatriate tens of thousands of Britons over the last two months, this might explain what appears a delayed response.
While getting these people back, it would have been much harder to contain the virus.
Only now that the UK peak is declining, and that transmission rates are under control, is the Government more confident that measures, such as the quarantine, have room to work.
Are there any problems with the plan?
One thing people will be keen to know is how the Government intends to enforce travel rules.
Israel has done this by using government facilities, where people can self-isolate and be monitored.
There’s speculation the UK’s Border Force will carry out checks.
The question is how resource-intensive this will be – depending on where people isolate, and how many do it.
There’s also a cost element; the Government has said it will arrange accommodation for travellers who cannot “demonstrate” they’re able to do it for themselves.
But what is this accommodation, and is there a big bill?
Furthermore, the Government will have to ensure that people do not try to bypass the rule – by flying to France and then the UK.
Wider concerns
Travel industry insiders, too, are extremely nervous about the move – having already had 20,000 redundancies.
Daily arrivals from flights have already gone from 300,000 a day to around 15,000 average.
The quarantine will no doubt reduce their business even more; people who have jobs where they need to be on site simply cannot manage to go away (if they have to self-isolate for two weeks afterwards), and city breaks will lose their appeal.
There will be increasing calls for the Government to help.
Farmers, too, are concerned given that they need fruit pickers to fly over for the summer.
We can expect these concerns to become more pressing over the next weeks.
How long will this last for?
All remains to be seen.


conservativehome--2020-05-13--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner – a

Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner – and more

Eight years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party , compared to less than a third for the Conservatives .
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts , over time , the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number as Labour supporters .
To help remedy this , each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ The Institute was established as a Crown Non-Departmental Public Body , independent of Government and employer-led with a mandate set by Ministers .
The Institute is playing a vital role in continuing the apprenticeship and technical education reform process and works on behalf of employers to support the delivery of high quality apprenticeships and T @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apprentices or learners to be confident that their apprenticeship or T Level is of high quality , respected and will help them to build a career with a clear market value.
” “ Led by the Non-Executive Chair , the Crown Commercial Service ( CCS ) Board is responsible for the oversight of the operation of CCS , with emphasis on its strategic direction , management control , and corporate governance .
All Non-Executive Board Members are expected to contribute to decisions covering the strategy for the organisation and the overall direction of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counsel , advice and challenge .
We are seeking an exceptional individual to join our Board as a Non-Executive Director and Chair of the Technology and Digital Transformation Committee to support progression of our transformation journey… To complement our existing Board we are particularly interested in hearing from individuals who bring recent experience in leading large scale digital transformation in either the private or public sector.
” “ The CCRC ’ s role is to investigate and review cases where it is alleged that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred in relation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The CCRC is entrusted with the exercise of wide-ranging , and sometimes intrusive , statutory powers .
Commissioners are supported by senior managers , legal and investigations advisers , casework and administrative staff .
Investigations are mainly carried out by CCRC staff but CCRC can require others , such as the police , to carry out investigations on its behalf… Commissioners may be called on to provide specialist advice depending on their background and expertise .
Commissioners may also be involved in the training of staff and of fellow Commissioners ; again , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ As a non-executive director , you will play an active role on the board of SLC , supporting the SLC Executive Team and SLC Chair to deliver the company ’ s portfolio of priorities , overcome challenges and exploit opportunities , including the continued growth of its customer base , delivery of recommendations from the Tailored Review ( Annex 3 ) and implementation of the Review of Post-18 Education .
A key element of the role will be to work with the board to ensure that the resources and skills available to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its delivery obligations .
The SLC administers the data underpinning one of Government ’ s major assets : the Student Loan book .
This data supports the sale of tranches of loans to monetise that asset for the benefit of the exchequer and taxpayers ( £3.6bn raised to date ) .
There may be other opportunities to realise the value , in the widest sense , of the SLC ’ s data in the future.
” “ The Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner will be a visible leader and exemplar , establishing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future service provision for veterans in Northern Ireland which supports the realisation of the ambition shared across the United Kingdom to be the best place in the world to be a veteran .
The Commissioner must balance this strategic vision with managing short and long-term priorities , while remaining sensitive to the unique political and historical context in Northern Ireland .
The Commissioner will be influential with others and work constructively with senior stakeholders , from public sector organisations and the ex-service sector , to support improved outcomes through collaboration and negotiation.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SSAC ) is an independent statutory advisory body , funded by the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP ) .
It has the following statutory functions : to perform , on behalf of both the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Parliament , a mandatory scrutiny of most of the proposed secondary legislation that underpins the social welfare system ; and to provide advice and assistance to the Secretary of State , whether in response to a specific request from the UK Government or on its own initiative .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secondary legislation , the Committee ’ s general advisory functions are deployed to : inform the Committee ’ s work , improving members ’ ability to scrutinise regulations and provide independent advice to Ministers ; add value to the debate on a topic that is of current interest to Government and stakeholders ; and stimulate debate of a specific topic within the Committee and amongst stakeholders.
” “ The Independent Review of Prevent will deliver on the Government ’ s commitment set out in the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prevent strategy , as set out in CONTEST June 2018 .
We are seeking a highly talented individual of unquestionable independence , integrity and credibility , who can demonstrate his or her ability to exercise sound judgment and analysis at pace and under pressure , with close public and ministerial scrutiny .
This is high profile and public-facing role , so we are seeking to appoint a credible and talented Independent Reviewer who is confident engaging with a wide range of interested parties , from civil society and community organisations , to Ministers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration provides independent scrutiny of the UK ’ s border and immigration functions , providing security , confidence and assurance as to their effectiveness and efficiency .
They report annually to the Home Secretary and their reports are placed before Parliament .
Leading a team of approximately 30 staff you will strive to continually improve the UK ’ s approach to the Border , Immigration and Citizenship System .
Candidates will have experience of working successfully at a senior level , ideally within a regulation or enforcement arena @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appreciate the importance and opportunity that this role presents .
Excellent communication skills , decisiveness , independence and unquestionable integrity will be essential .
”

Eight years ago, the TaxPayers’ Alliance reported that “in the last year, five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories”.
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party, compared to less than a third for the Conservatives.
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts, over time, the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments. One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply don’t apply in the same number as Labour supporters.
To help remedy this, each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies, so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented.
– – – – – – – – – –
Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education – Non-Executive Board Member
“The Institute was established as a Crown Non-Departmental Public Body, independent of Government and employer-led with a mandate set by Ministers. The Institute is playing a vital role in continuing the apprenticeship and technical education reform process and works on behalf of employers to support the delivery of high quality apprenticeships and T Levels in England. The Institute enables apprentices or learners to be confident that their apprenticeship or T Level is of high quality, respected and will help them to build a career with a clear market value.”
Time: 2 days per month on average
Remuneration: £15,000 per annum.
Closes: 15 May
– – – – – – – – – –
Crown Commercial Service – Non-Executive Directors
“Led by the Non-Executive Chair, the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Board is responsible for the oversight of the operation of CCS, with emphasis on its strategic direction, management control, and corporate governance. All Non-Executive Board Members are expected to contribute to decisions covering the strategy for the organisation and the overall direction of the business, adding value by offering counsel, advice and challenge. We are seeking an exceptional individual to join our Board as a Non-Executive Director and Chair of the Technology and Digital Transformation Committee to support progression of our transformation journey… To complement our existing Board we are particularly interested in hearing from individuals who bring recent experience in leading large scale digital transformation in either the private or public sector.”
Time: Approx 2-3 days per month.
Remuneration: £15,000 per annum.
Closes: 17 May
– – – – – – – – – –
Criminal Cases Review Commission – Commissioners
“The CCRC’s role is to investigate and review cases where it is alleged that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred in relation to conviction, sentence or both. The CCRC is entrusted with the exercise of wide-ranging, and sometimes intrusive, statutory powers. Commissioners are supported by senior managers, legal and investigations advisers, casework and administrative staff. Investigations are mainly carried out by CCRC staff but CCRC can require others, such as the police, to carry out investigations on its behalf… Commissioners may be called on to provide specialist advice depending on their background and expertise. Commissioners may also be involved in the training of staff and of fellow Commissioners; again, depending on the expertise they bring.”
Time: Min. 52 days per annum.
Remuneration: £358 per diem.
Closes: 18 May
– – – – – – – – – –
Student Loans Company Board – Non-Executive Directors
“As a non-executive director, you will play an active role on the board of SLC, supporting the SLC Executive Team and SLC Chair to deliver the company’s portfolio of priorities, overcome challenges and exploit opportunities, including the continued growth of its customer base, delivery of recommendations from the Tailored Review (Annex 3) and implementation of the Review of Post-18 Education. A key element of the role will be to work with the board to ensure that the resources and skills available to the Company are commensurate with and focussed on its delivery obligations. The SLC administers the data underpinning one of Government’s major assets: the Student Loan book. This data supports the sale of tranches of loans to monetise that asset for the benefit of the exchequer and taxpayers (£3.6bn raised to date). There may be other opportunities to realise the value, in the widest sense, of the SLC’s data in the future.”
Time: Two days per month.
Remuneration: £12,000, up to £17,000.
Closes: 19 May
– – – – – – – – – –
Northern Ireland Office – Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner
“The Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner will be a visible leader and exemplar, establishing a strong network and creating a vision of future service provision for veterans in Northern Ireland which supports the realisation of the ambition shared across the United Kingdom to be the best place in the world to be a veteran. The Commissioner must balance this strategic vision with managing short and long-term priorities, while remaining sensitive to the unique political and historical context in Northern Ireland. The Commissioner will be influential with others and work constructively with senior stakeholders, from public sector organisations and the ex-service sector, to support improved outcomes through collaboration and negotiation.”
Time: Approx. 110 days per annum.
Remuneration: £306 per diem plus expenses.
Closes: 22 May
– – – – – – – – – –
Social Security Advisory Committee – Chair
“The Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC) is an independent statutory advisory body, funded by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). It has the following statutory functions: to perform, on behalf of both the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Parliament, a mandatory scrutiny of most of the proposed secondary legislation that underpins the social welfare system; and to provide advice and assistance to the Secretary of State, whether in response to a specific request from the UK Government or on its own initiative. In addition to the scrutiny of proposals for secondary legislation, the Committee’s general advisory functions are deployed to: inform the Committee’s work, improving members’ ability to scrutinise regulations and provide independent advice to Ministers; add value to the debate on a topic that is of current interest to Government and stakeholders; and stimulate debate of a specific topic within the Committee and amongst stakeholders.”
Time: Five days per month.
Remuneration: £22,000 per annum.
Closes: 01 June
– – – – – – – – – –
Home Office – Independent Reviewer of Prevent
“The Independent Review of Prevent will deliver on the Government’s commitment set out in the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 and will critically examine and report on the Prevent strategy, as set out in CONTEST June 2018. We are seeking a highly talented individual of unquestionable independence, integrity and credibility, who can demonstrate his or her ability to exercise sound judgment and analysis at pace and under pressure, with close public and ministerial scrutiny. This is high profile and public-facing role, so we are seeking to appoint a credible and talented Independent Reviewer who is confident engaging with a wide range of interested parties, from civil society and community organisations, to Ministers and local practitioners.”
Time: Five days per month.
Remuneration: £140,000 pro rata.
Closes: 01 June
– – – – – – – – – –
Home Office – Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration
“The Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration provides independent scrutiny of the UK’s border and immigration functions, providing security, confidence and assurance as to their effectiveness and efficiency. They report annually to the Home Secretary and their reports are placed before Parliament. Leading a team of approximately 30 staff you will strive to continually improve the UK’s approach to the Border, Immigration and Citizenship System. Candidates will have experience of working successfully at a senior level, ideally within a regulation or enforcement arena. Whatever your background, you will appreciate the importance and opportunity that this role presents. Excellent communication skills, decisiveness, independence and unquestionable integrity will be essential.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: £130,000
Closes: 06 June


conservativehome--2020-05-13--An undertow of doubt about the Government’s competence is washing through the Conservative Parliamen

An undertow of doubt about the Government’s competence is washing through the Conservative Parliamentary Party

Lobby journalists attempting to find out what ’ s happening in a 1922 Committee meeting sometimes press their ears to the wall of Committee Room 14 , where the event takes place .
Trying to assess what Tory MPs make of the Government ’ s strategy for easing the lockdown is a bit like doing so .
Like straining to hear a sum of muffled noise , the odd clear sentence and the occasional shout .
But this isn ’ t to say that one can make nothing out at all .
The background to our latest ring-round features outstanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are helping to buttress backbench and ministerial morale .
Furthermore , that Parliament is virtual has the effect of diffusing protest : there have been few clearly dissenting voices speaking out from the backbenches so far .
And as readers will see from the below , Tory MPs are willing to cut Johnson a lot of slack .
That said , there is good reason for Downing Street and the whips to be concerned .
The simple fact is that if imposing lockdown was controversial and difficult , easing it will be much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new strategy demands fine judgements ; being able to deliver its plan operationally ; internal disciple and competence , keeping ahead of public opinion , having the credibility to lead it and , as ever , a big slice of luck .
Reading all the feedback below , three undertows are washing around .
First , exasperation at the bungled launch of the new phase , with guidance emerging the best part of 24 hours , or later , after the Prime Minister ’ s statement .
That will already have waned .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a second factor – namely , a mass of questions about how the new plan will work .
By these , we don ’ t mean evidently stupid ones asked by clever people on Twitter ( such as what “ stay alert ” means ) .
Rather , we mean a thousand enquiries about whether the planned easings will happen on time , what will happen to lives and livelihoods if they don ’ t , and above all for how long lockdown can practicably be sustained .
Above all , more backbenchers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unhappiness about the messy launch , the briefing against Hancock , and the pre-guidance confusion may fade , but traces of it will linger .
This will be especially so among MPs worried that the Government , for all the horrendous circumstances it finds itself in , has made at least three shifts in strategy so far .
And contrary to the Prime Minister ’ s suggestion that we ’ ve reached the summit , the really difficult part of the climb may only just be starting .
“ I think the Prime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until the full document could be published alongside it .
This would have provided some much-needed clarity , and avoided handing the media free hits such as the swift backtracking over whether you can meet both your parents at once .
Likewise , if quarantine was useful , why wasn ’ t it done six weeks ago ?
I think a better approach is testing temperatures , as they have in Singapore and Hong Kong for years .
Some of the other announcements , such as letting golf and tennis resume , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more action on what precautionary measures are needed before public transport can be used safely and businesses such as hairdressers can reopen .
We also need a more flexible furlough scheme with the flexibility to let businesses partially reopen on a skeleton staff.
” “ Our starting point is far from ideal , but the Government can only make the best of the situation .
The advice is more nuanced than previously but not particularly confusing , and recognises that the only way out of this situation is a gradual easing of restrictions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to be a stronger emphasis on getting the economy moving as quickly as possible , and I have been disquieted to see the way in which we have seen such an appalling death toll despite all but shutting down the economy .
One wonders whether the Swedish approach may have served Britain better.
” “ My overall view is that the Prime Minister ’ s having to exercise the the judgement of Solomon .
If he lifts the restrictions too early and there ’ s a virulent second outbreak , the public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ ve been through .
If he runs it too long , there ’ ll be no economy left to rescue .
So there ’ s the dilemma .
And you can ’ t reach for the “ How to come out of Covid lockdown manual ” .
No such publication exists .
So what ’ s he doing ?
He ’ s proceeding cautiously and I realise that has an economic cost , but on balance I think he ’ s got it about right .
What was good about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lay out a road map.
” “ Boris Johnson ’ s been for quite a while away from the people – and he ’ s a great communicator , and he ’ s usually got his finger right on the pulse – I feel , and certainly the immediate avalanche of responses from usual Boris supporters ( not Conservatives , but Boris supporters ; people who lent us their vote in the last election ) … he ’ s lost them .
He lost them last night .
Unless it is changed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his parliamentary statement we ’ re able to give people clarity and reassurance , it ’ s going to have an impact in the Wall.
” “ I thought it was completely appropriate for the Prime Minister to give the country a bit of a heads up in terms of direction of travel , and then subsequently follow up the following day by allowing parliament to do what its job is… We ’ ve had one or two emails , nothing great so far , from constituents just asking for some clarification @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point of view I hope people don ’ t get into the position where they expect the Government to be so prescriptive as to tell them what they should do in every situation .
We need to trust that people are sensible , generally speaking , and we need to allow a degree of common sense to prevail.
” “ It is unfortunate that details of the revised guidance have been piecemeal in coming through and some measures appear so rushed .
Opening up everything from businesses to beaches in a two day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have all been sat at home for weeks , I am not sure why guidance was not more detailed or why it is rushed for this Wednesday .
Tourism regions are deeply troubled at the unlimited travel , particularly to regions with low levels of infection , without releasing any data or scientific guidance about why these journeys are now safe for people moving from areas of high infection to low infection .
The increased exercise is warmly welcomed – but remain unsure why we as MPs have to sit at home unable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others to return to work – we need to return to Westminster now travel is unlimited – even if we have to all go for a jog round Parliament Square when we get there !
” “ Clarity has to be the number one message [ going forward ] , but reassurance as well .
It ’ s one thing to say “ you can go back to work and your kids can go back to school ” , but they ’ re still asking whether or not it ’ s safe to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who ’ ve told me they ’ re not sending their kids to school until September ; we need to offer them that reassurance , and we can only do so by being clear and frank with them… It could have been so much better and achieved so much more , and unfortunately it just seemed to miss the pulse and the mood in the room .
I don ’ t think it was necessarily the content , it was the lack of clarity regarding it.
” “ The communications were bungled .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same times as the details were published .
So there was confusion that could have been avoided .
I had people emailing may who had been furloughed asking if they were supposed to go back to work or not .
But I agree with the Government being cautious .
There are advantages in being able to wait to see what happens in other countries .
The problem with being cautious is that it will mean some unpopular decisions later on when we have run out of money .
Paying out extra for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back down again will cause anger.
” “ I think Boris was actually rather brilliant yesterday because funnily enough I ’ d just watched that Gary Oldman Churchill film again , and was struck by that bit where Churchill is trying to find his voice and is told to be truthful with the people .
There isn ’ t an easy way out of this .
If the hospitals begin to be overwhelmed you begin to feel civilisation coming to an end .
The thing about Boris ’ s performance is he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not pretending it ’ s simple .
My anxiety is he ’ s having to choose factions in the Cabinet .
As for that briefing in The Mail on Sunday , it ’ s disgusting behaviour .
Loose talk costs lives.
” “ I think it landed all right .
But there was a lot of correspondence overnight , and much depends on whether Ministers can now answer some of the questions that people like my constituents are putting to them .
There ’ s a strong feeling among the colleagues that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was totally ridiculous , unnecessary , puerile .
As for getting back to something near normal , the Prime Minister basically said that we will try to do it in a bit , which was an attempt to fudge , but whether it works or not we will see.
” “ People have been clamouring for clarity about when we ’ re going to come out of lockdown .
This was a suitably calm approach to providing a roadmap , a phased approach to withdrawal that was broadly sensible .
But saying that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , before publishing the details of the sectors that should go back to work , was slightly unfortunate .
Construction companies in my patch have in fact being going back to work in the last two weeks , and manufacturing companies have been making preparations to start from the beginning of June .
People do need a bit of time to prepare.
” “ It was a good general statement from the PM .
It was a clear general message that we are winning but that we haven ’ t won yet .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ small steps .
It is reasonable to make progress conditional on infection rate not creeping up .
But the other problem is public opinion .
I ’ m amazed by the number who want the Government to control every movement of their lives .
People wanting to dob their neighbours in it .
All these people emailing me asking can they do this , can they do that .
Why don ’ t they grow up and take some personal responsibility ?
That means the Government leading not following public opinion .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ furlough scheme paying people not to work who could work – but maintain help for people who really are prevented from working , like publicans.
” “ I ’ m absolutely aghast .
It was a terrible mistake not making the announcement in the Commons , which would have allowed the accompanying documents to be released simultaneously .
Colleagues are pretty horrified .
The whole business also shows why you need a real Parliament for us all to get together .
If we had one now , I ’ d be able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at someone else ’ s , with another ten people who could sit down and go through it all together .
Having said that , the Government ’ s had to pull the vote on releasing prisoners due on Tuesday , which is a triumph for MPs ’ Whatsapp groups .
There is a group of more economically-minded MPs who are alarmed by this.
” “ I think as far as it goes it ’ s fine .
We need a bit of luck in handling this dreadful disease , because the longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic and mental health damage will be to the fabric of society .
Vital though the R factor is , we ’ ve got to get moving or we ’ ll all go bonkers.
” “ Broadly speaking I thought it was rather good , because actually it did set out the complexity and the inability to give categorical answers to really complex questions .
But he didn ’ t follow it up by saying all the details will now be on the Government website .
So he ’ s now playing catch-up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Americans during the Second World War , he does the right thing after all else has failed.
” “ I thought it was fine .
I think it was pretty good , actually .
I ’ m not usually that impressed by that kind of thing .
But I came away from that thinking it ’ s clear and good .
I watched Twitter going mental , but I don ’ t get this ‘ the public are very confused ’ thing .
I think it ’ s just a natural desire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frustrated that their scenarios are not being fulfilled .
I asked my mother what she thought of it .
She said ‘ Yeah , it seems fine , ’ which is high praise from her .
She ’ s annoyed with Sturgeon for keeping on gazumping him.
” “ Of course Boris Johnson is under a lot of pressure , so I am very sympathetic to him on a personal level .
But I would like to see the lockdown be eased much faster .
There should be more focus on care homes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus .
The rest of us need to get back to work .
When it comes to the main productive workforce we need to get production back up urgently .
To allow that we need to get children back to school .
People are simply not grasping the seriousness to the economy .
It might be that many want to keep the lockdown going – yet those same people won ’ t thank the Government for the delay if we go all bust.
” “ I don ’ t know where my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to walk a tightrope , and he ’ s not actually announced a very big change in policy .
Despite the row with Sturgeon and the Welsh , the actual guidance isn ’ t really very different among the four nations , and lots of the colleagues are having a go at Blackford on the MPs ’ WhatsApp groups .
I hate to be negative but my Facebook has certainly gone negative for the first time .
It ’ s hard to know where voters are going to settle , but everything ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hotter .
”

Lobby journalists attempting to find out what’s happening in a 1922 Committee meeting sometimes press their ears to the wall of Committee Room 14, where the event takes place.
Trying to assess what Tory MPs make of the Government’s strategy for easing the lockdown is a bit like doing so. Like straining to hear a sum of muffled noise, the odd clear sentence and the occasional shout.
But this isn’t to say that one can make nothing out at all. The background to our latest ring-round features outstanding opinion ratings for the Conservatives, which are helping to buttress backbench and ministerial morale.
Furthermore, that Parliament is virtual has the effect of diffusing protest: there have been few clearly dissenting voices speaking out from the backbenches so far. And as readers will see from the below, Tory MPs are willing to cut Johnson a lot of slack.
That said, there is good reason for Downing Street and the whips to be concerned. The simple fact is that if imposing lockdown was controversial and difficult, easing it will be much more so. The Government’s new strategy demands fine judgements; being able to deliver its plan operationally; internal disciple and competence, keeping ahead of public opinion, having the credibility to lead it and, as ever, a big slice of luck.
Reading all the feedback below, three undertows are washing around. First, exasperation at the bungled launch of the new phase, with guidance emerging the best part of 24 hours, or later, after the Prime Minister’s statement. That will already have waned.
What won’t so much is a second factor – namely, a mass of questions about how the new plan will work. By these, we don’t mean evidently stupid ones asked by clever people on Twitter (such as what “stay alert” means).
Rather, we mean a thousand enquiries about whether the planned easings will happen on time, what will happen to lives and livelihoods if they don’t, and above all for how long lockdown can practicably be sustained.
Above all, more backbenchers are questioning Ministers’ competence. The unhappiness about the messy launch, the briefing against Hancock, and the pre-guidance confusion may fade, but traces of it will linger.
This will be especially so among MPs worried that the Government, for all the horrendous circumstances it finds itself in, has made at least three shifts in strategy so far.
And contrary to the Prime Minister’s suggestion that we’ve reached the summit, the really difficult part of the climb may only just be starting.
– – – – – – – – – –
MP representing a Northern seat
“I think the Prime Minister should have held his speech back until the full document could be published alongside it. This would have provided some much-needed clarity, and avoided handing the media free hits such as the swift backtracking over whether you can meet both your parents at once. Likewise, if quarantine was useful, why wasn’t it done six weeks ago? I think a better approach is testing temperatures, as they have in Singapore and Hong Kong for years. Some of the other announcements, such as letting golf and tennis resume, are simply common sense, but we need more action on what precautionary measures are needed before public transport can be used safely and businesses such as hairdressers can reopen. We also need a more flexible furlough scheme with the flexibility to let businesses partially reopen on a skeleton staff.”
MP representing a Midlands seat
“Our starting point is far from ideal, but the Government can only make the best of the situation. The advice is more nuanced than previously but not particularly confusing, and recognises that the only way out of this situation is a gradual easing of restrictions over time. However, there does need to be a stronger emphasis on getting the economy moving as quickly as possible, and I have been disquieted to see the way in which we have seen such an appalling death toll despite all but shutting down the economy. One wonders whether the Swedish approach may have served Britain better.”
MP representing a Southern seat
“My overall view is that the Prime Minister’s having to exercise the the judgement of Solomon. If he lifts the restrictions too early and there’s a virulent second outbreak, the public will never forgive us – after everything they’ve been through. If he runs it too long, there’ll be no economy left to rescue. So there’s the dilemma. And you can’t reach for the “How to come out of Covid lockdown manual”. No such publication exists. So what’s he doing? He’s proceeding cautiously and I realise that has an economic cost, but on balance I think he’s got it about right. What was good about the broadcast was that he actually began to lay out a road map.”
MP representing a Northern seat
“Boris Johnson’s been for quite a while away from the people – and he’s a great communicator, and he’s usually got his finger right on the pulse – I feel, and certainly the immediate avalanche of responses from usual Boris supporters (not Conservatives, but Boris supporters; people who lent us their vote in the last election)… he’s lost them. He lost them last night. Unless it is changed, unless we do a volte-face or today in his parliamentary statement we’re able to give people clarity and reassurance, it’s going to have an impact in the Wall.”


Coronavirus Count

Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 226,463 ( Up from 223,060 ) .
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 32,692 ( Up from 32,065 ) .
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 3,403 ( Down from 3,877 ) .
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 627 ( Up from 210 ) .
From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS BY DATE REPORTED From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk to the UK has been raised to high ” – From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
OUR PLAN TO REBUILD : THE UK GOVERNMENT ’ S COVID-19 RECOVERY STRATEGY See here .
New as of Monday May 11 .
GUIDANCE : FURTHER BUSINESSES AND PREMISES TO CLOSE See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
HOW EVERYONE CAN HELP STOP THE CORONAVIRUS ( SOCIAL DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
STAY AT HOME @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SELF-DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR WORKERS ON WHAT AND HOW THEY CAN CLAIM See here .
Published on Friday March 20 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS , TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW See here .
Published on Saturday March 28 .
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
• Always wash your hands when you get home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands ) when you cough or sneeze .
• Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : • You think you might have coronavirus .
• In the last 14 days you ’ ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers .
• You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus .
• In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours .
• In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your area ) or 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is , how it ’ s spread and how to avoid catching it – Government NHS website overview .
• Stay at home advice and how to manage self-isolation .
( All information taken from Government sources .
Updated as of 7.00 on Wednesday May 13th . )

HEADLINE FACTS
Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases: 292,950 (Up from 291,409).
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths: 41,481 (Up from 41,279).
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases: 1,541 (Up from 1,266).
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths: 202 (Up from 151).
England total cases: 156,410 (Up from 156,018 ).
England total deaths: 37,069 (Up from 36,883).
England death rate: 279.4 (Was 278.7).
Scotland total cases: 15,709 (Up from 15,682).
Scotland total deaths: 2,439 (Up from 2,434).
Scotland death rate: 288.9 (Was 288.4).
Wales total cases: 14,658 (Up from 14,581).
Wales total deaths: 1,435 (Up from 1,425).
Wales death rate: 467.0 (Was 464.6)
Northern Ireland total cases: 4,838 (Up from 4,822)
Northern Ireland total deaths: 538 (Up from 537).
Northern Ireland death rate: 257.1 (Was 256.3).
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS BY DATE REPORTED
DAILY NUMBER OF LAB-CONFIRMED ENGLAND CASES
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
– – –
RISK
“The risk to the UK has been raised to high” –
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
– – –
NHS VOLUNTEER RESPONDER FORM
See here
(The Government’s scheme to recruit 250,000 volunteers.)
– – –
OUR PLAN TO REBUILD: THE UK GOVERNMENT’S COVID-19 RECOVERY STRATEGY
See here. New as of Monday May 11.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON THE LOCKDOWN.
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON SHIELDING AND PROTECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE CLINICALLY EXTREMELY VULNERABLE FROM COVID-19
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON SOCIAL DISTANCING
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT WEBSITE: GENERAL ADVICE
See here.
GOVERNMENT WEBSITE: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. WHAT YOU CAN DO AND CAN’T DO
See here.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS, TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW
See here. Published on Saturday March 28.
– – –
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS
Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
Always wash your hands when you get home or into work .
Use hand sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve (not your hands) when you cough or sneeze .
Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell.
SYMPTOMS
The symptoms of coronavirus are:
A cough.
A high temperature.
Shortness of breath.
However, these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness.
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common, such as cold and flu.
USING 111
NHS 111 has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do.
Use this service if:
You think you might have coronavirus.
In the last 14 days you’ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers.
You’ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus.
In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours.
In Wales call 111 (if available in your area) or 0845 46 47.
In Northern Ireland call 111.
Do not go to a GP surgery, pharmacy or hospital.
FURTHER LINKS TO GOVERNMENT ADVICE
– – –
(All information taken from Government sources.
Updated as of 19.00 on Friday June 12.)


conservativehome--2020-05-13--Luke Evans: We must protect the long-term mental health of frontline NHS staff

Dr Luke Evans is a member of the Health Select Committee , and is MP for Bosworth .
Very early on during the Coronavirus crisis , I instituted with my team the idea of twice daily virtual meetings .
For 20 minutes or so at the start and end of each day , we would all stop work and debrief each other on our daily workload , and the calls that we had taken from worried constituents .
Whilst those regular conference calls were very much about managing caseloads , I don ’ t think it is possible to underestimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I the opportunity to sound off or to share ideas and worries .
At a time when so much work is being done in isolation at dining room tables , those calls have become invaluable not only in planning work but to our collective mental health too .
The work of an MP and his caseworkers can be stressful and lonely .
As a medic , I knew how important scheduling in regular and frequent conversations would be .
I ’ m very conscious at this time that there are jobs whose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effect on mental health .
A couple of weeks ago I was able to ask Matt Hancock about what the Government was planning to do to protect the long-term mental health of front-line NHS staff .
Facing death and grief daily , often with patients dying alone , means the risk of suffering long term mental health issues such as PTSD is a very real one .
It ’ s an issue that I returned to earlier this week in The House Magazine .
The Secretary of State reassured me that his Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hour mental health hotline for NHS staff but , in an environment which health staff will continue to work in long after Coronavirus has subsided , I fear that what is needed is much more than a telephone number , as welcome as that is .
The NHS is a wonderful institution whose greatest asset is its dedicated and hardworking staff and , much like my own small parliamentary team , NHS staff rely on each other .
At a time when burnout to countless staff is a very real threat , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and returning to waiting lists which have necessarily been put on hold , in the coming months those teams will be at breaking point .
NHS staff know that if they step out of the daily routine to address their own mental health that others will have to pick up the slack , and so many fail to do so until they can carry on no more .
We have to make sure that there are not only helplines but that both they and general mental health support are highly visible .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not only OK to step out , but highly desirable if you ’ re finding it difficult .
To seek support at an early stage is far preferable to crisis further down the line .
A doctor will often become frustrated at a patient who refuses to take the medicine that is prescribed for them , and yet all too many medics will fail to follow their own advice .
As we move gradually out of lockdown we have to highlight the mental health impacts that this outbreak will have had on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be prone to PTSD , that many will suffer burnout .
For the Government it ’ s not even particularly about money but about the culture of our NHS .
We have to say to our front line workers it ’ s OK not to be OK , and that we support you on your road back to good mental health .

Dr Luke Evans is a member of the Health Select Committee, and is MP for Bosworth.
Very early on during the Coronavirus crisis, I instituted with my team the idea of twice daily virtual meetings. For 20 minutes or so at the start and end of each day, we would all stop work and debrief each other on our daily workload, and the calls that we had taken from worried constituents.
Whilst those regular conference calls were very much about managing caseloads, I don’t think it is possible to underestimate their importance in giving my whole team and I the opportunity to sound off or to share ideas and worries. At a time when so much work is being done in isolation at dining room tables, those calls have become invaluable not only in planning work but to our collective mental health too.
The work of an MP and his caseworkers can be stressful and lonely. As a medic, I knew how important scheduling in regular and frequent conversations would be. I’m very conscious at this time that there are jobs whose impact can have a far more devastating effect on mental health.
A couple of weeks ago I was able to ask Matt Hancock about what the Government was planning to do to protect the long-term mental health of front-line NHS staff. Facing death and grief daily, often with patients dying alone, means the risk of suffering long term mental health issues such as PTSD is a very real one. It’s an issue that I returned to earlier this week in The House Magazine.
The Secretary of State reassured me that his Department had already acted to introduce a 24 hour mental health hotline for NHS staff but, in an environment which health staff will continue to work in long after Coronavirus has subsided, I fear that what is needed is much more than a telephone number, as welcome as that is.
The NHS is a wonderful institution whose greatest asset is its dedicated and hardworking staff and, much like my own small parliamentary team, NHS staff rely on each other.
At a time when burnout to countless staff is a very real threat, and the looming concerns of a second spike and returning to waiting lists which have necessarily been put on hold, in the coming months those teams will be at breaking point.
NHS staff know that if they step out of the daily routine to address their own mental health that others will have to pick up the slack, and so many fail to do so until they can carry on no more.
We have to make sure that there are not only helplines but that both they and general mental health support are highly visible. We have to make sure that it’s not only OK to step out, but highly desirable if you’re finding it difficult. To seek support at an early stage is far preferable to crisis further down the line.
A doctor will often become frustrated at a patient who refuses to take the medicine that is prescribed for them, and yet all too many medics will fail to follow their own advice.
As we move gradually out of lockdown we have to highlight the mental health impacts that this outbreak will have had on our frontline staff, that they will be prone to PTSD, that many will suffer burnout.
For the Government it’s not even particularly about money but about the culture of our NHS. We have to say to our front line workers it’s OK not to be OK, and that we support you on your road back to good mental health.


conservativehome--2020-05-13--Ryan Bourne: A view so radical that some simply won’t see it. The driver of our problems isn’t lockd

Ryan Bourne: A view so radical that some simply won’t see it. The driver of our problems isn’t lockdown. It’s the virus.

Ryan Bourne holds the R Evan Scharf Chair in Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute .
Boris Johnson now demands we must “ Stay Alert ” to the threat of Covid-19 , rather than simply “ Stay Home ” to avoid spreading it .
Perhaps it ’ s time we commentators “ stayed alert ” to new evidence regarding the Coronavirus too , rather than doubling down on our entrenched views .
Even after the Prime Minister ’ s statement , the UK remains gripped in an inane pro- v anti-lockdown debate – the former camp convinced relaxation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the latter convinced lockdowns themselves cause economic destruction .
This dialogue of the deaf is fast becoming a dialogue of the blind .
For global evidence suggests that lockdowns have had a very small additional impact on economic activity relative to the voluntary social distancing we ’ d see anyway .
Not only were our behaviours changing radically before government orders , but places that didn ’ t lockdown are seeing similar economic devastation .
Take the United States .
Data from Raj Chetty ’ s “ Opportunity Insights ” produces incontrovertible evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spent away from home , and travel plunged following the national emergency declaration on March 13 .
This was well before state governors ordered business closures and mandated that residents stay home .
The five U.S. states that did not issue stay-at-home orders likewise saw near-identical economic and mobility trends to those that did .
These results have been confirmed by two academic studies .
Major retail brands , from Nike to Apple , were closing stores well before state lockdowns too .
Sweden , which didn ’ t lockdown to the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been the key driver of downturns .
Data from Citymapper shows that transport mobility in Stockholm fell 70 percent by the start of March .
Travel to the holiday island of Gotland was down 96 percent compared with Easter last year , despite no government orders banning it .
Last week , projections from the Swedish central bank suggested the country will see a GDP contraction similar to other locked down Scandinavian economies , despite Sweden ’ s liberal approach to business openings .
Just because people are free to engage in economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not mean workers or businesses will do so .
Here , OpenTable data shows that UK restaurant bookings fell 82 percent by March 17th against last year , a full three days before Boris Johnson closed restaurants .
City Mapper shows mobility in London had fallen 75 per cent the day before full lockdown was announced , with Manchester and Birmingham exhibiting similar patterns .
True , it then fell by another 10 percentage points after lockdown , but the degree of behavioral change would have made it very difficult for much activity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media focus worldwide on bars still open , people having picnics or bathing on beaches , the data shows voluntary social distancing came well before government mandates .
We acted on information from governments , of course , but not their orders .
Some companies even wanted governments to lockdown to be eligible for business interruption insurance or relief .
The economic carnage is therefore primarily from the virus , not the lockdown .
And other data on the famous R , from countries such as Switzerland to the U.S. states , suggests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before lockdowns were introduced .
My point here is not to imply that lockdowns are economically harmless .
Crude bans catch high-risk and low-risk activity alike .
They prevent businesses from adapting to this new environment with safety protocols too , and second-guess what is best for many families in very different situations .
We can all think of examples of companies that could open safely and viably with social distancing ( the government ultimately agreed on garden centres ) .
Likewise , we know wellbeing has fallen dramatically for many and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activities that could bring us great pleasure .
Sweden is also strongly dependent on foreign trade , so in part is being dragged down by policy elsewhere .
But these impacts on the margin shouldn ’ t be used to mask the big picture : whether in expectation of lockdowns , plain old fear , or observation of policies elsewhere , private activity mimicked lockdowns before they happened .
The libertarian in me wants to blame bad government policies for economic harm .
And the longer lockdowns go on , and adaptation is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet one can not look honestly at the data and conclude anything other than the virus , not the lockdowns , have caused our economic woes so far .
So what are the implications ?
Pro-lockdown commentators could say this proves there is no health vs. economic trade-off and so little upside to relaxing restrictions .
Anti-lockdown folk could say that it shows people are better placed to manage risks than governments imply .
Our starting assumption though should surely be that much economic pain will endure until the public feels confident @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevent business innovation towards this .
But they might help deter some people taking the wrong message that relaxation means “ anything goes.
” Johnson is evidently pained by these considerations , hence phasing in other loosening , while being terrified about how it ’ s perceived .
His strategy now is to continually adjust activity restrictions to suppress the virus while using staged the relaxation to judge what the big risk factors are .
With so much uncertainty , none of us know yet whether this is the right approach .
Retrospective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call if a vaccine comes quickly and so lockdowns actually prevent deaths rather than delaying them , or if the time results in better treatments , or safety protocols that inspire more confidence .
The unknowns are legion .
Boris has to make a judgment now and is clearly hedging his bets .
He wants to do more than “ flattening the curve , ” and to build test-and-trace infrastructure to live with the virus once infections have fallen dramatically , shifting to more like South Korea ’ s approach .
Where he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take for that that strategy to be abandoned .
At what stage do we , societally , conclude the costs of suppression or waiting for a vaccine to “ go back to normal ” are too high .
To put it another way : there remain only three ways this full episode ends for the UK – a vaccine delivering sustained immunity , near-eradication and then ongoing firefighting indefinitely , or various paths towards “ herd immunity.
” Johnson was perfectly clear on the staged removal of lockdown .
He was less clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his view on which end state he was working towards – indeed , if a vaccine wasn ’ t forthcoming , he simply said we would all be in it for the “ long haul.
” The virus has been the cause of our economic pain to date .
But whether suppressing it is optimal largely depends on factors beyond political control .
What would have to happen for this new alert system for ongoing suppression to be deemed undesirable ?
That ’ s the hole in this pandemic plan .

Ryan Bourne holds the R Evan Scharf Chair in Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute.
Boris Johnson now demands we must “Stay Alert” to the threat of Covid-19, rather than simply “Stay Home” to avoid spreading it. Perhaps it’s time we commentators “stayed alert” to new evidence regarding the Coronavirus too, rather than doubling down on our entrenched views.
Even after the Prime Minister’s statement, the UK remains gripped in an inane pro- v anti-lockdown debate – the former camp convinced relaxation risks a huge additional death toll, the latter convinced lockdowns themselves cause economic destruction.
This dialogue of the deaf is fast becoming a dialogue of the blind. For global evidence suggests that lockdowns have had a very small additional impact on economic activity relative to the voluntary social distancing we’d see anyway. Not only were our behaviours changing radically before government orders, but places that didn’t lockdown are seeing similar economic devastation.
Take the United States. Data from Raj Chetty’s “Opportunity Insights” produces incontrovertible evidence that “social spending,” time spent away from home, and travel plunged following the national emergency declaration on March 13.
This was well before state governors ordered business closures and mandated that residents stay home. The five U.S. states that did not issue stay-at-home orders likewise saw near-identical economic and mobility trends to those that did. These results have been confirmed by two academic studies. Major retail brands, from Nike to Apple, were closing stores well before state lockdowns too.
Sweden, which didn’t lockdown to the same extent, similarly suggests voluntary distancing has been the key driver of downturns. Data from Citymapper shows that transport mobility in Stockholm fell 70 percent by the start of March. Travel to the holiday island of Gotland was down 96 percent compared with Easter last year, despite no government orders banning it.
Last week, projections from the Swedish central bank suggested the country will see a GDP contraction similar to other locked down Scandinavian economies, despite Sweden’s liberal approach to business openings. Just because people are free to engage in economic activities or open their businesses, does not mean workers or businesses will do so.
Here, OpenTable data shows that UK restaurant bookings fell 82 percent by March 17th against last year, a full three days before Boris Johnson closed restaurants. City Mapper shows mobility in London had fallen 75 per cent the day before full lockdown was announced, with Manchester and Birmingham exhibiting similar patterns.
True, it then fell by another 10 percentage points after lockdown, but the degree of behavioral change would have made it very difficult for much activity to remain open anyway.
Despite extensive media focus worldwide on bars still open, people having picnics or bathing on beaches, the data shows voluntary social distancing came well before government mandates. We acted on information from governments, of course, but not their orders. Some companies even wanted governments to lockdown to be eligible for business interruption insurance or relief. The economic carnage is therefore primarily from the virus, not the lockdown. And other data on the famous R, from countries such as Switzerland to the U.S. states, suggests the virus transmission was subsequently falling firmly before lockdowns were introduced.
My point here is not to imply that lockdowns are economically harmless. Crude bans catch high-risk and low-risk activity alike. They prevent businesses from adapting to this new environment with safety protocols too, and second-guess what is best for many families in very different situations. We can all think of examples of companies that could open safely and viably with social distancing (the government ultimately agreed on garden centres).
Likewise, we know wellbeing has fallen dramatically for many and that lockdowns contribute to that by banning some activities that could bring us great pleasure. Sweden is also strongly dependent on foreign trade, so in part is being dragged down by policy elsewhere.
But these impacts on the margin shouldn’t be used to mask the big picture: whether in expectation of lockdowns, plain old fear, or observation of policies elsewhere, private activity mimicked lockdowns before they happened.
The libertarian in me wants to blame bad government policies for economic harm. And the longer lockdowns go on, and adaptation is denied, the more true this becomes. Yet one cannot look honestly at the data and conclude anything other than the virus, not the lockdowns, have caused our economic woes so far.
So what are the implications? Pro-lockdown commentators could say this proves there is no health vs. economic trade-off and so little upside to relaxing restrictions. Anti-lockdown folk could say that it shows people are better placed to manage risks than governments imply.
Our starting assumption though should surely be that much economic pain will endure until the public feels confident infection risks have been reduced. Lockdowns prevent business innovation towards this. But they might help deter some people taking the wrong message that relaxation means “anything goes.” Johnson is evidently pained by these considerations, hence phasing in other loosening, while being terrified about how it’s perceived.
His strategy now is to continually adjust activity restrictions to suppress the virus while using staged the relaxation to judge what the big risk factors are. With so much uncertainty, none of us know yet whether this is the right approach. Retrospective analyses will say suppression was the correct call if a vaccine comes quickly and so lockdowns actually prevent deaths rather than delaying them, or if the time results in better treatments, or safety protocols that inspire more confidence. The unknowns are legion.
Boris has to make a judgment now and is clearly hedging his bets. He wants to do more than “flattening the curve,” and to build test-and-trace infrastructure to live with the virus once infections have fallen dramatically, shifting to more like South Korea’s approach. Where he is silent is what evidence it would take for that that strategy to be abandoned. At what stage do we, societally, conclude the costs of suppression or waiting for a vaccine to “go back to normal” are too high.
To put it another way: there remain only three ways this full episode ends for the UK – a vaccine delivering sustained immunity, near-eradication and then ongoing firefighting indefinitely, or various paths towards “herd immunity.”
Johnson was perfectly clear on the staged removal of lockdown. He was less clear on what might cause him to change his view on which end state he was working towards – indeed, if a vaccine wasn’t forthcoming, he simply said we would all be in it for the “long haul.”
The virus has been the cause of our economic pain to date. But whether suppressing it is optimal largely depends on factors beyond political control. What would have to happen for this new alert system for ongoing suppression to be deemed undesirable? That’s the hole in this pandemic plan.


conservativehome--2020-05-13--Daniel Hannan: Why are so many Burkean Tories still backing this rolling forward of state power?

Daniel Hannan is a writer and columnist .
He was a Conservative MEP from 1999 to 2020 , and is now President of the Initiative for Free Trade .
Most of us like to think that we are pragmatic while our opponents are doctrinaire .
It is , as behavioural psychologists have long known , an inescapable part of our nature .
So it is not surprising that during the Covid-19 outbreak , as during any crisis , each side should accuse the other of being ideological .
Leftists complain that the government is putting “ the economy ” before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two things could somehow be disentangled ) .
Rightists , for their part , suspect that their opponents are enjoying the lockdown , and the associated expansion of state power , a little too much .
Actually , if we do our best to set our prejudices aside , we can see that almost everyone has accepted the uniqueness of the situation .
Most small-government types acknowledged the need for increases in state spending and emergency powers – though it is fair to say that they fret more than the general population about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for their part , have generally gone along with the scrapping of some regulations .
Hardly anyone is arguing , for example , that , at a time when millions are losing their jobs , companies should be required to measure their gender pay gaps .
That said , our political opinions often reflect our personalities .
We tend to differ in our attitudes depending on whether we are optimistic or pessimistic , risk-taking or cautious , solitary or social , trusting or cynical .
And these character traits are themselves subject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threat will generally make people more defensive , more inward-looking , more tribal , more authoritarian , more intolerant of dissent , more censorious .
All of which poses a challenge to small-government conservatives .
Exactly as psychologists would have predicted , most people responded to the epidemic by demanding bans and prohibitions .
Naturally , they did so in the belief that theirs was a logical and pragmatic response , while those who disagreed were blinkered ideologues .
The government ’ s initial response was in fact admirably Burkeian .
The full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pubs and theatres were closed , but other businesses were left open .
People were told to use their common sense , avoid unnecessary contacts and keep washing their hands .
And you know what ?
It did the trick .
We can now see that it was during the pre-lockdown period that the rate of new infections started to plummet in the UK .
If , as epidemiologists and ministers now accept , Covid-19 related deaths peaked on 8 April then , allowing for the lag in incubation and deterioration , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on or around 18 March – five days before the lockdown was announced .
Obviously , no one knew that at the time .
Both ministers and the scientists who advise them were in the unenviable position of having to work with tiny scraps of information .
Understandably , perhaps , they did what the public and the tabloids were demanding and ordered draconian restrictions .
Now , even many self-identifying conservatives clamour for the clampdown to continue .
Have they simply turned to swim with the current ?
Has the panic changed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were they always relaxed about an increase in state power ?
Whatever the explanation , those who continue to argue for personal autonomy and property rights find themselves suddenly in the minority .
I have been struck , over the past month , by the divergence between libertarians and what we might call “ communitarian conservatives ” – those public-spirited , amiable , often quietly religious Tories whose columns appear at Unherd and , indeed , sometimes on this site .
The position of most libertarians is clear enough : they fear that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justification for the closures has expanded , they fret about the loss of freedom , they worry about the growing debt and they want the restrictions lifted .
That of most ( not all ) communitarians is more surprising .
You ’ d think that the original Burkeian response would have been right up their street ; but , when the moment came , they cheered for measures that owed less to the science than to a general feeling that the Government should be doing more .
Now we find ourselves trapped in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been reversed in a way that would have horrified Burke .
Argue for , say , shops to reopen , and you will be told : “ How can you be certain that it won ’ t cause the infection rate to rise ?
” But it shouldn ’ t be for defenders of the status quo ante to show that restrictions don ’ t work ; it should be for exponents of unprecedented restrictions to show that they do .
Six weeks ago , most of Europe was in lockdown and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Belarus ) were the outliers .
Now , other countries are opening up .
Children are returning to school in Denmark , Germany , Norway , Austria .
Shops are reopening across the Continent .
Switzerland – not a country we associate with wanton recklessness – has ended its lockdown weeks earlier than planned , reopening shops , gyms and cafés , removing border restrictions , telling otherwise healthy over-65s that it is fine to go out .
Suddenly , it is boarded-up Britain that is the outlier .
Other countries , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beginning to trade and export again , taking business from their shuttered British rivals .
Conservatism expresses itself through trust , responsibility and common sense .
It is not compatible with laying down prescriptive rules on which family members you may meet and which forms of exercise you are allowed .
When we forget that , we really are in trouble .

Daniel Hannan is a writer and columnist. He was a Conservative MEP from 1999 to 2020, and is now President of the Initiative for Free Trade.
Most of us like to think that we are pragmatic while our opponents are doctrinaire. It is, as behavioural psychologists have long known, an inescapable part of our nature. So it is not surprising that during the Covid-19 outbreak, as during any crisis, each side should accuse the other of being ideological.
Leftists complain that the government is putting “the economy” before “people” (as though the two things could somehow be disentangled). Rightists, for their part, suspect that their opponents are enjoying the lockdown, and the associated expansion of state power, a little too much.
Actually, if we do our best to set our prejudices aside, we can see that almost everyone has accepted the uniqueness of the situation. Most small-government types acknowledged the need for increases in state spending and emergency powers – though it is fair to say that they fret more than the general population about the endurance of these measures.
Socialists, for their part, have generally gone along with the scrapping of some regulations. Hardly anyone is arguing, for example, that, at a time when millions are losing their jobs, companies should be required to measure their gender pay gaps.
That said, our political opinions often reflect our personalities. We tend to differ in our attitudes depending on whether we are optimistic or pessimistic, risk-taking or cautious, solitary or social, trusting or cynical. And these character traits are themselves subject to environmental influence. A perceived external threat will generally make people more defensive, more inward-looking, more tribal, more authoritarian, more intolerant of dissent, more censorious.
All of which poses a challenge to small-government conservatives. Exactly as psychologists would have predicted, most people responded to the epidemic by demanding bans and prohibitions. Naturally, they did so in the belief that theirs was a logical and pragmatic response, while those who disagreed were blinkered ideologues.
The government’s initial response was in fact admirably Burkeian. The full force of law was used sparingly. Pubs and theatres were closed, but other businesses were left open. People were told to use their common sense, avoid unnecessary contacts and keep washing their hands. And you know what? It did the trick.
We can now see that it was during the pre-lockdown period that the rate of new infections started to plummet in the UK. If, as epidemiologists and ministers now accept, Covid-19 related deaths peaked on 8 April then, allowing for the lag in incubation and deterioration, the peak in the rate of infections came on or around 18 March – five days before the lockdown was announced.
Obviously, no one knew that at the time. Both ministers and the scientists who advise them were in the unenviable position of having to work with tiny scraps of information. Understandably, perhaps, they did what the public and the tabloids were demanding and ordered draconian restrictions. Now, even many self-identifying conservatives clamour for the clampdown to continue.
Have they simply turned to swim with the current? Has the panic changed the chemistry of their brains? Or were they always relaxed about an increase in state power? Whatever the explanation, those who continue to argue for personal autonomy and property rights find themselves suddenly in the minority.
I have been struck, over the past month, by the divergence between libertarians and what we might call “communitarian conservatives” – those public-spirited, amiable, often quietly religious Tories whose columns appear at Unherd and, indeed, sometimes on this site.
The position of most libertarians is clear enough: they fear that the original “flatten the curve” justification for the closures has expanded, they fret about the loss of freedom, they worry about the growing debt and they want the restrictions lifted.
That of most (not all) communitarians is more surprising. You’d think that the original Burkeian response would have been right up their street; but, when the moment came, they cheered for measures that owed less to the science than to a general feeling that the Government should be doing more.
Now we find ourselves trapped in a situation where the burden of proof has been reversed in a way that would have horrified Burke. Argue for, say, shops to reopen, and you will be told: “How can you be certain that it won’t cause the infection rate to rise?” But it shouldn’t be for defenders of the status quo ante to show that restrictions don’t work; it should be for exponents of unprecedented restrictions to show that they do.
Six weeks ago, most of Europe was in lockdown and only Sweden (and, I suppose, Belarus) were the outliers. Now, other countries are opening up. Children are returning to school in Denmark, Germany, Norway, Austria. Shops are reopening across the Continent.
Switzerland – not a country we associate with wanton recklessness – has ended its lockdown weeks earlier than planned, reopening shops, gyms and cafés, removing border restrictions, telling otherwise healthy over-65s that it is fine to go out.
Suddenly, it is boarded-up Britain that is the outlier. Other countries, following their own scientific advice, are beginning to trade and export again, taking business from their shuttered British rivals.
Conservatism expresses itself through trust, responsibility and common sense. It is not compatible with laying down prescriptive rules on which family members you may meet and which forms of exercise you are allowed. When we forget that, we really are in trouble.


conservativehome--2020-05-13--Katy Bourne: We may be at a turning point for policing by consent

Katy Bourne is the Police and Crime Commissioner for Sussex and chairman of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners .
Our version of lockdown is light by comparison to other nations but the restrictions on our movements are nevertheless alien to British citizens .
We all want the Government ’ s strategy to succeed – but we know that the impact on the economy , social cohesion , and our mental health , is damaging and , for some , possibly permanent .
Will we emerge with a stronger urge for self-preservation or a stronger need for community ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the massive changes to our normal routines ?
Will we respect or resent them ?
Policing got thrust to the front and centre of the pandemic when the Coronavirus Bill provided enhanced police powers to enforce public health measures .
Many commentators reacted immediately to warn of the end of our traditional liberties .
A handful of police interactions or warnings were highlighted as evidence of a police state in-waiting .
I think that is nonsense .
It ’ s not what the Government requires , it ’ s not what the police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure it ’ s not what the public would tolerate .
What has surprised Ministers and officials though , is people ’ s compliance with the restrictions on movement and gatherings .
So , is the great British public successfully policing itself so far ?
Citizens are flooding police with calls and emails to report people making non-essential trips .
Some are doubtless extensions of simmering disputes but many will be motivated by a genuine fear of the virus .
Our collective response to the pandemic has been largely good-natured up to now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traditions of policing by engaging and explaining , rather than enforcing the “ stay at home ” message .
The majority of the public believe the police response to be measured , especially in the face of being coughed and spat at and bitten .
Although we may be “ past the peak ” , it is deemed not yet safe to lift restrictions .
Do we have the patience to continue and do our police officers have everything they need to tackle those people who can ’ t or won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for more police powers such as entering properties to disperse house parties but I don ’ t think that is necessary or ideal .
Adding more powers to deal with the here and now may appear valuable today , but the public may grow weary of them in the future .
Our citizens quite rightly want the police to be targeting criminals and preventing and deterring crime rather than moving people on from beaches and beauty spots or policing access to recycling facilities and garden centres when they re-open .
With overall crime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say the police have got less to do and so , perhaps , we won ’ t need to recruit another 20,000 officers ?
That would be short-sighted .
Criminal behaviour is like water , it will always find a level .
The pandemic has created the circumstances for some crimes to flourish , such as cyber-crimes and fraud and online exploitation of children .
These are not crimes you deter by walking the physical beat…we need officers and experts policing the digital beat as well .
There are real fears that victims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it because they believe there is no safe place to go to and that nothing will be done against the perpetrators .
We do know that calls to help lines and refuges appear to be spiralling upwards , but many victims feel trapped and powerless .
PCC colleagues across the country are ensuring that abuse support services will continue to get as much funding as we can muster to help victims of domestic abuse , sexual violence , exploitation , and stalking .
Whilst many crime types have fallen during lockdown , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the streets , violence and shoplifting will mushroom .
We will still need police to be tough on criminals , but how tough should they be with people who break future social distancing rules ?
The public health measures we will need to tackle further outbreaks will challenge long-cherished notions of freedom of association and privacy .
China imposed the strictest controls on the population with citizens effectively bar-coded with every movement and interaction tracked .
What liberties are the British willing to suspend or sacrifice ?
If we have to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s movements with phone apps and monitoring people as they enter buildings and transport networks , who will be in charge ?
Who will control the data ?
Health officials , the police , the Government ?
One thing I am certain of is that the public like the model of policing we already have , and they definitely don ’ t want to lose their local constabularies or the transparency and accountability that Police and Crime Commissioners are a key part of .
Our constabularies reflect the people they serve and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time when we need maximum public co-operation .
We may have to maintain social distancing for some time .
Self-policing of our movements and interactions with the aid of technology will be infinitely preferable to having police officers checking our details for years to come .
We don ’ t want to turn our backs on 200 years of the most respected policing model in the world because we are not sure that we can trust ourselves to change our behaviour for our own safety .

Katy Bourne is the Police and Crime Commissioner for Sussex and chairman of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners.
Our version of lockdown is light by comparison to other nations but the restrictions on our movements are nevertheless alien to British citizens.
We all want the Government’s strategy to succeed – but we know that the impact on the economy, social cohesion, and our mental health, is damaging and, for some, possibly permanent.
Will we emerge with a stronger urge for self-preservation or a stronger need for community? How will citizens view those responsible for the massive changes to our normal routines? Will we respect or resent them?
Policing got thrust to the front and centre of the pandemic when the Coronavirus Bill provided enhanced police powers to enforce public health measures. Many commentators reacted immediately to warn of the end of our traditional liberties.
A handful of police interactions or warnings were highlighted as evidence of a police state in-waiting. I think that is nonsense. It’s not what the Government requires, it’s not what the police want, and I’m fairly sure it’s not what the public would tolerate.
What has surprised Ministers and officials though, is people’s compliance with the restrictions on movement and gatherings. So, is the great British public successfully policing itself so far? Citizens are flooding police with calls and emails to report people making non-essential trips. Some are doubtless extensions of simmering disputes but many will be motivated by a genuine fear of the virus.
Our collective response to the pandemic has been largely good-natured up to now. Our police have maintained the Peelian traditions of policing by engaging and explaining, rather than enforcing the “stay at home” message.
The majority of the public believe the police response to be measured, especially in the face of being coughed and spat at and bitten.
Although we may be “past the peak”, it is deemed not yet safe to lift restrictions. Do we have the patience to continue and do our police officers have everything they need to tackle those people who can’t or won’t stick with it?
Some have called for more police powers such as entering properties to disperse house parties but I don’t think that is necessary or ideal. Adding more powers to deal with the here and now may appear valuable today, but the public may grow weary of them in the future.
Our citizens quite rightly want the police to be targeting criminals and preventing and deterring crime rather than moving people on from beaches and beauty spots or policing access to recycling facilities and garden centres when they re-open.
With overall crime down during lockdown measures, some may say the police have got less to do and so, perhaps, we won’t need to recruit another 20,000 officers? That would be short-sighted.
Criminal behaviour is like water, it will always find a level. The pandemic has created the circumstances for some crimes to flourish, such as cyber-crimes and fraud and online exploitation of children. These are not crimes you deter by walking the physical beat…we need officers and experts policing the digital beat as well.
There are real fears that victims of domestic abuse aren’t reporting it because they believe there is no safe place to go to and that nothing will be done against the perpetrators. We do know that calls to help lines and refuges appear to be spiralling upwards, but many victims feel trapped and powerless.
PCC colleagues across the country are ensuring that abuse support services will continue to get as much funding as we can muster to help victims of domestic abuse, sexual violence, exploitation, and stalking.
Whilst many crime types have fallen during lockdown, we know that when more people are back on the streets, violence and shoplifting will mushroom. We will still need police to be tough on criminals, but how tough should they be with people who break future social distancing rules?
The public health measures we will need to tackle further outbreaks will challenge long-cherished notions of freedom of association and privacy.
China imposed the strictest controls on the population with citizens effectively bar-coded with every movement and interaction tracked. What liberties are the British willing to suspend or sacrifice?
If we have to go down the route of mapping citizen’s movements with phone apps and monitoring people as they enter buildings and transport networks, who will be in charge? Who will control the data? Health officials, the police, the Government?
One thing I am certain of is that the public like the model of policing we already have, and they definitely don’t want to lose their local constabularies or the transparency and accountability that Police and Crime Commissioners are a key part of.
Our constabularies reflect the people they serve and that is too valuable to lose at a time when we need maximum public co-operation.
We may have to maintain social distancing for some time. Self-policing of our movements and interactions with the aid of technology will be infinitely preferable to having police officers checking our details for years to come.
We don’t want to turn our backs on 200 years of the most respected policing model in the world because we are not sure that we can trust ourselves to change our behaviour for our own safety.


conservativehome--2020-05-13--Andrew Gimson’s PMQs sketch: Starmer becomes lethal by pointing out the Government’s inconsistencies

Sir Keir Starmer is becoming lethal .
He speaks in the puzzled tone of a reasonable man who discovers that the Government has contradicted itself .
So he wondered why until the 12th March the Government advised that it was “ very unlikely that people receiving care in a care home will become infected ” .
Boris Johnson was incautious enough to reply , “ No , Mr Speaker , the advice didn ’ t say that.
” Starmer was “ surprised the Prime Minister queries the advice of his own Government ” , and Twitter was soon alive with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson was correct .
Perhaps even more damaging was Starmer ’ s observation that after seven weeks of publishing international comparisons at the Downing Street press conferences , the Government yesterday stopped publishing them : “ Why ?
” Johnson said he was “ advised ” that international comparisons are “ premature ” .
But in that case , why publish them for seven weeks ?
Jeremy Corbyn tried to show that the Government was immoral .
Starmer makes the much more damaging charge that it is incompetent .
For Corbyn appealed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shared .
Starmer , by contrast , appeals to standards which have been set by the Government itself , and shows how these have been contradicted .
Like the man on the Clapham omnibus , or in Starmer ’ s case the man on the Camden omnibus , he studies the official account , and points out that it does not make sense .
In April , Starmer pointed out , there were 18,000 more deaths in care homes than the average for that month for the last five years , and so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been attributed to Covid-19 .
What caused the other 10,000 deaths ?
“ The Government must have looked into that.
” Johnson agreed that “ sorting the problem in care homes is going to be absolutely critical ” , and ended his reply : “ We must fix it and we will.
” If the problem is not fixed , we can expect to hear that assurance quoted back at the PM by Starmer .
Meanwhile , Johnson has a PMQs problem to fix .

Sir Keir Starmer is becoming lethal. He speaks in the puzzled tone of a reasonable man who discovers that the Government has contradicted itself.
So he wondered why until the 12th March the Government advised that it was “very unlikely that people receiving care in a care home will become infected”.
Boris Johnson was incautious enough to reply, “No, Mr Speaker, the advice didn’t say that.” Starmer was “surprised the Prime Minister queries the advice of his own Government”, and Twitter was soon alive with chapter and verse suggesting Starmer rather than Johnson was correct.
Perhaps even more damaging was Starmer’s observation that after seven weeks of publishing international comparisons at the Downing Street press conferences, the Government yesterday stopped publishing them: “Why?”
Johnson said he was “advised” that international comparisons are “premature”. But in that case, why publish them for seven weeks?
Jeremy Corbyn tried to show that the Government was immoral. Starmer makes the much more damaging charge that it is incompetent.
For Corbyn appealed to a Bennite morality which is not generally shared. Starmer, by contrast, appeals to standards which have been set by the Government itself, and shows how these have been contradicted.
Like the man on the Clapham omnibus, or in Starmer’s case the man on the Camden omnibus, he studies the official account, and points out that it does not make sense.
In April, Starmer pointed out, there were 18,000 more deaths in care homes than the average for that month for the last five years, and so far only 8,000 of those deaths have been attributed to Covid-19.
What caused the other 10,000 deaths? “The Government must have looked into that.”
Johnson agreed that “sorting the problem in care homes is going to be absolutely critical”, and ended his reply: “We must fix it and we will.”
If the problem is not fixed, we can expect to hear that assurance quoted back at the PM by Starmer.
Meanwhile, Johnson has a PMQs problem to fix.


conservativehome--2020-05-13--WATCH: The Leader of the Opposition to Johnson at PMQs: will the scientific advice be published?

`` After the confusion of the last few days '' , says Labour leader Keir Starmer , will the PM @ @ @ @ @ lockdown measures are based on ?
Advice is published in `` due course '' , @ @ @

"After the confusion of the last few days", says Labour leader Keir Starmer, will the PM publish the scientific advice that lockdown measures are based on?
Advice is published in "due course", replies Boris Johnson
Follow live: https://t.co/WAaVYqKUuA #PMQs pic.twitter.com/Bo8MQ1cvHX
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) May 13, 2020