UKC

I noticed that for the last 2 days Scotland has had <20 new COVID-19 cases reported (prorated for England this would be us having <200) yet the restrictions are still tighter than England....the one around travel seems particulary harsh IMO.

So what is Sturgeons plan, to literally drive it into the ground before she eases up a bit more?

A couple of friends of mine are a community nurse in the Tayside NHS region and a senior planning officer at Perth and Kinross Council, with responsibility for crematoria, among other things. From their experiences, both are of the view that the lockdown restrictions are far tighter than is warranted by the reality of the numbers of cases. Purely anecdotal of course, but when one considers how few new cases there are in this region, and how few there are in some other regions of Scotland, it does seem reasonable to raise your question. 

Consider for a moment that the number of cases might be a result of the tighter lockdown restrictions.

If you look at the numbers there hasn't been a great deal of difference between Scotland and other parts of the UK. 

I'm not sure restrictions have really been much different except that in Scotland no construction work at all was carried out. 

I think there's a lot we don't understand.

Of course but that is not my point....

Fergus Ewing just announced that tourism sector can prepare for reopening on 15 July

Hopefully there will be a tourist industry by then but it looks likely that many will fold this year. 

Which numbers are you looking at? The official figures (available on the two governments' websites) look pretty different to me!

Here are the (very approximate) daily number of new cases reported by the governments (based on the 7 day rolling average) for the stated period, first for UK then for Scotland

Late April      4500     300

Early May      4500     250

Mid May        3500    170

Late May       2500      70

Early June      2000     30

Last 2 days    1500     15

On the face of it then new cases are currently about 10-20 times scarcer in Scotland than they were in late April, while in the UK the number of new cases is about a third of its value then. Both Scotland and the UK have been increasing the number of tests at a similar rate (approximately doubling over the period). It is hard to escape the conclusion that since about mid May Scotland has started doing very much better than the the rUK (which really means England of course, but I'm not seeking to make any party political or nationalist point). UK gov figures on hospital admissions seem to tell the same story.

Can you point me to information that leads to a different conclusion?

You mean like China and the rest of Europe did?

Seems like a good plan to me.   If we can stop imported cases and are at near-zero then we can have a much more normal life than the precautions necessary when there is still a significant amount of infection.   The thing to remember is that during lockdown R is much lower so the rate of infection falls faster and you get to near zero quicker.   As soon as you start opening up and R gets to around 1 it will level off and take much longer to fall to near zero, if it gets there at all and doesn't start rising again.

There is now data from tracing virus DNA that shows 51% of the initial clusters of Covid in Scotland came from 'other parts of the UK' i.e. England.   We are heading for a situation where there are effectively zero new cases in Scotland but there are still a significant number in England and the infections in England have stopped falling or potentially even rising again.   This opens up the whole discussion about the border again.   If Scotland was independent with the infection rates we will have we could start opening up travel to the EU countries which have also suppressed Covid.  

This is totally the fault of the Tories in Westminster who are diverging from international best practice and opening up a few weeks too early to placate the press.

I drew my conclusion from this:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/10/coronavi...

Scotland is worse than some other parts of the UK and better than others according to that data.

But that map shows you the cumulative number of cases - it is not informative about how the number of new cases is declining (which is the subject of this thread).

Yes fair enough I was answering a slightly different question.

It will certainly be interesting if we get to a point where it makes sense to close the border to travel from England. Could this legally or politically be done? One would hope so if it meant life could get back to normal more quickly in Scotland.

And this sir is why if you manage to get to be independent I will be pushing for Yorkshire to go with you. Build Hadrians wall just south of Sheffield and jobs a good un. We can defend the border for you to stop the incursion of the real southerners 

Forget about England do you think it is still reasonable for people in Scotland to not be officially allowed to drive to the Highlands for a walk/climb? 

Bollocks to that, you can build the wall along the Tees...  

Only 12 new cases reported in last 24 hours. For the first time since March no new cases in Glasgow and Clyde Health Board area which is the biggest in population terms. 

I think it is getting very close to the point where that restriction isn't needed.  Cases in Glasgow are way down.  There's a review in a week, which is not bad timing because there could be a nasty surprise pending from recent loss of discipline which hasn't shown through yet.

As someone who lives in the Highlands I would say yes, for now.

Genuine question, what are you fearful of?

Her plan is to do the opposite of whatever England does and then blame England for anything that doesn't work out, like this for example

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/england-under-reporting-care-home-de...

It seems there's no shortage of Scots more than happy to endure any amount of unjustifiable restriction on their freedom in order to distance themselves from England judging by some of the threads on here.

her plan is to be different to england at any cost. cheap political points scoring and pushing a nationalist agenda at the cost of everybodies health. pretty disgraceful really

That is nonsense for three reasons:

a. There was a common policy for the UK for a long time on most things.  Scotland went into lockdown slightly earlier and is coming out slightly later.

b. On the points where Scotland and England have diverged it is England that has taken an unusual path.  Scotland is just following WHO advice and the strategies used in the EU, China and most of the world.  Northern Ireland and Wales are not following England blindly either.

c. The numbers say that it is England's path which has been damaging to health.  

Whoa on there, given that much of the roman empire was built on slavery that old wall needs to go regardless. 

Unlike any other politicians?

Pot, kettle, black much? If by "England" you mean the Westminster governments handling of the coronavirus pandemic in England... having different plans, considering they way they have been repeatedly bungled by the tory government isn't disgraceful, it could even be commended? 

Similarly anecdotal, a friend of mine is a consultant at Ninewells and less than a month ago, which is the last time we spoke, considered the restrictions to be barely adequate to reduce the spread of infection. This was based on experience of the pressures Covid-19 was putting on the hospital, including staff being off with Covid. A view could be taken that a significant decrease in new cases in the region indicates that the measures are working.

I think the justification is a global pandemic that no one knows exactly how to deal with it and as a result different countries are trying to do what they think is best. 

I would also add that the countries who have had more severe lockdown seem on balance to be the countries who now have lower and in some cases zero infection rates so maybe its fully justified. 

Is that an issue for you?

No, not really. If they willingly submit to whatever tyranny Sturgeon imposes on them it should keep the Lakes a bit quieter this summer if we can't get abroad.

The Lakes? Pah, you can keep them. Poor substitute for the real thing 😉

On a more serious note, you do realise that by using such language you’re merely promoting the the pro-independence anti-England agenda which you accuse her of? Ironic.

I don't really care, I'm ambivalent about Scottish independance and can't lose any sleep over it either way. If the blue faced die hards can't take a gentle ribbing now and again they've got more to worry about than they think.

Funny, I thought you’d come back with something along the ‘I don’t care’ lines. What you’re really saying is that you’re not interested in the UK. I often wonder if they did a poll of rUK voters on the break up of the UK what the outcome would be. Approx 50% of Scottish voters want the breakup of the UK. It would be interesting to hear how others feel.

Oh...and in time honoured UKC tradition it’s spelt ‘independence’ 😉

Sorry about the spelling, it's always been my weak point.

Regarding the UK, I am actually interested in it. I grew up thinking of myself as British and only English in a secondary way when we played as separate teams in sporting events and even then there was no animosity to the other UK nations, I even cheered for Scotland in the Argentina world cup in '78 because it seemed the natural thing to do since England weren't there. I'd do the same now if I still cared about football.

It's really only as an adult that I gradually became aware that my attitutude wasn't the norm with the rise of nationalism elsewhere.
So I don't actively want the UK to break up, I think the divorce proceedings would be a pointless ballache, and if I were Scottish I wouldn't vote for independance but I'm not and that's the thing. I've come to accept that for a large number of people their Scottishness (or Welsh or Irishness) matters more to them and I accept that without thinking it makes them bad people, well not all of them anyway

I don't think the Scots stand to gain much if anything materially from independence but it's not about that, it's about their place in the world and their sense of self determination so if a majority want independance then so be it, it won't make much difference to my life. And of course it would shut the bigots up, they can rant about 'perfidious albion' until they're blue in the face (literally) and we won't have to listen to them anymore, so there's a least one plus

Independence for the silent majority of it's supporters up here is simply about ending the London-centric policy machine doing what's good for them in spite of how bad it usually is for Scotland. It's a fair grievance to have. Could try rotating governance of the the UK between it's constituent nations rather than it always being governed by the most populated part of it. Think the south east would go for that and accept to experience the same imbalance as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland does? The situation needs fixing, but the powers that be would rather focus on attracting more Russian and Dubai billionaires to their neighbourhoods.

Thanks for taking the time to give a more (apologies if this sounds patronising) mature reply. I not at liberty to voice my opinions of what my preferred choice would be but I do think the key thing is division, it’s just not a good thing. And I just think that if people are serious about the union then they need to be mindful of their words. And we are to divorce then we need to do so in as amicable a way as possible.  NS is hugely popular with a very high approval rating, significantly more than BJ. And predictions are that the SNP will regain their majority in Holyrood next year. There’s everything to play for, and our words will matter.

Similar to yourself I have a work colleague who told me they always thought they were British until they moved to Scotland, then they realised they were English. I’ve moved around Scotland and I’m not even sure I could define what being Scottish is, let alone British.

Bookings are self regulating in that people from areas with high R  ,I have found are cancelling anyway- people are surprisingly responsible on that level.{ people have booked last year,  so they watch the news}

That leaves regional variation that by July 15th could be anywhere, quite frankly. Can't see why european countries with low R and Highlands with low R can't fly directly. A person's place of origin needs to be checked in case they come from a high R place and just travel to an airport to avoid detection.

England may have regional restrictions of movement for high R areas. We'll see. You aren't obliged to take a booking from a high R region, and a hospitality business has the addresses of their guests on booking.

I think there will be more subtle controls than the big border idea, which people seem to jump to first.

I think you are putting too much emphasis on the R value when considering travel restrictions. What effects the chances of a traveller bringing the virus with them is the percentage of people infected within their home area. It is possible to have a low infected percentage with high R (we had this early in the UK epidemic before any social distancing) or a high infected percentage with low R (we had this at the height of the UK epidemic when we had the strictest, best observed, lockdown). The R number really only tells you the direction of the epidemic.

The R value is very important but is a blunt instrument. It is possible to think of situations where things are definitely improving but the R value increasing. For instance, suppose R in care homes is 1, but 0.4 elsewhere with equal numbers of infected people in care homes and outside. The R value overall will be the mean 0.7.  Later, there will be the same number of infected people in care homes but fewer outside, so the R value overall is weighted towards the care home value and will have increased. So we have an increasing R value when measures to control it are unchanged and the total number of infections and of infected people is decreasing.

I'm not sure.  I think the controls may need to be quite strict if they are to be successful.   Not just border or regional travel restrictions but also strong laws making it a duty to report infections and give your name for contact tracing and to stay isolated.  When things are open, rather than locked down, people who are infected not keeping isolated is far more dangerous.

When you open up and rely on having no infection in the community to make it safe it is like living in a forest area which is bone dry, once a fire starts it can grow exponentially.   You can't take chances so you have strict laws about starting fires.

We should be looking at what China does when there's a flare up as an example.  

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/13/beijing-china-new-covid-19-ca...

Any how many hotel / b&b/ camp site owners will take the booking regardless? 

How many people will lie about their address? 

credit card payment can be declined if the wrong postcode is used.

I note you haven't replied to Blunderbuss's genuine question of what are you fearful of? Any chance of a reply to the same question from me?

Apart from the obvious - stop the spread of the disease - what is it and what evidence do you have? What is the R number for the Highlands, or regions of it? How many cases are there? What measures could not be put in place in the sparsely populated north that have been put in place in cities and towns for the last 3.5 months? Infection is demonstrably less in the outdoors so why can't access be managed? How many bed spaces are currently available in Highland hospitals?

There is no real rational justification for this restriction any more in my mind but I'm happy to listen to a reasoned and evidenced argument.

Davie

You may well be right that there is no real rational justification, but key to getting the country moving again is going to be confidence that people can go about their lives without fear, rational or otherwise. I don't think it is unreasonable to take irrational fear at least into account when opening things up - all the decisions involved are finely balanced with no easy answers.

Here's a question that's been bothering me for a few minutes.  Say for the sake of argument England lifts it's tourism lockdown on the 4th July but jolly old saint Nic is still intent on not allowing those of us north of the border to travel, Will I be able to drive to a holiday cottage in Skipton or will the cops pull me over halfway down the M74?  And if I'm not allowed to travel, am I still likely to lose my deposit seeing as the destination is open.  

That author bloke managed to drive all the way from London to Skye. He only got spoken to cos he posted on Twitter, or some such.

Read into that whatever you will......

. Could try rotating governance of the the UK between it's constituent nations rather than it always being governed by the most populated part of it.

Tony Blair's cabinet was full of Scots. Gordon Brown was Scottish.

So is Tony Blair.

And  Michael Gove...

It is nonsensical to say that the UK is governed by its most populated part. Any region of the UK of any size is represented at Westminster roughly in proportion to its population. The UK is no more governed by England than it is by any other large chunk of the UK with similar population to England. To claim otherwise is to deny the existence of the UK. 

Although I have some nationalist sympathies, it annoys me when nationalists say that Scotland is governed by England - whether they like it or not, we are still part of the UK.

Not nonsense at all. Of the UK's population of 67.88 million over 56 million live in England. Of the 650 MPs sitting in Westminster 533 - that's 82% of them - represent English constituencies. Therefore England can outvote the other three countries of the UK by a factor of almost five to one. The conclusion is irrefutable - the UK is governed by England.

Remember that Scotland & Wales (granted the position of N Ireland is a unique anomaly) are not regions but countries. If you don't get that, you won't get what drives the impetus for constitutional change

Isn't that because the lockdown is working..

So they have a lockdown and few cases = criticism.

No lockdown and loads of cases = criticism.

You are making precisely the mistake that I was pointing out. By your reasoning you could just as easily claim, for example, that London is governed by the rest of the UK.

You are completely misunderstanding how UK government works.  "England" doesn't vote as a block, anymore than Scotland does. -it is not a federation.  The 650 MPs vote as UK MPs.  It makes no more sense saying England governs than it would to say people living in cities govern because there are more of them.

If 'gouvernment' is the PM & his/her cabinet plus other posts like private secretaries, the UK is effectively ruled by England - how many of the cabinet are not English? even the obvious exception (Michael Gove) is an MP for an English seat. Blair's governments with the likes of George Brown & (for a while) Robin Cook were more mixed.

The fact that there is no reason cabinet can't be mixed is the important point there. DizzyVision was claiming that the rest of the UK is always governed by England and it is that claim that is completely nonsensical.

When these people claim that Scotland is governed by England, what they actually mean is that the party which won most seats in the last UK general election happens not to be the party which won most seats in Scotland at the last UK general election. Of course, if that happens consistently, it might be an argument for independence, but that is different issue.

I would say it has worked to the point where you can ease restrictions......and certainly on those stopping people going for a day trip to the hills.

When discussing the UK in this context, I find this helps

youtube.com/watch?v=daB7np-RtOM&

Of course currently the 5 mile limit is just a guideline so if you choose to go further than that for a socially distanced walk. What is the difference in virus spread risk from me driving 40 miles for a solo walk at  Arrochar compared to the First Minister driving 45 miles to visit her parents in their garden?

Not a lot. They both break the current guidelines.

And both comply with the current regulations.

I think masks should have been brought in months ago. We've been using them for 2.5 months.

But we largely lifted restrictions too early and are seeing a bounce back already. Some states are now worse than they were in April/May. 

The states that aren't are seeing a rise have got good compliance with masks and social distancing. Sadly the 'all lives matter' crew think they don't need them.

There is no mistake in the arithmetic; therefore the premise is sound. There is no fault in the reasoning; therefore the conclusion is sound.

The UK is not one country, but a union of countries (if it wasn't we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place). The demographics are that the population of one is 4.85 times the size of the other three combined, a position replicated almost exactly in their respective representation in parliament. Therefore that one outvotes the others and effectively governs them. Fact

PS - London isn't a country; neither is it signatory to the Treaty of Union.

Misunderstanding? That's somewhat patronizing given that I've been on the voters roll since 1976.

It's not about block voting or federalism or party politics; it's about numbers.

Yes it is. This is where your logic fails. The UK exists whether you like it or not.

Most people call it a union of nations so as not to cause confusion. 

http://www.theweebluebook.com/principles-and-politics.php

China widely complies with masks and are having another flair up. NZ didn't use masks and have eradicated it, except for British travellers! Masks cannot be the big tactic. They may play a part, but social distancing and test and tracing are the big ones.

Yep, I worry the same will happen here too. Too little effective contact tracing and testing going on.

But nationalism has little to do with logic. I mean, a nation is constructed mostly in the mind. All Scots know only some other Scots. Most Britons know only some other Britons. Yet we construct an imagined community for which many are even willing to fight and die for.

Nationalism is a social construct that is usually fairly modern in its inception. It is a flexible and negotiable cultural construct that can change when circumstances change. It is kept together by important rituals, such as a royal wedding, a world cup or the writings of a national bard. 

Benedict Anderson wrote an influential book on nationalism in the 1980's discussing these ideas. 

Absolutely! Nationalism and theism are the two main things we need escape to move on as a species.

What puzzles me about the Scottish approach is this. If we make the assumption lockdown is economically damaging, a longer lockdown will be more so. Yet whenever it is lifted people from other regions with higher disease prevalence will be free to travel and, in time, I'd expect the prevalence to rise as a result. Thus, despite more economic damage, I wonder if there will be any lasting benefit in Scotland (or Wales). 

One assumes the 5 mile guidance is, at least in part, to reduce cross-border travel. How long will this advice be maintained?

I suspect the day we escape nationalism and theism is a long way away. 

I am supportive of the Scottish government approach so far, but the economic damage is growing daily. The news today from New Zealand and Beijing also shows the problem with being declared virus free. What does a country do then? Keep locking down? Stay isolated from everywhere else?

It would be an interesting parlour game if the virus wasn't killing people and devastating livelihoods. 

It seems the only way to open up and get then economy going without risking a second wave requiring another lockdown and even more economic damage is to first get the virus down to such a low level that aggressive testing and tracing can keep it that way, stamping out local outbreaks. 

That makes precisely the case for independence (which I have sympathy with) that I mentioned in my post at 14.34 yesterday.

However, I take issue with the last sentence: "But the referendum hinges on whether you think Scotland is a country or just a region of one. It can’t be both." It should read say "should be", not "is"; the fact is that Scotland, at the moment, is not an independent country; it is a region and constituent nation of the UK. 

Some while back someone posted a set of graphs that showed that by combining distance, masks and an embedded test and trace the disease could be suppressed indefinitely, probably until we get a vaccine. But it showed there was no either/ or situation for these 3 approaches, --they had to be all embraced together to have the suppressive effect.

I recently read The 2nd wave in Iran coincides apparently with great freedom of movement but with the abandonment of any of these measures.

See what tomorrow brings in terms of a way forward. But I personally thnk a protracted lockdawn in phase one has achieved a significant drop in Covid 19 and was a good move by Sturgeon.The speed of phase 2 and 3 may be quite surprising. But I agree the economy is floundering now- at least I am!

I’ve never once said masks alone. Not once. They are certainly part of the answer. China has had small breakouts but again is more congested. But China can lockdown like few other nations can. Look at images of Chinese citizens queue for buses to go into quarantine.

i worked at BNZ when the bird flu was a threat. They’ve poured millions into biosecurity over the decades. No nation on earth was better prepared. I worked on the first draft of their biosecurity science strategy, a worlds first.
 

but NZ is very different to the U.K. or NY or major European cities. We need masks on public transport.

they never got a wide ranging outbreak, the pandemic response is very different once it’s community spread. I said back in April we’d not manage to eradicate this once we had 10,000s of cases. 

look at the lancet paper. 3 measures we can do, individually. Socially distance, masks, eye protection. Socially distance is the one with the strongest evidence but we aren’t doing it. Even seeing friends is ok but if you just do it every other weekend you’re effectively quarantine after each interaction. But if we just socialize outside, socially distanced as much as possible it will keep the R value low.

The law used to report infections and give name and address. Interesting one. This is different to face coverings because people are already reporting names and contacts-  well two thirds are- so it seems to be persuasion working and personal safety for yourself family and friends as the motivation. This is incentive enough for people to act voluntarily . And law may even dissuade people from reporting disease because it has a compulsion  which creates psychologically a "dob in your friends feeling"

I support face coverings law because it is universally being ignored and because people find it hard to identify with the good effect on a complete stranger. .And it is a  simple law applying to oneself.

Well, yes! This is exactly what we are being told to do! That's my point! Wastemonster trying to unlock too quickly is stopping this happening. 

People wearing masks are not distancing enough, and people are trying to suggest that business can go back to normal with masks. But masks are not effective enough for that. We need to stay locked down until we can control it with track and trace. We need to get to NZ position then unlock. 

You aren’t getting to NZ.

that ship has sailed months ago. NZ had 1500 cases, the U.K. has at least 300,000. You have about as many new cases a day as NZ had in total.

theres no way you can lock down long enough all you can have is controlled growth, possibly in some areas a Steady decline. 
 

The lockdowns were about getting control and then you buy time to get treatments and build in mitigation measures.

you had severe push back from just 1-2 months of lockdown, there’s no way you can do that for 1-2 years. There are numerous Economic, health, social Reasons why that can’t happen.

You can say “well China does”, that’s china. It’s now about returning to some new norm as close as possible to normal. Small class sizes, masks, rotating in office work schedules etc. 

Seriously once a disease is this widespread you can’t just eradicate, it has to either run it’s course as slowly as possible or find a vaccine or treatment.

We have to get to NZ! Otherwise this virus will continue to rip through care homes and destroy lives. As community infections rise, you cannot keep it out of care facilities. If you unlock too soon, you will have a rise in community infections! The outbreak in our home came from an asymptomatic staff member wearing a surgical mask!! Yes, in some homes it was due to discharging people from hospital while infected, but by no means everywhere! Mask wearing does not stop infections. If may have reduced the viral load that the residents got, but they still contracted the virus!!

We need to keep locked down until we can track and trace effectively. Otherwise the economy is going to be even more screwed with repeated lockdowns and there will be an unacceptable number of early deaths. 

Scotland is getting closer to this, and hopefully our cautious unlocking approach will help. 

Again I never said it stops transmission. It reduces it.

you've already opened up. You aren’t getting to NZ. You are not locked down. 
 

people are returning to work. Economically it couldn’t go on. NZ could but they needed a much shorter lockdown. It’s just a matter of keeping it low and tracking and tracing. Masks and social distancing have a huge role to play now.

Scotland can get it low But there’s still trade with the rest of the U.K. in goods and labour, nurses etc.

We are still semi-locked down. England aren't, they have a free for all going on! We still have half a chance of getting to where we need to be. We can't afford not to get infections down, more lockdowns will be totally catestrophic. If a business can't open with social distancing, then it can't open! Masks are not the solution as they don't stop infections!! Cases in Scotland are continuing to fall with current measures, so we need to keep that up until infections are low enough that track and trace can handle it. Track and trace has to be our long-term strategy.

Ok. Ignore the science. The evidence suggests masks and social distancing are the two strongest measures. But you know best. I’m fed up of the bloody scientists publishing their wacky ideas..

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31183-1/...

From the last few paragraphs:

“Universal face mask use might enable safe lifting of restrictions in communities seeking to resume normal activities and could protect people in crowded public settings and within households. Masks worn within households in Beijing, China, prevented secondary transmission of SARS-CoV-2 if worn before symptom onset of the index case.

15 Finally, Chu and colleagues reiterate that no one intervention is completely protective and that combinations of physical distancing, face mask use, and other interventions are needed to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic until we have an effective vaccine. Until randomised controlled trial data are available, this study provides the best specific evidence for COVID-19 prevention.”

And yes, so Scotland isn’t locked down. So you aren’t going to eradicate it.

All you can do is reduce risk, that doesn’t mean remove risks. There’s always a chance of contact transmission or a cough getting through a mask or traveling 3m.

What I have witnessed here is that many people wearing masks are not keeping their distance or lowering them under their chin to talk on the phone/ smoke/ scratch their face etc! So maybe with good usage they would help, but they are not used well. It's like a badly fitted bike helmet - it's worse than not wearing one because you act like you are protected but you aren't!

Sorry but this is nonsense, you are not going to grind cases down to zero like NZ......all European countries have opened up with some cases.....Germany has an average of 250 new cases a day and it's care homes are not being 'ravaged'.

The problem with Scotland is that it seems almost impossible not to involve our biases regarding independence.

Anyone that claims any sort of “lockdown” still happening amongst the majority of the public is deluded. Pubs are serving on the street in Edinburgh; the Meadows is rammed when dry; tradesman vans rammed full of workers.

I’ve spoken to many people who say they are in awe of Scot Gov approach, whilst admitting they’ve just taken a Starbucks to their Mum’s, with their Aunt; and the kids are staying over again to give them a “breather”.  

I’ve largely stuck to it (let my Dad in to the house for a pee), but it just seems daft I can send my daughter to a childminder’s house,(other kids on other days) but am being “guided” not to go to the Pentlands (5.3 miles). Bonkers!

In my opinion, anyone sticking to this will have the sense/hygiene to not cause detriment if they decided to travel further.

Don’t even have the energy to bring up the 1 day/week of schooling in August.

EDIT: Just been informed by the other half daughter might get 2 days schooling. 

250 cases a day in a population of 83 million! We are not even close! 

And Lothian has a lot of cases at the moment (although I haven't seen the total for percentage of population there.) I don't see that happening in Stirling. Obviously, as I haven't been elsewhere, I can't say what is happening there! 

Its really not a free for all down here.

Scotland has a population of about 5.5 million  and  in last 24 hours around 20 new cases. So we're not that far behind.

The way the whips work at Westminster it effectively does vote as a block.   It isn't like the US where senators have their own agenda and to an extent will put their state interests above their party.

In most federal countries there's a second chamber with some level of veto authority to represent the states.  We get the house of lords which overwhelmingly represents SE England because of the way its members are chosen.

Scotland is a distinct country from England and becoming more so as England is becoming more right wing.  It has always been more of a European nation, slightly to the left of England, has a different experience of immigration than many regions of England (less immigration and more of the immigrants from Europe) and like Ireland a history of repression and exploitation by England.   

Scotland has not voted Tory since about 1950, we don't want to leave the EU and we don't particularly want to catch Covid or paint a military refueling plane red white and blue so Boris can use it like it was an executive jet.   We have no choice because these c*nts in London make the rules and it is about time we changed that.

Scotland has around 20 cases a day with population of 5.5 million, so we are fairly close to German situation right now, and have fewer active cases than much praised countries such as Singapore which has a similar population.  With maybe only 3000 people currently infected it definitely is the time to start opening up the country and getting rid of the stupid five mile travel guideline.  Why continue to cripple the rural economy when the situation is so good here? mass gatherings over recent weekends with no spike in infections suggest the risk of outdoor transmission is small, so i would be disappointed if cafes and pubs were not allowed to reopen with outdoor seating from this weekend (well cafes and restaurants at least), the evidence from across Europe suggest this will be safe as also seen in Scottish cities with many cafes and pubs already seen to be operating this way. 

Scotland already has the virus suppressed to such a low level that contract tracing is not overly burdensome and evidence is it's been fairly successful so far.  But with evidence that suggest majority of infection are asymptomatic, it will be impossible for test and trace alone to combat a rise in new infection, continued social distancing, mask wearing etc will be required long term and be more effective measure than contact tracing.

We speak about protecting rural communities but from tomorrow under phase 2 it is likely people will be allowed to meet friends and family indoors but people will still be asked not to travel more than five miles for excerise, such a mad scenario is beyond words.

Lothian is still in Scotland right? I think we even vote the right way on the whole now too.

Next time you’re out for your daily exercise, nip down the Raploch/Bannockburn and see how much social distancing is happening. Provided is it’s max 4.99 miles of course. Also, that increase in traffic buzz you hear ain’t key workers.

I’m all for a slower approach, but some of it is a bit daft now.

 

This article on a vaccine shows even this is problematic for eradicating  Covid 19.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/05/08-may-who-briefing-smallpox-eradica...

But going towards it may be possible.

I agree I said before we moved to phase 1 the continued lockdown made no real sense the last few weeks of as no one was sticking to it, it's the same now, it's clear the country is ready to move forward and has been demonstrated to be safe to do so. 

Easing the travel guidelines and reopening public toilets, and allowing cafes etc to trade more effectively will make the current situation more bearable for everyone, a phased approach would make more sense rather than reopening tourism overnight come 15th of July.

The biggest risk is now the border with England.   If England doesn't control it to the same extent as Scotland and the EU we won't be able to take it down to effectively zero and open up as much as we would like.  Or we will need health measures at the border like asking people to show evidence of a recent negative test.

Yes but if the risk level is low enough then to all intents and purposes it is eradicated.   I'm not going to worry about 100,000 to 1 risks.

There's only about 20 new cases a day testing positive in Scotland at the moment.   Hardly anyone in ICU and a few hundred in hospital.

Yeah, mid July will be interesting. I’d have thought they might have gone with “Scottish business for Scottish people” or something for a  bit at least.

Eh? I can assure you English MPs do not vote as a block, and more than Scottish ones do.

There is an arguable case for Scottish Independence now but it’s nothing to do with England ruling Scotland currently. The case against is the danger that paranoid populist nationalist sentiment like that takes over.

But the way COVID spreads undetected that 1 in 100,000 risk gets higher quick. The incubation period and spread in people with low level symptoms or asymptomatic means it will be very hard to eradicate.

I agree re the border, it is a massive issue and why Scotland isn't like NZ even if it could get there - which I'm not sure it can.

20 a day following a strict lock down is still quite a lot, say that's actually 40 a day (280 a week) (highly unlikely you detect all), as you reduce the lock down as is happening now that is likely to grow quickly. I'm not sure you are that close to eradicating it. 

Is that enough?

Here the rush to open up coastal areas was basically financial. They made it seemed like gradual relaxing but its no fluke that's happened for peak tourism time.  

Scotland, at the moment, is not an independent country; it is a region and constituent nation of the UK. 

Yes, yes, we know that - the issue is whether it should continue to do so. Note that exiting the UK is not exactly unprecedented. The Irish Republic used to be a "region" and constituent nation of the UK. It went 100 years ago. We don't hear many people trying to make out it has no right to exist as an independent country.

It's not "my" logic Robert. Either something is logical or it is not. Just do the maths. Neither am I suggesting the UK doesn't exist (should I really need to say that?)

As for obfuscating the issue by citing fine semantic distinctions between nation/country, consider this:

In the last UK census respondents were asked - for the first time ever - to state their national identity. In England, 67% of respondents cited "English" as their sole national identity. Only 19% thought of themselves as solely British. The corresponding figures for Scotland were 62% and 8% respectively. Of course, maybe 67% of English people and 62% of Scots are wholly ignorant and confused regarding which country they live in. If so, that's an incredibly - and I use that word literally - high number.

Of course that is an important issue, but not the one being discussed.

Ahhh ... "nationalism", that terrible thing that people fear so much, yet seldom explain what they actually mean by it. Or ever consider what, if anything, it has to do with the drive for Scottish independence. You can rest assured that, whatever else, paranoia plays no part.

My point is that the fact that the UK exists as a single country/nation (it really doesn't matter which word you choose to use) means that your logic is invalid. The UK is a single country/nation with a single government - no part of the UK governs any other part. Saying that England governs Scotland is just a distortion used by Nationalists to whip up resentment of Westminster.

All of which is very interesting but entirely beside the point.

I believe the UK figures include pillar 1 and  2 testing, but the English and Scottish figures are just pillar 1. As far as i can tell there were about 250 pillar 1 new cases in England at the moment - quite different from the UK figure you give. 

Proportionally that makes England and Scotland quite similar at the moment.

The inclusion of the Pillar 2 testing in the UK figures will explain the differing pattern of decline as the Pillar 2 testing has massively ramped up in that time period.

Total cases for the two countries per capita are very similar - 288/100,00 in Scotland and 281/100,000 in England.

Sitting down here in the SW (141/100,00) I'm pretty glad that 5 mile limit is in place for the heavily infected Scots - imagine if they all flocked to Gobin Coombe!

Truly there are none so blind as those who will not see.

Robert, looks like we'll have to agree to disagree, much like the irresistible force and the immovable object. I've had similar conversations many times before on various forums, and no doubt will have many more in the future.

Before I go, just one more observation ...

All of which is very interesting but entirely beside the point.

... dismissing out of hand the views of over 60% of the population of both England and Scotland doesn't exactly enhance your democratic credibility.

... and one further salient illustration ...

Saying that England governs Scotland is just a distortion

There has been a majority of pro-independence MPs representing Scottish constituencies in the UK parliament since 2015 - i.e. for three general election in a row. They want a 2nd referendum on independence, yet can't have one because of the overwhelming majority (533 compared to 59) of MPs from English constituencies who don't. Ergo ... the governance of Scotland is de facto in the hands of English MPs. This cannot be gainsaid.

PS used by Nationalists to whip up resentment 

Most Independenistas are not much interested  in fomenting resentment. That said, against the background described above, it's surprising that there isn't more of it.

Good night.

Actually I can't. It is very apparent, and was in 2014 too.

Sitting up here in the NE (77/100,000) I’m glad that 5 mile limit is in place - imagine if all the heavily infected English flocked to Cummingston! 

Got to take you up one the point about R being distorted by care home infections in the community . Yes, in the past. That was seeded by discharges without tests, large numbers of sudden discharges to free up hospitals and late decision to exclude people from outside visiting and lack of PPE.

Circumstances are different today. Those are  circumstances not going to be repeated in care homes. 

We are in the eye of the storm and awaiting the back end of that storm. I would suggest that a raising of R in future would reflect the numbers walking around the community and not particularly distorted by infections in  care homes. If R goes up -it is going to indicate the health of the  general public in a region.

So if I’ll put our border along the M4 and a line down to Poole so we hang on to Swanage. What will your borders be and can we discuss an air corridor?

I’m not sure I agree. As the case numbers continue to fall it’s quite easy for R to vary quite a lot - especially in the face of a local outbreak - in a care home or hospital (a la Weston super Mare) both up and down, and also the level of uncertainty about the real level of R will increase.

I’m thinking a wall from Findhorn to Buckie, curving inland to just south of Aberlour (don’t want to lose the deli). Then a corridor down the A95, A9, M80, M74, M6 and M5?

Might be challenging to manage?

Sorry, I was just making up a hypothetical situation where R would rise despite the overall picture improving.

All your statistics, which I agree make a case for independence (with which I have a great deal of sympathy), do not change the fact that we have a UK government which governs the UK. There is no English government governing anybody and therefore it is simply incorrect to say that England governs Scotland. The fact that at the moment the governing UK party does not hold a majority of Scottish seats does not change that fact - it is absurd to claim that England can govern Scotland sometimes and not at others depending on the composition of the UK parliament.

What would one really do with an address anyway? 

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

Looking at that map which bookings would one accept or reject? There is regional variation but it's not very pronounced. 

Jk

Hi Dr S

Thanks for reply regarding Pillars 1 and 2. This sort of explanation may well be relevant, and I honestly expect that there must be some sort of artefactual explanation for the striking divergence in figures of new cases between rUK and Scotland, but I honestly don't think your suggestion is it.

The Pillar-1 Pillar 2 division was introduced when Hancock was pushing hard to achieve his testing target and I'm not sure it has any meaning in Scotland. 

Pillar 1 tests have remained at a fairly constant level in England since the end of April, and pretty much all the increase in testing (more than doubling) in the combined number of tests has been due to the rapid rise in Pillar 2 testing. Meanwhile, in Scotland, with no recognition of the difference between Pillar 1 and Pillar 2, the total number of daily tests has more than doubled (from just under 2000 in late April to 4-5000 today). So it certainly makes no sense to compare Scottish data with the Phase 1 only data in rUK. I think, but I'm not certain, that the increase in new tests of all sorts in the rUK has been of the same order of magnitude as in Scotland - just over a doubling.

So, again, on the face of it there remains no clear reason why the number of daily cases in Scotland is about 15 times less than it was in late April, while in the rUK is only 4 or 5 times lower - unless it is a difference in leadership and in subsequent behaviour of the populations.

https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-trends-in-daily-data...

Hmm yes, have you considered a tunnel?

interesting - PHE have this:

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/about

And I  see that from your link Scotland data did not include pillar 2 data before the 14th of July.

the daily case rate in england is given here -

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

looks like 250 to 280.

I've found the constant changes in how data is reported throughout pretty annoying - you would think the 4 nations could at least have a consistent reporting stratergy!

Is it your understanding that what SG refer to as "Regional Testing Centre" data is the equivalent of UK Pillar 2 data? You are correct that this data has only recently been included but, because it represents a fairly small fraction of the total testing (unlike the situation with Pillar 2 in Eng & Wales), it has little impact on the rate of decline figures I posted higher up the thread.

Your second link is puzzling, giving on the same page the number of "lab-confirmed" new cases in England as 281 on 17th of June, while the headline figure on the same page states 1218 new cases in the UK on 18th June. Given that there were only 11 new cases today in Scotland it seems likely that the figure for England alone would be > 1000 and definitely not 281. Is it the case that "lab-confirmed" means Pillar 1 only? If so, then, for reasons explained in my previous post this is in no way comparable to the Scottish figures.

But on your last point I wholeheartedly agree!

Or a bridge?

Personally I think all the governments in the UK have been useless. They seem to be taking their cue from each other, a bit like the way the standard of climbing in a club tends to level itself out.

Last time I checked we were doing less than 3000 tests a day in Scotland but had capacity to do 15000, why? Test, track and trace isn't working properly and seems further behind than in England as well. Our treatment of our elderly in sending them back into care homes to die is a disgrace but not different in substance to England really, or probably Wales or NI but we don't hear much about those places. We've had proportionally much the same number of f*ckups followed by cover ups as England and our health and education secretaries have proved themselves incompetent beyond all reasonable doubt. And because we don't have test, track and trace in place and because we started lockdown too late and because our Scottish government's default response to anything is to not do anything we're going to wreck our economy even more than we need to. Brilliant.

And do you know? Next year we'll be electing the same bunch of lazy, incompetent, nepotistic liars back into Holyrood because people think being able to wave a blue flag is more important than having a decent education system, a thriving economy and a society if equal opportunity even though they know there won't be a referendum before 2024, there won't realistically be one before 2027 and in fact there may not ever be one ever again.

Populism eh? 

But the Scottish Government is not the currency issuer in Scotland and I suspect that'd have an impact on their ability to go into lockdown. If I'm to take Universal Credit for instance, I'd be logging onto gov.uk

Do you think Scotland can just magic the money up? I think the UK can - and they are.

Scottish Covid figures are at 11 new confirmed cases/day and has been that way for a while. How widely is the virus circulating in Scotland? Does that explain your 'low' test and trace figures? I haven't looked myself so don't know the figures.

Though I agree with parts of your argument, it also sounds like a convenient rant.

Well, thats  (regional testing =pillar 2) an assumption on my part based on what it said on the PHE page and what its says on the SG page - they seem to mesh a bit. If you look on the PHE page its even more confusing as they state Wales was including pillar 2 whilst England and Scotland where not!

looking at the raw csv data from UK.Gov they clearly report Scotland and England data as from pillar 1, with pillar 2 as extras - if all of those extra cases are from England its a bit odd given that you would expect to pick up some cases that way in Scotland, and some of what UK.gov call pillar 2 is being undertaken in Scotland.

I've probably looked at spreadsheets enough for the evening!

edit to add - if the scottish data does not include 'pillar 2' then the SG gives tests carried out in Scotland on the 16th as 4735 - NHS lab plus regioanl test centres (about 1000 of these).

PHE report 28149 pillar 1 tests in England and 38989 pillar 2 tests in the UK excluding Wales. If your contention is that none of these pillar 2 tests are in Scotland then that makes England testing at 67138 - 14 times greater than Scotland overall, and with a really big disparity in the regional testing centre - about 35 times greater. Are we just seeing the result of differing testing approaches?

Conveyor belt? could put a plane on it.....

I really think all talk of Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 is a kind of nonsense when we try to apply it across the UK. If RTC (Scotland)=Pillar 2 (England) then they remain incomparable, because of the obviously wildly different proportions of Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 tests in the two countries (P2=c. 70% of English tests and c. 25% of Scottish tests). This is why I have been ignoring Hancock's Pillars and focussing on the actual reported number of tests, which have increased at similar (though had to assess how similar) in both countries, while the decline of positives has been much faster in Scotland.

It is really hard to disentangle all the different terminologies and methodologies to understand what's going on. Here's an interesting piece on the BBC - not sure if this data can be trusted to be comparable between different parts of the UK either of course - but if you scroll down to the estimates of regional R numbers, you'll see they are in line with the apparent difference in the decline of new cases in Scotland that I have been highlighting.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

... we have a UK government which governs the UK. There is no English government governing anybody 

De facto Robert, not de jure. 

it is absurd to claim that England can govern Scotland sometimes and not at others depending on the composition of the UK parliament.

Which is not something I have ever said; or implied. It's not party politics; it's the maths.

No matter; I'm not wasting any more time grappling with gainsaying. Feel free to have the last word ... which may be, I'm beginning to suspect, what's really of most importance to you.

It is very apparent, and was in 2014 too.

Then there will be no end of specific examples available to cite in support of your assertion. Yes?

But that wild disparity in testing proportions may explain the diffrence  - if England is testing more, it will detect more cases. It may be the 'pillar 2 tests' which you suggest are almost entirely in England are picking up cases that the Scottish testing stratergy is not. Its not just the numbers, its which people the tests are directed at.

If the Scottish R number is based on a different testing stratergy than the English one is it in any way comparable?

anyhow - there are a lot of things that its hard to resolve, at least with my level of knowledge, the main point is that cases continue to decline in all four countries of the UK - long may it continue.