The Bower & Collier Family History

Research by Colin Bower

Discussion Group

From Government Guidelines 13 May
“ well as exercise, people can now also spend time outdoors subject to: not meeting up with any more than one person from outside your household....”. “It is still not permitted to leave your house to visit friends and family in their home.
The Government is looking at how to facilitate greater contact with close family or friends....”

Debate 11D. Do you think that everyone is “alert” to these regulations?

Please vote Yes, No or Undecided on each and let me have a sentence or two on why you have voted the way you have.

Please let me have your answers by Friday following which I will add them to my website and circulate summaries of your feedback next Wednesday.




1. No. They may be alert but regulations seem to be flouted - have heard of someone coming from London to their second home in Milford in the last week.

Perhaps a 20 mile travel limit should have been imposed. People drove for 1 1/2 hours to Durdle Door last week-end.

2. No, some people make their own rules, simply because they don’t understand the logic of government decisions.

e.g. They can meet one person outside their house, but they can’t sit in their single parent’s back garden, socially distanced.

3. No, people are not alert to the changes

4. Undecided. Probably most people have listened and tried to follow the rules but they really aren’t logical,

e.g. Why can you sit on a park bench but not at at least 2 1/2 metres in someone’s garden, on chairs that no one else uses etc.

Maybe people have listened but it doesn’t apply to them!

Refers back to a previous debate when the question was about common sense. Makes you wonder if people have any nowadays sometimes!

5. Yes - the majority are but many may have stopped listened. Millions watched Boris' big announcement.

The idea was that people should know the rules and follow them, of course

Though people may be alert to the rules, they may use their "common sense" and not follow them

There must be a sizeable minority. Some were not obeying the Stay Home message let alone the Stay Alert message.


Despite the Government wanting to prevent "house to house" transmission, we have seen or heard of friends and families openly visiting

Despite the Government wanting to prevent "gatherings", meeting up with just one person is illogical and will not necessarily be followed.

The rules should have allowed you to meet 2 people so that couples could meet up.

6-7. Yes but a minority flout the rules

8. Rules are rather open to interpretation and a growing minority ignoring them. Or they are just socially illiterate.

9. Yes. It has been repeated enough

Review of Week

As has been pointed out, you would think that it would be difficult not to have heard what the guidelines are but you would have had to be willing to listen, exercise understanding and take notice.

There appears to have been an absence of brain power/thought or perhaps it is ignorance or sheer bloodymindedness.

The suggestion that people should use their "common sense" rather than give clear precise instructions during a pandemic is incredible and worrying,.

From pictures of people, flouting the rules, in the papers and online, it seems that to many it's all over and the "genie is out of the bottle."

We can only hope that there is not a surge in transmission and we don't need to try to put the genie back.

Stay at Home (when you can) & Stay Alert (when you go out) would have been better.

"Stay at Home, Save the NHS" was very powerful but had to change when asking people to go back to work and school.

Colin Bower
23 May 2020

Link to Debates Index:

Debates Index

Made with CityDesk