London in Tier 2, Whole of North East Tier 3

SmallTown said:
Which I explained how it might be calculated.
It’s not antagonism. If you know me by now I’ll always rally against “north v south” or “rich v poor” lazy stereotypes.
As soon as I saw the title of the thread I just knew for a fact it’d be full of Teeside chips going “blummin London” it’s a provincial attitude that holds our region back
Click to expand...

What a tool you are and your 'I'm alright Jack' attitude from being based in London shows that you have become as far detached from Teesside as the rest of the South is.

P.s. TEESSIDE two s's
 
Last edited:
People on both sides of this debate need to ask themselves one simple question.

How do you think this announcement looks across the country, and do you think it will be bought into nationwide, such that it is effective?
 
Living in London, in my area we have covid cases of 153 per 100000 people, Islington has about 130 cases as does Lambeth.
Looking at the figures for Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and Redcar they are all well above 400 cases per 100000, often above 500 cases per 100000.

I have only had a quick look but on that basis surely it stands to reason that these areas should be in Tier 3 or am i missing something in the great North/South debate?
 
Once again the lack of transparency in decision making is troubling. It leads to the division that is evident in this thread and almost feels intentional at times.

The 5 key factors on decision making are ultimately ambiguous and open to anyones manipulation.
 
The worrying development with these restrictions is how the tiers are decided. Previously it was (unless I'm mistaken) linked to the "R rate" (inverted commas due to the inability to accurately track with current test and trace programme in place). New decisions are based on the following - does anyone else think the complexity and lack of transparency in deducing the below essentially leaves the gvt free to do what they want? (particularly the last one!)

  • case detection rate (in all age groups and, in particular, among the over 60s)
  • how quickly case rates are rising or falling
  • positivity in the general population
  • pressure on the NHS – including current and projected (3 to 4 weeks out) NHS capacity – including admissions, general/acute/ICU bed occupancy, staff absences
  • local context and exceptional circumstances such as a local but contained outbreak
 
FatCat said:
Living in London, in my area we have covid cases of 153 per 100000 people, Islington has about 130 cases as does Lambeth.
Looking at the figures for Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and Redcar they are all well above 400 cases per 100000, often above 500 cases per 100000.

I have only had a quick look but on that basis surely it stands to reason that these areas should be in Tier 3 or am i missing something in the great North/South debate?
Click to expand...
The point is that London, unquestionably hit worse at the beginning and the main source of the spread throughout England and the UK, has never been in the top tier of restrictions, ever. When London's in trouble, the whole nation closes down. When London's not doing too bad, most other major built up areas all have to have their economies continually destroyed in order to keep London open. Parts of London are doing as badly as anywhere else anyway too.

Shouldn't be too surprised really, its a tale as old as time especially under Tory leadership. And they don't ever care how it looks.
 
Last edited:
atypical_boro said:
The point is that London, unquestionably hit worse at the beginning and the main source of the spread throughout England and the UK, has never been in the top tier of restrictions, ever. When London's in trouble, the whole nation closes down. When London's not doing too bad, most other major built up areas all have to have their economies continually destroyed in order to keep London open. Parts of London are doing as badly as anywhere else too.

Shouldn't be too surprised really, its a tale as old as time especially under Tory leadership. And they don't ever care how it looks.
Click to expand...
I see, my very brief analysis was only looking at the current situation not what has gone before. However I don’t agree with you assertion that “parts of London are doing as badly as anywhere else” from what I can see there isn’t one London borough with cases over 300 per 100000, as mentioned in the north areas are consistently in the 4,5 and 600 cases per 100000 so on that basis alone I would say the tier 3 designation is correct.

I’m sure there are very valid arguments to say that the north is treated as a poor relation in other instances but from the data I don’t believe covid is one of those instances.
 
Pak_Doo_Ik said:
I see the cheeky chappy saviours of the world scousers have moved down to tier 2
Click to expand...

Don't know what you are getting at here but it seems a dig for some reason.

FYI the Liverpool City region had had a real difficult time Covid wise recently, nothing to do with saving the world. Yes like everywhere else there has been some non compliant people, but the vast majority of people have done what was asked and needed to do to get the spread of what was on the verge of becoming an overwhelming public health and national health crisis under control, which ncluded mass and regular testing.

Numbers wise it seems to have worked, I personally would prefer to stay in tier 3, but I can see why the move is to tier 2.
 
I don't think the government has a southern bias, per se, on this issue. I do think they have bottled it to avoid the operational nightmare of treating London borough by borough. I think the criteria have been chosen to allow London, as a whole, to fall into Tier 2. Once the necessary criteria had been established to achieve this goal they were then applied to the rest of the country.
 
Deja vu for Sunderland. They are in danger of becoming a 'we can't escape from Tier 3' Centre of Excellence.
 
FatCat said:
I see, my very brief analysis was only looking at the current situation not what has gone before. However I don’t agree with you assertion that “parts of London are doing as badly as anywhere else” from what I can see there isn’t one London borough with cases over 300 per 100000, as mentioned in the north areas are consistently in the 4,5 and 600 cases per 100000 so on that basis alone I would say the tier 3 designation is correct.

I’m sure there are very valid arguments to say that the north is treated as a poor relation in other instances but from the data I don’t believe covid is one of those instances.
Click to expand...
Havering is 367. Many, many parts of the north, including where I live are below 200.
 
Only a Tory Government could turn a pandemic problem into a political divide.

I see Rishi has managed to avoid tier 3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top