Replace Rule of Six with Rule of Two Get in touch – tell us what
WHILE the news that some of the new vaccines against Covid-19 are proving effective is welcome and signals a light at the end of the tunnel, the risk of catching Covid and passing it to our loved ones will remain high for some time.
Areas across the East Midlands are still experiencing high infection rates, and our local hospitals and GP surgeries are coming under huge pressure. Even when a vaccine comes it will be many months before enough vaccinations can be administered to make a return to life as we knew it possible.
This time around, it is crucial that we don’t repeat the mistakes of the first postlockdown period, when the Government relaxed restrictions on social mixing too hastily, creating the conditions for the virus to spread again.
Understandably, people are eager to visit friends and family after a long month apart, but given that mixing within private households indoors is a big factor in driving the spread of the virus, relaxing restrictions in this area could see a jump in the infection rate. Therefore the BMA believes that the Government must replace the “rule of six” with a “rule of two”, so that no more than two households are able to meet indoors. This rule should remain in place for as long as it takes to deliver a sustained reduction in infections.
Doctors are also calling for clearer and properly enforced rules on mask use and social distancing, and support for business and local authorities to create Covid-secure environments. Whether or not the Government takes the necessary action, we should all take this advice to heart and avoid taking unwise risks with our health after December 2.
We all deserve a healthy and prosperous 2021 – and this remains plausible if we hold our resolve and take the smart decisions that will defeat this virus.
Dr Rebecca Acres Chair of East Midlands
regional council British Medical Association parties have fallen through the safety net of a failed system.
Heartfelt best wishes go to Daniel and his family; I recall watching their doggy, Nico, running in a local playing field. Nico was extremely fleet of foot, the fastest dog I’d ever seen. Residents were saddened at the loss of Nico, and Daniel’s lifechanging injuries.
Mr Robert Jenrick MP is meeting the Attorney General Suella Braverman to review the sentence. Increasing the sentence won’t help Daniel get better any quicker. A call for increasing the sentence is understandable. All increased sentences do is place more strain on an overstretched prison and probation service. The prison service already costs the taxpayer circa £11,000 per minute, and it struggles to cope with 93,000 inmates.
Against the circumstances the two-year sentencing tariff appears low! However, prison sentences should be considered in conjunction with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, whereby the two-year custodial sentence will not be spent until after six years: the rehabilitation period is the length of the sentence plus a further “buffer period” of four years, giving a total of six years.
The essence of a two-year prison term means in an exceptional situation the defendant could be released after serving 24 weeks, but assessing all the elements in this case, which is a grim read, makes chances of an early release remote. Even when Pittman is released, he will have to be on his best behaviour for ages. When applying for jobs he will be compelled to declare his sentence for six years. The driver’s conscience will pain him throughout his life, like Daniel will carry his scars for life.
The biggest contention is over the past five decades the police have spent tens of billions of pounds on drugs busts to rid illegal narcotic substances from society. A fat lot of good that’s done as now it’s every driver’s nightmare that someone driving out of their face on drugs will crash into them with serious consequences.
Nigel J Starbuck
Bingham