Getting recreation and leisure up and running again.

Social distancing going down to one metre from Tuesday:

various friends working in NHS have said they don't need to be worn all the time - if out for a walk and not near others then we should be getting fresh air as well.

Masks should be worn inside shops, on public transport or in crowded areas but various friends working in NHS have said they don't need to be worn all the time - if out for a walk and not near others then we should be getting fresh air as well. Also I'm trying not to judge those without, yes some people are just selfish but there are many who cannot wear them constantly for health reasons, some (including me) suffer from claustrophobia and wearing a mask is extremely difficult. I wear it if in close proximity to other but certainly not if in a park or on a walk which is what I've been advised by the GP, as long as I don't cough/sneeze over someone and am not close to them that is considered to be fine.

A link to an official petition for more government help for the Arts.

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/320711

But no one is talking about anyone ignoring precautions - we are talking about appropriate precautions rather than paranoia. There is no reason why the vast majority of people cannot now be working, shopping and socialising with sensible hand washing precautions, some distancing between groups and wearing masks if you can't distance. If anyone wants to be more careful than that it is their choice, but it isn't necessary for the vast majority of people.

And it isn't just a collective risk, it is about assessing individual risk in the round, including a risk of spreading. Not everyone comes into contact with vulnerable people - I don't. The only vulnerable people I might potentially come into contact with are people at the supermarket, who have chosen to go out. That is their risk to judge. I wash and sanitize my hands frequently and wear a mask. Beyond that, I can't and shouldn't be expected to do anything else to further lower the risk of people I don't know and can't control. Everyone has to take responsibility for their own risk level.

Otherwise I see no-one, so why should I not be taking my own risk and contributing to restarting the economy where I can because I can do so, whereas others at higher risk cannot.

I disagree entirely that the economic impact might be less than the impact of a second wave. The economic impact is already severe and will take years to resolve, long after people have otherwise forgotten about the virus if a treatment or vaccine is found, and I make no apology for looking at the wider picture rather than just the virus itself.

Grateful to be in the company of so many theatre lovers who also are such knowledgeable epidemiologists, sociologist, and public policy analysts.

Let’s be honest there are probably three dates that are important when it comes to opening the theatres again, there is the date that the government allows the theatres to open (probably with some form of social distancing or other protective measures in place), there is the date by when most of the social distancing measures have been removed and the venues can run at full capacity and finally there is the date when a large enough proportion of the potential audience feel that it is safe enough to sit in a theatre and the show becomes less of a financial risk. Each of these dates are potentially not close to each other with probably several months in between. The work that ALW is trying to do, is an attempt to shorten the time between the first two dates and consequently shorten the time to the final date.

To my mind the dates been talked about by Cameron and the RSC (amongst others) are the final date.

Exactly. Anecdotally, just based on conversations with people over the last couple of weeks, the date theatres are allowed to reopen isn't necessarily going to be the same - for me, too - as the point people start to feel comfortable enough to sit among an audience again.