Like the last similar post, don’t want to open up the debate re: whether enforcement risk should matter - but for information sake - I left from T2 at LHR this morning and was not questioned on my reason for travel. A lone Border Force agent was standing in the area after the security checkpoint (I’m not even sure if this is unusual vs. normal times? Never paid attention). No one I saw was questioned (though everyone going through seemed to be single adults). Maybe if a family in flip flops and Hawaiian shirts went through, he would have engaged with them. As I’ve said before, if they really wanted to enforce this - they would have any such checkpoints (even if most people aren’t questioned) pre-check in. Doing it after people have checked luggage and entered into a secured international departures area (with no proper exit) would not suggest they are serious about turning around many (if any) people at that point.

Aren't they bringing in the new departure form soon?

Apparently early March https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/33059442-post29.html

That has generally been my experience (and expectation!) as a single adult (with a briefcase). Having said that, I'm quite keen to see the form as the current guidance refers to "reasonable excuse" - how will that be moulded into a form? Just want to be prepared for 8 March and onwards.

My prediction is that the form will have a lot of threatening language regarding illegality, fines, and being questioned and will have you basically check a box for various categories of essential travel and sign/attest or whatever. I don’t see it as likely to collect a lot of details and/or evidence and therefore unless the level of questioning by BF/the police changes, not much practically will change.

It may suggest for people to have documentation to back up their reason of travel which if worded in a reasonable manner may actually be helpful (note prior posts re my objection to people being asked for documentation when there is no such guidance :) ).

Oh, look! Another Priti Patel Power Trip (P3T)!

most of what she says never happens in the first place. I’ll believe it when I see it

Good day with regards to new cases being 29% less than last Friday, however the really good thing to see today was the positivity rate was 1.2% compared to 2.3% last Friday. This was due to 731k tests performed this week vs 521k last Friday.

The press is on with the budget; looks like the party is over soon. Who knew, we will have to pay all this outrageous government spending back.

maybe people will be less accepting of lockdown once they realise the costs of it through tax rises one way or another.

in the end of the day we the people are the government and there is a cost to be paid for all these lockdowns.

I wonder what value you place on 122,000 deaths, or additional deaths that could have happened if not for restrictions and lockdown?

EDIT: and what things do you think the government could have avoided spending money on in the last year?

It might only be a reflection of the company I keep, but everyone I know is in favour of tax rises to pay for the cost of supporting individuals, families and businesses and protecting jobs during the pandemic.

We can - and will - argue over many of the things that were done (or not done) in 2020, but there is little doubt that a lockdown was necessary. There was no alternative.

Keep the people informed, let them know of the risks they think is involved, recommend (not force) and allow them to decide for themselves.

That’s what’s happening now in the parks of the UK at least, certainly not ‘staying home’

But this misses the point of this pandemic really. You may choose you are low risk and may not get ill (although you might anyway) but everyone else you may infect hasn't made that choice.

hence the advice to shield for the vulnerable

so your plan for the last year would have been no restrictions on people or businesses, government just gives information, and all vulnerable to shield for the year?