Latest Government guidance appears to be supportive of localised lockdowns. The question is how localised & what will be the criteria through which boundaries between one location & another are drawn and policed? Let's consider the issues.

We already know that people are far more likely to catch the disease & die from the virus if they live in areas of economic deprivation. There are multiple reasons for this but one of them is you work in low paid professions where you are more likely to come into contact with it.

We also already know that people from black and other BAME communities are more likely to die from COVID. Again there are multiple reasons for this but one of these is that race and class are intersectional.

Taken together this means that working class & BAME communities are more likely to contract and suffer from COVID and its therefore reasonable to assume that localised 'lockdown' will affect these communities more so that affluent predominantly white communities.

But when you lockdown boundaries will have to be policed. Add the this the latest figures on police enforcement that indicate that Black, Asian and minority ethnic people in England are 54% more likely to be fined under coronavirus rules than white people. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/26/bame-people-fined-more-than-white-population-under-coronavirus-laws?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

I would suggest this data points to the dangers of localised lockdown because it is likely to create the conditions we know to be associated to riots. Localised lockdown could mean 'In it Together' is well and truly dead. Welcome to 'Lockdown Liverpool' & 'Blockaded Brixton'....