The two-metre social distancing rule is remaining in place, the Government has said, despite calls from MPs for the distance to be reduced.
Several MPs had called for the distance to be relaxed in line with some other countries’ rules to save jobs and help the hospitality sector reopen.
If pubs, theatres and other hospitality venues have to abide by the two-metre rule, it would severely restrict how many could enter and businesses could go bust.
Major research has shown there is a roughly 1.3 per cent chance of contracting the virus when two metres from an infected patient. But halving this gap raised the risk to only 2.6 per cent.
France, Sweden, Singapore and Austria all have a one-metre rule and Germany, Australia and the Netherlands have opted for 1.5 metres.
On May 27, Prime Minister Boris asked scientific advisors to review the guidance in the ‘hope’ that it could be reduced – but has since come to the decision it shouldn’t be changed.
The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH), which represents workers, has said it is vital the rule stayed in place to protect staff.
Researchers found there was roughly a 1.3 per cent chance of contracting the virus when two metres from an infected patient. But halving this gap raised the risk to only 2.6 per cent. This means the disease would spread to fewer than three in 100 people, against 13 in 100 without any social distancing at all. That equates to an 80 per cent reduction in risk
Guidance from WHO stipulates one-metre social distancing – and Britain is one of only a handful of countries going farther.
Politicians and business leaders have claimed the small increased risk from relaxing the two-metre restriction would be worth the economic benefits of allowing more businesses to reopen.
Environment secretary Theresa Villiers had called for the distance to be reduced in line with some other countries’ rules to save jobs and help the hospitality sector reopen.
Miss Villiers told BBC Radio 4: ‘I think we should take comfort from the World Health Organisation that one to two metres is safe and the fact that many other countries have taken the approach of one or 1.5 metres, that demonstrates that can be managed safely.
‘Unless we ease the two metre rule, the hospitality sector is likely to stay closed.’
Former chancellor Norman Lamont said halving the rule to one metre was ‘the single most important measure we must take’ to avoid ‘devastating mass unemployment’.
Commons Science Committee Greg Clark said he had written a letter to Boris Johnson urging the Prime Minister to relax the two metre rule.
Mr Clark said: ‘The difference between 2m and 1.5m may seem small but it can be the difference between people being able to go to work and losing their jobs.’
However, on Tuesday Number 10 said the Government believes the two-metre rule should remain in place, having asked members of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) to review evidence.
The Prime Minister’s spokesman said: ‘We continue to keep all of these matters under review but the current guidance is that the two-metre rule should remain in place.’
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has also urged Scots to continue to adhere to the current guidance of two metres.
Ms Sturgeon said today: ‘You might be reading or hearing in the media today some voices saying that one metre is sufficient, so I want to take the opportunity today to stress that the clear and the strong advice from the Scottish Government is to stay two metres apart from those in other households.’
It comes after a new study suggested physical distancing of two metres only reduced the risk of coronavirus transmission by a small amount compared to one metre.
The World Health Organization found there was roughly a 1.3 per cent chance of contracting the virus when two metres from an infected patient. But halving this gap raised the risk to only 2.6 per cent.
This means the disease would spread to fewer than three in 100 people, against 13 in 100 without any social distancing at all. That equates to an 80 per cent reduction in risk.
The study showed nothing could provide complete protection, although face masks have a strong shielding effect – reducing the risk of catching the virus by up to 85 per cent.
The research, published in medical journal The Lancet, added to the clamour for Britain’s two-metre rule social distancing rule to be relaxed.
Previously scientists have said the two-metre rule lacks any validity.
Professor Robert Dingwall, who sits on the government’s scientific advisory body New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group, which feeds into SAGE, said the two metre rule ‘has never had much of an evidence base’, suggesting it is safe to stand closer to someone.
Following the Lancet publication, the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) stressed the ‘vital’ importance of the two-metre distance as more businesses prepare to open.
The professional body, which represents those who work in environmental health roles such as in the food, housing and transport industries, urged the Government to maintain the two-metre guidance especially as ‘riskier’ businesses including pubs prepare to open.
CIEH Wales director Kate Thompson said: ‘The World Health Organisation advice for distances of at least one metre to be maintained, to prevent the spread of coronavirus, has led to strong pressure from certain industries to reduce social distancing between individuals from the current two metres.
‘However, this advice was only ever an absolute minimum, rather than a safe distance, and new evidence published today supports this longer distance.
‘Protecting public health and avoiding the possibility of a second peak of infections should be key. It is, therefore, vital that the two-metre rule is not reduced due to pressure from industry.’
The WHO study reviewed data from 172 existing studies on the spread of Covid-19, SARS and MERS.
It concluded: ‘Keeping a distance of over one metre from other people was associated with a much lower risk of infection compared with less than one metre.
‘However, the modelling suggests for every extra metre further away up to three metres, the risk of infection or transmission may halve.’
The study also adds to evidence that face masks should be worn on public transport and in busy areas, and highlights the importance of PPE for healthcare workers.
It found that the risk of catching the virus when wearing a mask was just three per cent, compared to 17 per cent when not wearing a mask.
Co-author Dr Derek Chu, from McMaster University, said: ‘We believe that solutions should be found for making face masks available to the general public. However, people must be clear that wearing a mask is not an alternative to physical distancing, eye protection or basic measures such as hand hygiene, but might add an extra layer of protection.’
Former ministers Mr Lamont and Miss Villiers had pointed to the smaller social distancing recommendations in other countries.
Figures from the British Beer and Pub Association figures show that, with the current two metre rule, only 20 to 30 per cent of premises will be able to open at a sustainable level.
However, if the rule was reduced to one metre, 70 per cent would be able to open.
Mr Lamont said: ‘The onus is on the (Government’s) advisers to explain why it is that, while Britons must stay two metres apart, the World Health Organisation recommends one metre – as do many other European countries, acting on their scientists’ advice.’
Last Thursday, Prime Minister Boris Johnson reiterated his support for the two metre rule, saying: ‘I must stress that to control the virus, everyone needs to stay alert, act responsibly, strictly observe social distancing rules, and stay two metres apart from those who you do not live with.’