The British government has published extensive guidance on how the nation could return to work after seven consecutive weeks of home confinement to reduce coronavirus infection rates.

But although Prime Minister Boris Johnson hailed the new guidance, which takes effect from tomorrow, as a tentative step to "reopening society", his initiative came under immediate fire from both opposition leaders and the media for its alleged lack of clarity.

Under emergency legislation adopted in March, the British government must renew or revoke its "stay-at-home" orders on a rolling basis, every three weeks. There has been one extension, and the question was whether another one should be ordered tomorrow.

Mr Johnson was under pressure from backbenchers in his ruling Conservative Party to relax the curbs on industry and businesses, and let people return to work as evidence mounted about the magnitude of the damage to the economy.

Last week's report by the Bank of England suggesting Britain could face its worst recession in over three centuries clearly unsettled lawmakers. So did a warning by Mr Andrew Bailey, the central bank's governor, that "not all economic activity" will be revived, even if lockdown restrictions were lifted.

But at the same time, the government remains nervous about the wholesale lifting of movement restrictions, partly because of news from other European countries like Germany where infection rates have risen after people resumed normal activities, but also because ministers in London are acutely aware of the lack of information about the pandemic's true state.

Britain's health authorities have set themselves the target of doing 100,000 coronavirus tests daily, but that has seldom been met, so an assessment about the true level of infection rates is difficult to make.

And although the latest statistics indicate daily mortality figures are diminishing, the number of those recorded as dead each day because of coronavirus-related complications still runs into the hundreds.

So Mr Johnson has tried to straddle the median line between keeping all the curbs and lifting them by urging people to "go to work if you can't work from home", a variation of the previous ban which encouraged everyone to stay at home.

People will also be allowed to spend an unlimited amount of time exercising outdoors, from 30 minutes before. And they can meet one other person not from their household, provided all stay 2m apart.

Mr Johnson also laid out a three-month plan to reopen primary schools, shops and outdoor cafes, and restart sports activities, although all moves are conditional on containing virus transmission rates, and most of the measures will not be kicking in before July.

Yet, all Mr Johnson seems to have achieved in announcing a gradual transition is to confuse just about everyone. Trade union leaders complain that workers are left at the mercy of employers, who may be able to require their employees to return to work. The teachers' union attacked Mr Johnson's plans as "nothing short of reckless".

Meanwhile, employers complain they have little guidance on what they should do. Businesses needed their "practical questions answered so they can plan to restart", said the British Chambers of Commerce.

To further confuse matters, the autonomous administrations in Scotland and Wales, with powers to operate their own health services, have complained that they were not consulted, and have refused to apply the new measures.

Detailed written guidance extending to over 50 pages and published yesterday does provide some clarity as to which industry sectors are expected to resume work and on what conditions.

Still, opposition parties criticise the entire approach as confused and ineffective. "The nation was looking for clarity and consensus," said Mr Keir Starmer, who leads Labour, Britain's biggest opposition party. He said what it got instead is a new policy which "raises more questions than it answers".

Confusion also surrounds plans to introduce a 14-day quarantine rule for travellers to the UK. For months, the British authorities have refused to introduce quarantine measures and ministers are struggling to explain why these may be necessary now, just as other European countries are discussing lifting their border controls.

Besides, France has already negotiated an exemption, so any traveller to the UK can easily bypass restrictions by simply arriving via France.

Unsurprisingly, ordinary Britons are evenly divided on the merits of Mr Johnson's plan. Latest opinion polls indicate some 44 per cent of Britons support the changes, while 43 per cent oppose them.

And less than a third of the public claims to understand what their government now expects from them.