Ministers target July 4th for reopening of England’s pubs and restaurants
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I'm all for changing school structures and having kids go to school much later at six/seven (with the wider societal changes that will need for parents to care for the youngsters). Absent that, I'm not sure what exactly there is to be afraid of with young kids going back. Teachers can and should be tested, those who are at risk can and should be supported to stay away for a while longer if that is their wish. The kids themselves are not in danger, and neither are most of the teachers - let's be honest about that. At what infection rate nationwide would you have kids going back?
And Denmark is still very relevant here, with the relevant comparison being between likely infection levels there when schools went back and likely infection levels here now. Schools have never not been going in Sweden yet its death rate is now falling. Where is the evidence that this will be a disaster? And if it does prove a problem, what is stopping a reversal of the decision? Do we just sit on our hands week after week after week?
There is a lot of green space around in my corner of SW London. Parks, greens, English Heritage stuff even the local council offices are house in an old manor house with grounds. There are no restrictions I'm aware of with regard to drinking and I rarely see any problems caused. Most of the time its just people having picnics with wine or buying pints from the pub and taking it onto the green. There is a lovely atmosphere and buzz on a sunny evening in many of these places.
My view is that it really depends on how much problem it causes and this will vary from area to area. I believe it would be unnecessarily draconian to ban it around here.
My view is that it really depends on how much problem it causes and this will vary from area to area. I believe it would be unnecessarily draconian to ban it around here.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
So you are claiming that the government response was deliberately planned to kill as many people as possible in order to diminish the the efficiency of the NHS. Now if you have anything sensible to back that up I'd be interested in taking a look but what you are saying here is that there is a murder conspiracy going on. Rhetoric and bluster aside, I think that's bollocks.
Of course some firms will benefit. PPE manufacturers and undertakers are probably doing pretty well too, but are you seriously suggesting that government policy towards C19 has been developed to provide maximum profits to Jacob Rees Mogg's company at the expense of 40,000 lives and the rest of the UK economy?Yes, it will fuck up more businesses, however there are people in the current cabinet who will benefit hugely from this. One example:
If you want more in-depth reading have a go at Naomi Klein’s - The Shock Doctrine
Jacob Rees Mogg's firm set to make fortune from the coronavirus crisis
EXCLUSIVE: Somerset Capital Management, which the MP co-founded, says market volatility offers a “once or twice in a generation” opportunity to make “super normal returns”www.mirror.co.uk
Sorry Jonesey but this is Jazzzesque tripe.
nogojones
spelling is overrated
The cabinet were very well informed of the consequences of not locking down and putting precautionary measures in place. They had the best case, worst case and probable figures. They saw what had happened in Italy and Spain and they deliberately chose a course of action that has led to between 50-60,000 people dying unnecessarily. They may form it in terms of supporing the economy and peoples free choice, but, yes I don't think it's too outragous to consider it a consipracy to murder by neglect.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
What you're describing is incompetence, not conspiracy.
maomao
普費斯
Reception don't sit at desks. They roll around on the carpet a lot. And on each other. In normal circumstances that's to be encouraged. I spoke to my reception age daughter's teacher last week. She doesn't think half the class will last five minutes at desks. We've been sent photos of the new classrooms and how the kids will be kept away from each other. We're keeping our daughter out for the moment because we don't want her to go through that. Or at least put it off for a few months while we don't have childcare issues.
They've chosen to send the youngest two years based on the spurious reasoning that the youngest are least at risk. As far as I'm aware there's no difference in risk to a four or an eight year old but there's a huge difference in behaviour. They could have sent years four, five and six back. There'd be no difference in risk to the kids, it would benefit the same amount of parents and there'd be a far higher chance of them complying with social distancing. But no, send the 'little ones back' just shut up and get on with it.
nogojones
spelling is overrated
I think there's a good bit of both in the cabinet
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
It's more to do with the amount of supervision they need than risk IMO. The youngest kids are bigger parental time drains. You might actually be able to get some work done with a 7 year old keeping themselves occupied, but with a 5 year old tearing about?
cupid_stunt
Chief seagull hater & farmerbarleymow's nemesis.
If that's a problem, instead of an outright ban, they should introduce a 'Public Space Protection Order', like we have in Worthing & it covers the whole borough, and basically retains the power to confiscate and dispose of alcohol where it is leading, or might lead to anti-social behaviour. It's not an offence to drink alcohol in public in Worthing but it is an offence to refuse to comply with a request by an authorised officer to cease drinking or surrender alcohol.
I bet the protection orders are just used to harass homeless street drinkers though.
cupid_stunt
Chief seagull hater & farmerbarleymow's nemesis.
No, they are used whenever there's anti-social behaviour, particularly with teenagers, but any ages.
maomao
普費斯
Well there's plenty of pros and cons for both sides if you start picking at it. Seven year olds probably benefit more from social relationships outside the family whereas a five year old can manage that aspect of staying home a bit more easily. Five year olds are easier to educate at home. But seven year olds do mostly sit at desks all day already.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Last time I replied to you about schools you never responded, so I will only try briefly this time, and I will put to one side all manner of angles and just focus on one central issue.
Do you believe that social distancing rules should apply within schools or not? Because although the actual reasons some people are uneasy about the schools stuff are varied and many, from the purely practical perspective of what schools have been asked to do, this is the central issue.
The government u-turn today is a reflection of the practicalities of the situation, schools are not equiped with the space and other resources to operate at anything like full capacity while maintaining the physical distancing guidelines that the government think are necessary. So if you want to make the sorts of comments you are prone to in regards schools, you should also come out and state clearly that you dont think some of these distancing rules, designed to stop the spread of the virus, are actually necessary at all.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
English pubs' beer gardens will not open in June, says No 10
Downing Street plays down reports it is poised to ease coronavirus restrictions
Not actually happening then.
20Bees
Well-Known Member
It’s 30 years since I moved away but such fond memories, watching village cricket outside the Barley Mow with the Test Match on the portable radio... riding over from Moor Park via Sheephatch, and up to Hankley Common... kept my horse in Elstead, then at Millbridge. Glorious location... but I digress from the point of the thread. I wouldn’t go yet.
English pubs' beer gardens will not open in June, says No 10
Downing Street plays down reports it is poised to ease coronavirus restrictionswww.theguardian.com
Not actually happening then.
No and not surprising. I'm not even sure where it came from, just more of this anonymous briefing merry go round. At the earliest it was always meant to be July and only then if the numbers support it.
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
It's neither conspiracy nor incompetence. It's just a mindset.
Parcelling off the NHS is a priority. Profit for a few is a priority.
Protecting as many lives as possible at the expense of the above priorities isn't an option that would ordinarily come up [within that mindset].
We aren't important (apart from when we might get in the way).
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
For young children, my answer is essentially no, I don't.
ETA:
To expand a bit. There's a bit of me that thinks fuck it give the kids a summer off. But that doesn't help the rest of us in getting back to normal. But what would we expect success to look like? If a couple of schools somewhere had to close again because of an outbreak, would that indicate a mistake? Or is that kind of thing acceptable and still part of a success if thousands of other schools are fine? Extreme risk-aversion has its own risks here.
Last edited:
Not actually happening then.English pubs' beer gardens will not open in June, says No 10
Downing Street plays down reports it is poised to ease coronavirus restrictions
I'm none too surprised by that -- I was always a bit sceptical that the pubs in England, even just the outside of some, would happen so soon.
Which makes the impression (from trade gossip) that our mate Rob the brewer was under today** , that pubs in Wales might open for outdoor service as soon as late June, sound like bollocks
.**(he was delivering us some bottles
)Given that the Welsh Government have been much more cautious all along about every relaxation of rules in all areas..
Teaboy said:
The first Monday in July has been mentioned in some stories, but that's very little later than late June
.I'd be happy to wait until early August tbh, or maybe September.
Even just for the outdoor-only pubs to reopen.
Although I fully understand why pubs themselves, and brewers, and drinkers
, want it to happen sooner, you've got to be confident.Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Yeah I think this is quite close to how I see it when I look at how the government has behaved throughout this. I think the idea that they actually want people to die is getting way too conspiracy theoryish. Even if you assume their viewpoints are entirely motivated by self-interest (and tbf I don't think Boris Johnson is far off) that's going to be around the usual politician stuff - re-election and popularity, and people dying isn't good for that. And for every one making a killing off some disaster capitalist plot there's going to be way more losing out to the general economic recession so that doesn't really stand up either. And although I don't want to defend them particularly I don't think everyone involved is actually some remorseless psychopath who is entirely indifferent to others.*
So I think they'd much rather be at point of having seen off the virus with minimal casualties around about now, for all sorts of reasons. They're totally hamstrung though by the attitudes and mindset they've brought to government over the last however long - going back way beyond Johnson. They just don't have the ability to work out how mobilising a public sector response would or should work. It's not how they've seen government or their own roles within that. They've spent decades stripping out the capacity so the infrastructure is fucked, but maybe even more to the point their theories say chucking more money at Serco should work. That's what they do. You could say it's incompetent to not be able to change your way of working like that but I think it's just more that it's totally outside of what they understand.
*'Not all total psychos' is probably as far down that road as I'd be prepared to go mind you.
Last edited:
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
Oh, I'm way less cheery and optimistic about it than that!
Why would they even want to organise an effective public sector response? Governing is, as I think zora put it perfectly the other week, an inconvenience. (Apologies, zora, if I'm shoehorning that into my own bleak point.)
I don't think the aim of throwing more and more money at Serco and their ilk is intended to fix anything, it's just diverting public funds into more deserving hands; people, rather than an unfortunately necessary resource, apparently from the same species.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Oh, absolutely. Johnson in particular has never been about actually doing the job he's meant to be doing when there's coke and self promoting to be done. I think tackling something like this is definitely not what he had in mind for being PM. He has been forced to try though - his initial attempts at shrugging his shoulders didn't fly for very long.
To put it in the same terms, it would be far more convenient for them to have had a better outcome than they've had and if they knew how to achieve that that's what they'd have done.
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
I get what you mean but think that the most convenient thing for them all round would have been if they hadn't decided to pretend they wanted to follow the science!
I've not heard of that company, but the owner does make one valid point : if any pubs are going to re-open, they do need more advance notice -- simply from a practical POV and a safety POV.
His responsibility/irreponsibility level is a different matter -- to say the least, I think he's being reckless myself
His responsibility/irreponsibility level is a different matter -- to say the least, I think he's being reckless myself
I've not heard of that company, but the owner does make one valid point : if any pubs are going to re-open, they do need more advance notice -- simply from a practical POV and a safety POV.
His responsibility/irreponsibility level is a different matter -- to say the least, I think he's being reckless myself
Yeah, guy comes across as a Class A bellend but he is right that the usual Government garbled message on a Friday saying things can open on Monday is fucking useless for businesses, especially pubs and restaurants.
The government must have a fair idea now whether they are going to let these places open at the start of July. They need advance warning either way. Its no bloody use the government telling them they can open if they have no staff and nothing to sell.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
