This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Teddy Eagle 27 Nov 20 8.39am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
I have some sympathy for the government how do you set rules that cover the scenarios they are concerned about. We've all seen the pictures of many drunken people arm in arm staggering around the high street or hundreds at illegal raves or even wedding parties. It must be difficult to set rules that people can follow and inevitably the bloke quietly sitting in the pub socially distancing finds he can no longer do that. Alcohol is a contributor to people not socially distancing. My own preference would be for a curfew say 6pm after which pubs and restaurants would have to close. This would allow people to have a sensible eat and drink but not get blathered. Can only speak for my local, which doesn’t serve food beyond snacks. They put screens up, took out half the tables, have one-way access, only allow one person at a time in the gents, have masked table service, hand sanitiser in four or five places, enforce mask wearing when not seated, etc but still can’t open. I don’t see how a meal would improve the situation.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 27 Nov 20 8.56am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Can only speak for my local, which doesn’t serve food beyond snacks. They put screens up, took out half the tables, have one-way access, only allow one person at a time in the gents, have masked table service, hand sanitiser in four or five places, enforce mask wearing when not seated, etc but still can’t open. I don’t see how a meal would improve the situation. My intention is to contact my MP with a view to attaining an explanation.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 27 Nov 20 8.57am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Can only speak for my local, which doesn’t serve food beyond snacks. They put screens up, took out half the tables, have one-way access, only allow one person at a time in the gents, have masked table service, hand sanitiser in four or five places, enforce mask wearing when not seated, etc but still can’t open. I don’t see how a meal would improve the situation. Exactly but how do you legislate those good practices with the idiot who runs Party Central.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 27 Nov 20 9.01am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
I have some sympathy for the government how do you set rules that cover the scenarios they are concerned about. We've all seen the pictures of many drunken people arm in arm staggering around the high street or hundreds at illegal raves or even wedding parties. It must be difficult to set rules that people can follow and inevitably the bloke quietly sitting in the pub socially distancing finds he can no longer do that. Alcohol is a contributor to people not socially distancing. My own preference would be for a curfew say 6pm after which pubs and restaurants would have to close. This would allow people to have a sensible eat and drink but not get blathered. Unviable for restaurants and makes no difference in a restaurant. 10pm curfew was half killing them. Pubs that are no different to restaurants should be allowed to open after a council visit to confirm they’ve set up to operate under this nonsense.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 27 Nov 20 9.04am | |
---|---|
There is no justification of the destruction of small businesses.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 27 Nov 20 9.14am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
Unviable for restaurants and makes no difference in a restaurant. 10pm curfew was half killing them. Pubs that are no different to restaurants should be allowed to open after a council visit to confirm they’ve set up to operate under this nonsense. I will be demanding an explanation for the rationale behind the regulation that alcohol can only be served with a substantial meal. Are the Government AKA "The science" afraid of bars in town centres which just serve alcohol being overwhelmed by temulent youths who have a total disregard for the rules ? Bars of course which have spent considerable money and effort in making themselves Covid-secure and introducing table service at socially distanced tables ?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 27 Nov 20 9.16am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Willo
I will be demanding an explanation for the rationale behind the regulation that alcohol can only be served with a substantial meal. Are the Government AKA "The science" afraid of bars in town centres which just serve alcohol being overwhelmed by temulent youths who have a total disregard for the rules ? Bars of course which have spent considerable money and effort in making themselves Covid-secure and introducing table service at socially distanced tables ?
You tell em mate.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 27 Nov 20 9.25am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
Unviable for restaurants and makes no difference in a restaurant. 10pm curfew was half killing them. Very generously, the Government have decided 'Last orders' by 10PM but closing at 11PM.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Eaglecoops CR3 27 Nov 20 9.54am | |
---|---|
The only interpretation that can be taken of this latest government science led shambles is that there is zero confidence in the public generally to behave in a rationale manner. So, even though it’s youngsters in the majority that run riot and have raves, illegal parties and dance in the street after closing simply because they can, the rest of us are punished because the virus is spreading in all age groups. Anyone thought that the kids mixing in schools and the young adults partying perhaps bring it home and spread to parents who then inadvertently spread to grandparents etc etc. You can be as safe as possible by following all the guidance, not doing this and not doing that and putting up without a pint but have no control over those who spread it asymptomatically. This is why the closure of pubs without meals and all of the other bull associated with it is such nonsense. If you want to have a real impact close down all schools and colleges for December keep the kids apart and everyone go about their social distancing and sensible use of the hospitality industry before it collapses entirely.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 27 Nov 20 10.47am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Eaglecoops
The only interpretation that can be taken of this latest government science led shambles is that there is zero confidence in the public generally to behave in a rationale manner. So, even though it’s youngsters in the majority that run riot and have raves, illegal parties and dance in the street after closing simply because they can, the rest of us are punished because the virus is spreading in all age groups. Anyone thought that the kids mixing in schools and the young adults partying perhaps bring it home and spread to parents who then inadvertently spread to grandparents etc etc. You can be as safe as possible by following all the guidance, not doing this and not doing that and putting up without a pint but have no control over those who spread it asymptomatically. This is why the closure of pubs without meals and all of the other bull associated with it is such nonsense. If you want to have a real impact close down all schools and colleges for December keep the kids apart and everyone go about their social distancing and sensible use of the hospitality industry before it collapses entirely. Zero confidence in our or some behaviour is the right answer, and why would they. Look in any english town for blue lights on any given night prior to covid and you've hit it on the head.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 27 Nov 20 11.24am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
A major criticism of SAGE and governmental policy on this virus from a major figure. Mike Yeadon’s latest Read it all but down some way and, ‘1) The definition of Covid deaths is too broad. Currently any death with an incidental positive Covid test within prior 28 days is counted as Covid. However, even deaths from the misdiagnosis of respiratory failure will result in Covid being put as the primary cause. There is no post mortem evidence that these are Covid deaths. There is no equivalent rise in death certificates with mentions of pneumonia as was seen in the spring. Accident and Emergency attendances for acute respiratory infections are currently 300 per day lower than average.’ The last couple of sentences there. Oh my God. Problem is it can’t really be called out yet because we’re not far enough into the seaside yet, or they’ll say it could just be a low season for these illnesses. ‘ 3) Excess deaths are not all Covid deaths. Pandemics can cause excess deaths. Lockdowns can also cause excess deaths and we saw excess deaths from many causes in Spring. There appears to have been no attempt to analyse these deaths or factor them into current decision-making processes. Normal interactions with the health service have still not resumed and excess deaths in the 15-44 year-old age group have climbed steadily throughout the year. These are nearly all non-Covid deaths.’ Just look at the 15-44 excess deaths graph. ‘ 5) The only confirmatory testing carried out has shown no Covid. Army testing in Liverpool uses a different and more reliable test – the ‘Lateral Flow Test’ (LFT). It has demonstrated that there is minimal Covid in the Liverpool community, the alleged hotspot. The numbers testing positive are barely above the false positive rate reported for the LFT meaning there were no real Covid cases found. In other words, the Army results confirm the fact that at least 90% of the PCR were false positives and the government is panicking on the basis of a massively exaggerated and unreliable statistic.’ Not at all surprised. It’s what the government and parrot media don’t mention when they claim the ludicrous notion that testing cured Covid in Liverpool. ‘6) Weak criteria used to declare a positive will result in false positives. Testing in May, by Imperial College showed that only half of the positive results from commercial laboratories were true positives and they questioned the criteria these laboratories were using to define a positive.’ If that is true then Jesus Christ.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Nov 20 11.32am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
There is no justification of the destruction of small businesses. There is no justification in spreading a killer virus by allowing non-essential activities. Protecting businesses, and the people who depend upon them, is another issue which has to be managed by the government and the cost borne by us all.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.