Lockdown #2

[The Stationmaster]

1 minute ago, hayfield said:

 

I think most responsible folk will do, but then there is a large group who will ignore the rules

 

Should isolate after as well just in case

Assuming that those who are still working (outside their home) get the sort of longer holiday that many get at this time of year greatly reducing social interaction ought not to be a problem for many people.  Yet again, apart from food shopping before Christmas, the problem with be those who can't do without a party or a pub etc visit.

[Mark Dickerson]

11 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Singing is not allowed indoors !!!

 

OK to sing outdoors whilst social distancing has to be observed

It would also appear that one can  ̶g̶e̶t̶ ̶t̶a̶n̶k̶e̶d̶ ̶u̶p̶,̶ ̶k̶n̶o̶c̶k̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶d̶o̶o̶r̶s̶,̶ ̶b̶a̶w̶l̶ ̶a̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶p̶l̶e̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶b̶a̶r̶s̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶G̶o̶d̶ ̶B̶l̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶Y̶e̶ ̶G̶e̶r̶r̶y̶ ̶M̶e̶n̶t̶l̶e̶m̶e̶n̶,̶ ̶b̶e̶f̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶d̶e̶m̶a̶n̶d̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶c̶a̶s̶h̶ go carolling as well. Obviously, this would be properly-observed at all times.

[boxbrownie]

14 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Darren,

 

People need some relief in the middle of winter, and have done since people and northern winters came together, that's why every society in these latitudes has some sort of "blow out" around the turning of the year.

 

 

I do get the reason for wanting to relax the lockdown over the Christmas period, but as I said to Mrs BB a couple of days ago.....it’s one Christmas in (for most people) what will probably be 70 odd that they will have to miss/modify/enjoy a different way.

[lapford34102]

27 minutes ago, hayfield said:

Certainly the C of E adheres to the rules, sadly some of the smaller sects fail to comply with the rules as shown in various tv reports. I have also heard some of the nonconformist groups bending the rules a bit

Probably depends on who you think has got your back in all this. My deeply cynical brain cell wonders if the Christmas arrangements are more a nod to Mamon rather than any other notable diety.

In other news a lovely day compared to the last few. Prom and beaches very busy with people enjoying the weather. High St pretty quiet with everyone seemingly keeping to the rules when we did our quick shop though one local "non essential" emporium seemed to have a interesting take on Click-and-Collect, more like Point through the Window and Collect.

Stu

[Welchester]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

But not necessarily for regular services as we know them due to logistical problems in keeping each family grouping 2m away from each other.

 

That seems to be the nub of things for many of those complaining - they want to be able to hold church services as normal.

 

That has been the regular pattern from July, when people were allowed back into churches, until November's lockdown

 

2 hours ago, teaky said:

But why isn't it 3m or more due to the increased risk caused by singing?  Or is that suppressed by mask wearing?

 

Congregational singing is not permitted, as Hayfield notes.

 

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Albeit wit some differences in personal restriction between Tier 1 and Tiers 2 & 3.   Yet agaIn I do wonder how people will avoid socialising etc at a place of worship and will those in Tier 1 areas really stick to the 'rule of 6' which is allowed in that Tier?   But it comes back to the sort of balancing act in the rules I mentioned above which presumably been taken into account here too.

 

The problem is not in the building, because as part of our risk assessments we have had to ensure seating allows 2m between households (or bubbles), and between anyone passing by, it's how you stop people mixing outside.

 

2 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

Singing is not allowed indoors !!!

 

OK to sing outdoors whilst social distancing has to be observed

 

Some intellectuals speculate indoor singing does not increase risk, most disagree. Outdoors the virus dissipates in the open air.

 

Certainly the C of E adheres to the rules, sadly some of the smaller sects fail to comply with the rules as shown in various tv reports. I have also heard some of the nonconformist groups bending the rules a bit

 

[hayfield]

2 minutes ago, Welchester said:

 

That has been the regular pattern from July, when people were allowed back into churches, until November's lockdown

 

 

Congregational singing is not permitted, as Hayfield notes.

 

 

The problem is not in the building, because as part of our risk assessments we have had to ensure seating allows 2m between households (or bubbles), and between anyone passing by, it's how you stop people mixing outside.

 

 

 

But outside the risk are far much lower than inside, agree with you many stop and have a chat, but you need to be in contact for 15 mins or more, then if you are sideways on or back to back the risk decreases etc. As you say though better to be safe than sorry

[Bernard Lamb]

3 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

Singing is not allowed indoors !!!

 

 

I attended one funeral just before the latest lockdown.

It was interesting to note how the church was set up. Chairs not pews so it was easier to arrange. Chairs were either in twos or singles and at least 2m apart. No ushers, order of service on the chairs and not handed, no collection and all people wearing masks except when actually speaking officially . 

The limit of thirty includes the officials so it actually means about twenty to twenty two in the congregation.

The rule re singing was very well put. "I have to point out that you are not allowed to sing, but you can sing in your heart or hum if you so wish" .

Bernard

[Neil]

5 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

In The Times today there is an article by Michael Gove giving the reasoning behind the decisions taken by the government regarding the on-going situation. Now it is not often that I agree with him, but I found the article contained a lot of well thought out comments. Basically there is very little choice over the main issues and very little wriggle room. The big fear is that if the NHS is overwhelmed then the damage to the economy will be far greater than any enforced business closures .

Bernard

 

Last night Chanel 4 news had a piece about the proposed restrictions with a scientist from the alternative sage group and the Tory mp for Romford. MP started off by putting forward the argument that the restrictions were damaging the economy, that they should be relaxed and a rebalancing of the lives vs livelihoods undertaken. Scientist countered by pointing out that saving lives and saving the economy were linked but not in the way the MP was arguing, that lives and livelihoods rise and fall together, that the countries with the least economic damage were also those with the greatest emphasis on combatting the spread of coronavirus. She argued that if the virus was left to increase exponentially then most would be reluctant to go out to shop, visit pubs, cafes and restaurants, take holidays and engage in economic activity.

 

I believe the (false) theory that protecting the populace and protecting the economy are incompatible and that like the ends of a see-saw as one goes up the other has to go down, is why we were slow to lock down, too eager to open up and half hearted in the financial support to individuals. 

[Welchester]

1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

The limit of thirty includes the officials so it actually means about twenty to twenty two in the congregation.

 

This was uncertain for some time, but we have now received clarification that 'funeral staff' (this includes clergy, musicians, ushers, funeral directors &c.) are not included in the total of thirty.

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, Neil said:

Last night Chanel 4 news had a piece about the proposed restrictions with a scientist from the alternative sage group

Alternative Sage group....annoys me every time they come on TV to spout, I assume they are the scientists who are sulking because they weren’t picked for the real Sage group.

 

So many experts, so many opinions....glad we have RM Web to shelter in 

[Nearholmer]

Must see if I can get some of this alternative sage for the turkey stuffing, although it seems that it might be hallucinogenic.

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, boxbrownie said:

Alternative Sage group....annoys me every time they come on TV to spout, I assume they are the scientists who are sulking because they weren’t picked for the real Sage group.

 

So many experts, so many opinions....glad we have RM Web to shelter in 

 

Especially when they are ex-advisers, plus those who are either ex-minsters or in opposition and just oppose for the sake of opposing. 

 

The thing is virtually all governments are struggling with this virus, even the Germans are now having a much worse time, French and Italian deaths are catching us up, even the Scandinavian countries are having a bad time. Ski resorts are being closed in Europe, and even the Russians are owning up to large numbers of infections and deaths. 

 

As for that bunch that looked into the acquisition costs of PPE, what a bunch of wasters. Of course we paid over the top, every country did, there was a world wide shortage. Why waste time and public funds on something everyone knew. I bet everyone of them on that committee were demanding that the government paid what ever was needed  to get the supplies we desperately needed, then when they did, they then complained we paid too much. Its all well and good being wise after the event, but in my book that's not wisdom. 

 

And as for those anti lockdown protesters !!! Every one should be arrested and fined for breaking the law and wasting public funds on policing them.

 

Edited November 28, 2020 by AY Mod

[Neil]

15 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

Alternative Sage group....annoys me every time they come on TV to spout, I assume they are the scientists who are sulking because they weren’t picked for the real Sage group.

 

So many experts, so many opinions....glad we have RM Web to shelter in 

 

First a correction I wrote 'alternative sage', I should have written 'independent sage'.

 

Independent sage was set up at a time when the government were telling us that they were following the scientific advice of sage (the official one) without saying what that advice was. Their (Independent Sage) aim was to make public the science behind the pandemic. Rather than dismissing their input out of hand I'd suggest that you take a look at what they have to say about themselves. You might also want to take a look at the debate I mentioned between Tory MP and sage scientist here.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Neil

[TheSignalEngineer]

13 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

So many experts, so many opinions....glad we have RM Web to shelter in 

You'll find as many experts and opinions as you need on here. All subjects and interests catered for.

[melmerby]

Tim Martin (Mr Wetherspoon) was on radio this morning bemoaning the lock down measures.

He was complaing a pub chain is there to sell beer not to be "quasi-restaurants"

Mm.

There was me thinking that Wetherspoons were "quasi-restaurants" that just happen to sell decent beer.

 

AFAIK most pub chains these days concentrate on food, where there is more profit to be made

[Nearholmer]

Given all the popular moaning and groaning, the rebellious MPs etc, I can’t understand why HMG doesn’t issue plain-as-pikestaff hospital capacity and occupancy figures, plus projected demand.

 

Other countries seem to be overt with capacity and occupancy figures, but here both seem to be ‘secret’ (well, not made overt).

 

I’ve postulated before that this might be because nobody wants to admit how small capacity actually is, but surely now is the time to up-front about it.

 

MPs are the ones who really need to get their heads around this ...... they haveb

a responsibility to get the facts, and some of them need to get real about their messaging to the public, by telling it like it is, rather than coming out with what they think will play well with their very-local electorates.

 

(Rebelling or holding-back-support as a way of squeezing money out I get, that’s just politics, it’s the “but in my village we haven’t had a case in months” bunch I’m complaining about)

Edited November 29, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Neil]

18 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

... As for that bunch that looked into the acquisition costs of PPE, what a bunch of wasters. Of course we paid over the top, every country did, there was a world wide shortage. Why waste time and public funds on something everyone knew. I bet everyone of them on that committee were demanding that the government paid what ever was needed  to get the supplies we desperately needed, then when they did, they then complained we paid too much. Its all well and good being wise after the event, but in my book that's not wisdom. ....

 

 

This is the thing, of late we've found ourselves drifting into ever more polarised opinion, the sort of thing where we're more likely to forgive our own 'side' and vilify what we perceive to be the 'opposition'. If I take a look at my own opinions I have been more willing to give John Bercow the benefit of the doubt than I have been Pritti Patel. Bullying is bullying whoever does it and I shouldn't take a more lenient stance because I like the other stuff that one person stands for.

 

So what do I reckon about PPE? Firstly that we shouldn't have been in a position to have to scrabble around for stuff leaving medical staff and care workers vulnerable, particularly when about a decade ago we had a decent stockpile of up to date gear. However at the beginning of the pandemic there was a need and it was predictable that to to bridge the shortfall would cost more than keeping reserves up to date in times of average demand. Equipment had to be bought and I wouldn't quibble that the government spent more than normal. Where I would take issue is that a good chunk of that extra money went not to regular reliable suppliers but to next door neighbours of ministers or companies without a track record of supplying PPE but with good contacts.

 

I don't think we should forget or seek to minimise those things that have been done wrong. The pandemic is a difficult thing to deal with but politicians put themselves forward and we elect them to deal with the difficult stuff. That's what their job is all about and it's not unreasonable to expect competence.

[APOLLO]

Quote

There was me thinking that Wetherspoons were "quasi-restaurants" that just happen to sell decent beer.

 

'Spoons in Paris !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

The Baguettes, The Baguettes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, Neil said:

 

This is the thing, of late we've found ourselves drifting into ever more polarised opinion, the sort of thing where we're more likely to forgive our own 'side' and vilify what we perceive to be the 'opposition'. If I take a look at my own opinions I have been more willing to give John Bercow the benefit of the doubt than I have been Pritti Patel. Bullying is bullying whoever does it and I shouldn't take a more lenient stance because I like the other stuff that one person stands for.

 

So what do I reckon about PPE? Firstly that we shouldn't have been in a position to have to scrabble around for stuff leaving medical staff and care workers vulnerable, particularly when about a decade ago we had a decent stockpile of up to date gear. However at the beginning of the pandemic there was a need and it was predictable that to to bridge the shortfall would cost more than keeping reserves up to date in times of average demand. Equipment had to be bought and I wouldn't quibble that the government spent more than normal. Where I would take issue is that a good chunk of that extra money went not to regular reliable suppliers but to next door neighbours of ministers or companies without a track record of supplying PPE but with good contacts.

 

I don't think we should forget or seek to minimise those things that have been done wrong. The pandemic is a difficult thing to deal with but politicians put themselves forward and we elect them to deal with the difficult stuff. That's what their job is all about and it's not unreasonable to expect competence.

 

My own view of Bercow is quite different, Not just how it came over he adjudicated rules to benefit his own beliefs, but the way he had to be the center of attraction.

 

Patel is another example where we are told what we need to know and we are not hearing both sides. Clearly there have been problems in the home office for years, reading between the lines I believe Patel has been sent in to do a job of clearing out both the old guard and those who are obstructive in the civil Service. Would they take it better from a male, or a white person from a privileged background ?.  They ought to try working on a building sight for a day, or on a trading floor. Bulling is wrong but so is not acting as required by your employer, if this is the case.

 

The issues this year, whether its PPI lockdowns or supporting businesses/employees, whichever government had been in power, they would have struggled to do better, and I cannot see anywhere in Europe that's faired much better. Many who lost their jobs in the last financial emergency would ask why were they not helped ? I was self employer then, was affected just as badly as many are today, like thousands of others I got no help from Mr Brown. 

 

I also get fed up by company directors bellyaching at being left out. The plain truth is they can claim just the same as any other employee, what they cannot claim for is the dividend income they receive, if they use a tax loophole reducing their earned income to reduce their tax (NI contributions) bill, why should the government subsidise what clearly is their investment income ?

[boxbrownie]

33 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

My own view of Bercow is quite different, Not just how it came over he adjudicated rules to benefit his own beliefs, but the way he had to be the center of attraction.

Patel is another example where we are told what we need to know and we are not hearing both sides.

Don’t start me on Bercow.......as for Priti....Mrs BB worked with her long before she was in the home office (Mrs BB was doing work for them) and it winds Mrs BB up by a mile every time, she says Priti was the nicest person to work with (notice the “with”) but she was definitely determined to get a job done, and done properly. As for bullying, Mrs BB cannot believe it was all one side if there was any at all, Mrs BB says she can imagine some raised voices and stern looks going on but only if they cocked up and the job should have been straight forward.

 

Unless your a fly on the wall it’s all what ever you want to believe.

[alastairq]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

it’s the “but in my village we haven’t had a case in months” bunch

  

In a brief conversation with a passing parcel van driver he was complaining about the lockdown system, and how it should be removed [or, never happened in the first place] .

I live in a reasonably rural [fields all around, and trees, for miles] village, up north of the 'umber. {Since, according to the Govt., my county doesn't actually exist/ But that's another story]

Maybe two cases of covid inflection all year....out of apopulation of around 150 or so?

I'm in  lockdown quite happily....and really haven't suffered a great deal during this time, emotionally or in practical terms.

The van driver commented, that it was alright for us in our lockdown...like being locked down in CentreParcs..compared to where he lived, in Leeds?

Plus, he didn't think anybody where he lived took any notice of these lockdown rules? [I took even more steps backwards]

He  thought I was incredibly lucky to live where I do....

I pointed out that it was a lifestyle choice I made decades ago.....to sacrifice the ability to earn loadsadosh, by living in a city...and to move somewhere where the quality of life, although economically at the bottom of the ladder,  was so superior to that found in urban or city estates.

A choice most don't seem prepared to make....but a choice that can withstand a pandemic with ease?

My nearest pub [3 miles away] is surviving by doing take away food [they have a restaurant]...

At the beginning of the year, the village came together as a community [using, of all things, Facebook]....and supplies of essentials were obtained and distributed as needed...but only the basic stuff. Any requests for Quinoa were roundly dismissed. Bread flour? Now that was another story altogether...local mill, etc.

But I liked the Centreparcs analogy.

Right at the start of this year, many [even probably on here?] felt that the pandemic was an opportunity for folk to re-assess their way of  life?

 

I do wonder how many are actually following through with that re-assessment?

Edited November 29, 2020 by alastairq
Ruddy computers think they know better than me!!!

[AY Mod]

Can we take a step back from the party politics/personality issues please?

[hayfield]

4 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Given all the popular moaning and groaning, the rebellious MPs etc, I can’t understand why HMG doesn’t issue plain-as-pikestaff hospital capacity and occupancy figures, plus projected demand.

 

Other countries seem to be overt with capacity and occupancy figures, but here both seem to be ‘secret’ (well, not made overt).

 

I’ve postulated before that this might be because nobody wants to admit how small capacity actually is, but surely now is the time to up-front about it.

 

MPs are the ones who really need to get their heads around this ...... they haveb

a responsibility to get the facts, and some of them need to get real about their messaging to the public, by telling it like it is, rather than coming out with what they think will play well with their very-local electorates.

 

(Rebelling or holding-back-support as a way of squeezing money out I get, that’s just politics, it’s the “but in my village we haven’t had a case in months” bunch I’m complaining about)

 

Kevin

 

I think to try and keep a cap on it the government are painting a black picture of it, don't forget it was not that long ago they were being chastised by some for taking too long to act

 

There are a large group who will just ignore the rules. Likewise another large group who will batten down the hatches

 

The government are really speaking to those of us in the middle, and its this group who will make of break what happens over Christmas 

[monkeysarefun]

Australia has opened up additional quarantine facilities for those returning from overseas to spend the compulsory 2 week stay in.

Having lots of empty space is an advantage in that it can be a long way away from anyone else - in this case south of Darwin, 3000km from the eastern states population.

 

Having spent time in Darwin at this time of year - hot and stifling  until  the monsoon and tropical storms arrive in later December,  I do not envy them, especially those arriving from the UK autumn, as many of them are. 

 

And they pay for the privilege.

 

Still, we have had no new locally community transmitted  cases here for  a couple of weeks,(other than a couple in SA, now under control)  so whatever works, and at least theyve got a swimming pool.

 

Edited November 29, 2020 by monkeysarefun

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, alastairq said:

  

In a brief conversation with a passing parcel van driver he was complaining about the lockdown system, and how it should be removed [or, never happened in the first place] .

I live in a reasonably rural [fields all around, and trees, for miles] village, up north of the 'umber. {Since, according to the Govt., my county doesn't actually exist/ But that's another story]

Maybe two cases of covid inflection all year....out of apopulation of around 150 or so?

I'm in  lockdown quite happily....and really haven't suffered a great deal during this time, emotionally or in practical terms.

The van driver commented, that it was alright for us in our lockdown...like being locked down in CentreParcs..compared to where he lived, in Leeds?

Plus, he didn't think anybody where he lived took any notice of these lockdown rules? [I took even more steps backwards]

He  thought I was incredibly lucky to live where I do....

I pointed out that it was a lifestyle choice I made decades ago.....to sacrifice the ability to earn loadsadosh, by living in a city...and to move somewhere where the quality of life, although economically at the bottom of the ladder,  was so superior to that found in urban or city estates.

A choice most don't seem prepared to make....but a choice that can withstand a pandemic with ease?

My nearest pub [3 miles away] is surviving by doing take away food [they have a restaurant]...

At the beginning of the year, the village came together as a community [using, of all things, Facebook]....and supplies of essentials were obtained and distributed as needed...but only the basic stuff. Any requests for Quinoa were roundly dismissed. Bread flour? Now that was another story altogether...local mill, etc.

But I liked the Centreparcs analogy.

Right at the start of this year, many [even probably on here?] felt that the pandemic was an opportunity for folk to re-assess their way of  life?

 

I do wonder how many are actually following through with that re-assessment?

 

 

I wonder what history will make of this plague ? Those who are affected the most are those who either live in crowded areas and or the poorest in society,

living in urban areas usually in large numbers and multi generational. Thinking they are either invulnerable or their relatives will never infect them. The simple fact is many deaths could have been avoided if everyone acted on the advice given.   

 

If I look at the areas locally most affected, its areas with lots of social housing. this seems to be replicated if you look at other highly affected areas. 

 

I feel for those who will enter the highest area on Wednesday who have abided by the rules, but sadly too many in their community/local communities have ignored the advice and are now paying the consequences