Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Pandemic: Millions of people in the north affected by new

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited July 31 in General
imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Pandemic: Millions of people in the north affected by new lockdown restrictions announced by Tweet

An estimated 4m people living in large parts of the North wake up this morning to find that a new range of lockdown restrictions has been implemented. The areas covered include Greater Manchester, East Lancashire and parts of Yorkshire.

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • TimTTimT Posts: 933
    Wot! Not comments yet?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 3,198
    Government by tweet.
    Opposition by tweet.
    Where is Parliament?
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,719
    edited July 31
    I'm sick and tired of hearing about these Government rules and regulations after they have first been announced in the social media, which believe it or not many millions of us choose not to use.
    Whereabouts can one find the definitive do's and don'ts? For example, these new lockdown provisions cover some but not all parts of West Yorkshire ... is one allowed therefore for household members in a restricted area to to meet with household members from an unrestricted area and does it make any difference in whose house they meet? Yours, Confused.

    (Third by the way.)
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 3,198

    I'm sick and tired of hearing about these Government rules and regulations after they have first been announced in the social media, which believe it or not many millions of us choose not to use.
    Whereabouts can one find the definitive do's and don'ts?

    With parliament not sitting and Mrs Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha on holiday in Scotland, there is obviously no legislation, but I presume that the government must issue a Statutory Order, and publish it. Where is this to be read?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 3,198
    alex_ said:

    Perhaps if politicians are so concerned about the Government announcing new measures at very short notice and by the fastest route to get the message out, then they shouldn’t have spent so much time criticising the Government for being slow to react at the start of the pandemic (“every hour/day cost x lives...”), or even more recently when mocking things like new mask rules giving advance notice for people to adapt?

    Is Starmer saying there should have been a press conference at 10pm?

    With the worst death statistics in Europe, the English government has failed her people. It is simply a fact that HMG were far too slow to act in the early stages of the pandemic, when Italians, Spaniards, French and Germans were warning you of the obvious error. England is still too slow in doing the right things. What we are witnessing now is Westminster in full panic mode.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 23,049

    I'm sick and tired of hearing about these Government rules and regulations after they have first been announced in the social media, which believe it or not many millions of us choose not to use.
    Whereabouts can one find the definitive do's and don'ts?

    With parliament not sitting and Mrs Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha on holiday in Scotland, there is obviously no legislation, but I presume that the government must issue a Statutory Order, and publish it. Where is this to be read?
    To be published...
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-rules-on-gatherings-in-some-parts-of-northern-england
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 3,123
    I'm glad the Government are taking the virus much more seriously and acting more proactively.

    Whether a tweet is the best way of announcing something, I'm not sure but I can't see why we have to stick to antiquated methods.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 23,049
    India arrests 50 journalists in clampdown on critics of Covid-19 response
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jul/31/india-arrests-50-journalists-in-clampdown-on-critics-of-covid-19-response

    Disturbing.
    Someone on the previous thread suggested that we require UK journalists to be officially licensed, for very similar reasons the Indian government is using as justification...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,734
    Keir has a point, late night Tweets are not the right way to exercise emergency powers. If anything, it’s not an effective way to reach the people you need to reach.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369
    Jonathan said:

    Keir has a point, late night Tweets are not the right way to exercise emergency powers. If anything, it’s not an effective way to reach the people you need to reach.

    I listened to the changes on Sky and BBC last night and also on 5 live overnight
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,664
    edited July 31
    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    Yes, they are worried about rising infection rates across GM boroughs. So stop Asians celebrating Eid and they'll drop or at least not rise any further they think.

    And yet people can be in the pub with a whole load of people from many families - rules say don't but that's what a pub or restaurant is FFS. Asian families unlikely to go to the pub to celebrate Eid.

    So good news if you are whitey. Less good if not.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,166

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369
    edited July 31

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without contradicting Burnham
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 27,168

    alex_ said:

    Perhaps if politicians are so concerned about the Government announcing new measures at very short notice and by the fastest route to get the message out, then they shouldn’t have spent so much time criticising the Government for being slow to react at the start of the pandemic (“every hour/day cost x lives...”), or even more recently when mocking things like new mask rules giving advance notice for people to adapt?

    Is Starmer saying there should have been a press conference at 10pm?

    With the worst death statistics in Europe, the English government has failed her people. It is simply a fact that HMG were far too slow to act in the early stages of the pandemic, when Italians, Spaniards, French and Germans were warning you of the obvious error. England is still too slow in doing the right things. What we are witnessing now is Westminster in full panic mode.
    I doubt many people could explain now what all the rules are and get them all correct; things are chopping and changing about so much.

    The Italians have produced a set of rules that Karen Brady would describe as harsh but fair and have said they are staying in place until October. With all the publicity they have had I expect most Italians know what they are supposed to be doing. So far at least they have things under control.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,166

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,198
    We were due to go to a family do in Rochdale this weekend. Thankfully it was cancelled some time ago

    Hope, for the sake of folk in the area, that 'the authorities' get on top of the situation soon.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 572
    My brother (a newly retired GP) lives in Greater Manchester. He has a week's holiday in Norfolk planned starting today. He is due to call on us in Leicestershire on the way.

    Will he be doing a Cummings if he goes ahead with his plans?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369

    We were due to go to a family do in Rochdale this weekend. Thankfully it was cancelled some time ago

    Hope, for the sake of folk in the area, that 'the authorities' get on top of the situation soon.

    Absolutely
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
    Thank God Burnham is clear. The government hasn’t been. The government deserves criticism because the government is not performing. The government is not performing because too many people in it are not up to the job. Because of that our response to the pandemic has been nowhere near good enough.

    And hindsight is a great thing as Sturgeon says when coming under criticism

  • ClippPClippP Posts: 324

    alex_ said:

    Perhaps if politicians are so concerned about the Government announcing new measures at very short notice and by the fastest route to get the message out, then they shouldn’t have spent so much time criticising the Government for being slow to react at the start of the pandemic (“every hour/day cost x lives...”), or even more recently when mocking things like new mask rules giving advance notice for people to adapt?

    Is Starmer saying there should have been a press conference at 10pm?

    With the worst death statistics in Europe, the English government has failed her people. It is simply a fact that HMG were far too slow to act in the early stages of the pandemic, when Italians, Spaniards, French and Germans were warning you of the obvious error. England is still too slow in doing the right things. What we are witnessing now is Westminster in full panic mode.
    Not sure it is "Westminster", Mr Dickson. Just Johnson and his useless cronies and hangers on.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,166
    edited July 31

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
    Thank God Burnham is clear. The government hasn’t been. The government deserves criticism because the government is not performing. The government is not performing because too many people in it are not up to the job. Because of that our response to the pandemic has been nowhere near good enough.

    And hindsight is a great thing as Sturgeon says when coming under criticism

    Hindsight is only great if you learn from it. This government fails on that front, too. No hindsight was needed to know that a government assembled solely on the basis of unswerving loyalty to an inadequate leader would not be best positioned to tackle a deadly pandemic. In any case, you are attacking Starmer for reacting negatively to a completely botched government communication. No hindsight was involved.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,734
    ClippP said:

    alex_ said:

    Perhaps if politicians are so concerned about the Government announcing new measures at very short notice and by the fastest route to get the message out, then they shouldn’t have spent so much time criticising the Government for being slow to react at the start of the pandemic (“every hour/day cost x lives...”), or even more recently when mocking things like new mask rules giving advance notice for people to adapt?

    Is Starmer saying there should have been a press conference at 10pm?

    With the worst death statistics in Europe, the English government has failed her people. It is simply a fact that HMG were far too slow to act in the early stages of the pandemic, when Italians, Spaniards, French and Germans were warning you of the obvious error. England is still too slow in doing the right things. What we are witnessing now is Westminster in full panic mode.
    Not sure it is "Westminster", Mr Dickson. Just Johnson and his useless cronies and hangers on.
    Boris does do the right thing sometimes, but only after exhausting all possible alternatives.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,263

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
    Thank God Burnham is clear. The government hasn’t been. The government deserves criticism because the government is not performing. The government is not performing because too many people in it are not up to the job. Because of that our response to the pandemic has been nowhere near good enough.

    And hindsight is a great thing as Sturgeon says when coming under criticism

    Hindsight is only great if you learn from it. This government fails on that front, too. No hindsight was needed to know that a government assembled solely on the basis of unswerving loyalty to an inadequate leader would not be best positioned to tackle a deadly pandemic. In any case, you are attacking Starmer for reacting negatively to a completely botched government communication. No hindsight was involved.

    Looks like an effective annoncement as everyone is talking about it.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 6,100
    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    Perhaps if politicians are so concerned about the Government announcing new measures at very short notice and by the fastest route to get the message out, then they shouldn’t have spent so much time criticising the Government for being slow to react at the start of the pandemic (“every hour/day cost x lives...”), or even more recently when mocking things like new mask rules giving advance notice for people to adapt?

    Is Starmer saying there should have been a press conference at 10pm?

    With the worst death statistics in Europe, the English government has failed her people. It is simply a fact that HMG were far too slow to act in the early stages of the pandemic, when Italians, Spaniards, French and Germans were warning you of the obvious error. England is still too slow in doing the right things. What we are witnessing now is Westminster in full panic mode.
    I doubt many people could explain now what all the rules are and get them all correct; things are chopping and changing about so much.

    The Italians have produced a set of rules that Karen Brady would describe as harsh but fair and have said they are staying in place until October. With all the publicity they have had I expect most Italians know what they are supposed to be doing. So far at least they have things under control.
    Are there are any big studies showing comparison of the leading European countries by mental health or economic activity to go alongside the death and infection stats? I could be wrong but not sure a harsh but fair regime is what we need either, jobs and mental health matter too. Finding a good balance is tricky, if we are within a year of a vaccine being widely available Id lean towards the current "control" strategy rather than a stricter "eradication strategy" that would likely not succeed through the winter anyway.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809
    I’m afraid I had a slight chuckle listening to tory MPs claiming their area should be excluded because their are was lower than the others. I didn’t hear them calling for those areas in Spain with lower infection rates to be excluded from the travel quarantine requirements.

    It’s difficult for them to come straight out and say it’s to stop multi family Eid celebrations happening tonight and over the weekend, that’s why all the boroughs are included so it doesn’t look so targeted. How will they police it?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,166
    edited July 31
    philiph said:

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
    Thank God Burnham is clear. The government hasn’t been. The government deserves criticism because the government is not performing. The government is not performing because too many people in it are not up to the job. Because of that our response to the pandemic has been nowhere near good enough.

    And hindsight is a great thing as Sturgeon says when coming under criticism

    Hindsight is only great if you learn from it. This government fails on that front, too. No hindsight was needed to know that a government assembled solely on the basis of unswerving loyalty to an inadequate leader would not be best positioned to tackle a deadly pandemic. In any case, you are attacking Starmer for reacting negatively to a completely botched government communication. No hindsight was involved.

    Looks like an effective annoncement as everyone is talking about it.

    The announcement should not be what people are talking about. It’s the measures that matter and ensuring they are followed.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
    Thank God Burnham is clear. The government hasn’t been. The government deserves criticism because the government is not performing. The government is not performing because too many people in it are not up to the job. Because of that our response to the pandemic has been nowhere near good enough.

    And hindsight is a great thing as Sturgeon says when coming under criticism

    Hindsight is only great if you learn from it. This government fails on that front, too. No hindsight was needed to know that a government assembled solely on the basis of unswerving loyalty to an inadequate leader would not be best positioned to tackle a deadly pandemic. In any case, you are attacking Starmer for reacting negatively to a completely botched government communication. No hindsight was involved.

    Boris has been in full campaign mode all week. Yesterday it was fun-stuff with police motorcycles. It is where he appears most comfortable and most professional.

    In all fairness where has he got the time for dealing directly with all this boring Coronavirus nonsense?

    Campaigning, campaigning, campaining. The Johnson mantra.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,928
    nichomar said:

    I’m afraid I had a slight chuckle listening to tory MPs claiming their area should be excluded because their are was lower than the others. I didn’t hear them calling for those areas in Spain with lower infection rates to be excluded from the travel quarantine requirements.

    It’s difficult for them to come straight out and say it’s to stop multi family Eid celebrations happening tonight and over the weekend, that’s why all the boroughs are included so it doesn’t look so targeted. How will they police it?

    Firmly, one hopes.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 27,168
    nichomar said:

    I’m afraid I had a slight chuckle listening to tory MPs claiming their area should be excluded because their are was lower than the others. I didn’t hear them calling for those areas in Spain with lower infection rates to be excluded from the travel quarantine requirements.

    It’s difficult for them to come straight out and say it’s to stop multi family Eid celebrations happening tonight and over the weekend, that’s why all the boroughs are included so it doesn’t look so targeted. How will they police it?

    What makes you think that any of this extends to policing it?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without contradicting Burnham
    Your loyalty is touching.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,166
    The golden rule of communications is to ensure the content of the message is the focus of attention, not how it was shared. The government consistently fails on this very basic principle. It’s because they don’t know what they’re doing.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 6,100
    IanB2 said:

    nichomar said:

    I’m afraid I had a slight chuckle listening to tory MPs claiming their area should be excluded because their are was lower than the others. I didn’t hear them calling for those areas in Spain with lower infection rates to be excluded from the travel quarantine requirements.

    It’s difficult for them to come straight out and say it’s to stop multi family Eid celebrations happening tonight and over the weekend, that’s why all the boroughs are included so it doesn’t look so targeted. How will they police it?

    What makes you think that any of this extends to policing it?
    I think they gave up with policing once officers were trying to tell shops easter eggs were illegal but "normal" chocolate was fine.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,664

    We were due to go to a family do in Rochdale this weekend. Thankfully it was cancelled some time ago

    Hope, for the sake of folk in the area, that 'the authorities' get on top of the situation soon.

    Had arranged to go see my elderly and rather frail parents last weekend. The imposition of the pre-lockdown in Rochdale spooked them enough to call it off. And now this. We can't meet at home or even their garden. But I could be in the pub with them. It's absurd.

    I've had to read the latest advice off the web for them. They're lonely, isolated, scared, and the stupidity of do this/don't do this is making my dad increasingly angry and frustrated.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300

    nichomar said:

    I’m afraid I had a slight chuckle listening to tory MPs claiming their area should be excluded because their are was lower than the others. I didn’t hear them calling for those areas in Spain with lower infection rates to be excluded from the travel quarantine requirements.

    It’s difficult for them to come straight out and say it’s to stop multi family Eid celebrations happening tonight and over the weekend, that’s why all the boroughs are included so it doesn’t look so targeted. How will they police it?

    Firmly, one hopes.
    Realistically its not going to be policed at all.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,664

    We were due to go to a family do in Rochdale this weekend. Thankfully it was cancelled some time ago

    Hope, for the sake of folk in the area, that 'the authorities' get on top of the situation soon.

    Absolutely
    They are getting on top of it. Stop the Asians doing Eid. So that white folks can go to the pub.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100

    Government by tweet.
    Opposition by tweet.
    Where is Parliament?

    If Parliament was sitting:

    Government by twats.
    Opposition by twats.
    Where is Twitter?

    :smile:
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,546

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    Yes, they are worried about rising infection rates across GM boroughs. So stop Asians celebrating Eid and they'll drop or at least not rise any further they think.

    And yet people can be in the pub with a whole load of people from many families - rules say don't but that's what a pub or restaurant is FFS. Asian families unlikely to go to the pub to celebrate Eid.

    So good news if you are whitey. Less good if not.

    Given the complaints about how COVID-19 is racist, this sounds a sensible approach from the government.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 31
    philiph said:

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
    Thank God Burnham is clear. The government hasn’t been. The government deserves criticism because the government is not performing. The government is not performing because too many people in it are not up to the job. Because of that our response to the pandemic has been nowhere near good enough.

    And hindsight is a great thing as Sturgeon says when coming under criticism

    Hindsight is only great if you learn from it. This government fails on that front, too. No hindsight was needed to know that a government assembled solely on the basis of unswerving loyalty to an inadequate leader would not be best positioned to tackle a deadly pandemic. In any case, you are attacking Starmer for reacting negatively to a completely botched government communication. No hindsight was involved.

    Looks like an effective annoncement as everyone is talking about it.
    WE are all talking about it.

    Most of us being anonymous people on the internet of whom about three, none of them on here at the moment, live in the affected area.

    Do we know that the message has got out to those people who are actually affected?

    Edit - now @RochdalePioneers is posting one of us is directly affected. Since he appears to be complaining about the lack of clarity, however...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 29,207

    Government by tweet.
    Opposition by tweet.
    Where is Parliament?

    Most will be abroad , at holiday homes , generally living high on the hog whilst UK burns
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    malcolmg said:

    Government by tweet.
    Opposition by tweet.
    Where is Parliament?

    Most will be abroad , at holiday homes , generally living high on the hog whilst UK burns
    I thought that was what you wanted, Malc?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 6,100
    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300

    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.

    The Q&A says you cant socialize with another household even in a pub garden. You can only visit a pub etc with members of your bubble.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 906
    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,546

    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.

    The Q&A says you cant socialize with another household even in a pub garden. You can only visit a pub etc with members of your bubble.
    Hancock on BBC saying that they reckon the most likely location for the virus spreading is in the home when households mix. I can believe that.
  • eekeek Posts: 8,645

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    I think they know what they are doing - close restaurants and pubs and the Government is closing them permanently.

    Allow the pubs to stay open and while the lack of trade will kill them at least the Government (by not banning visits) can say we did what we could.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 29,207

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    Andy Burnham 100% on same page as HMG and Hancock on Sky just now making it difficult for labour to attack the decision or communications without being contradicting Burnham
    So what? It’s utterly shambolic. The lockdown may well be necessary - but if it is introduced in a way that causes confusion - and it undoubtedly has - it will not be effective. That is the point here.

    Burnham seems clear and of course it is complex, but criticising for it's own sake is not beneficial to anyone
    Thank God Burnham is clear. The government hasn’t been. The government deserves criticism because the government is not performing. The government is not performing because too many people in it are not up to the job. Because of that our response to the pandemic has been nowhere near good enough.

    And hindsight is a great thing as Sturgeon says when coming under criticism

    You keep trying G but nobody is buying it, they know Boris , Hancock , Cummings , Gove and the other lying creeps are the perpetrators.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,664
    ydoethur said:

    WE are all talking about it.

    Most of us being anonymous people on the internet of whom about three, none of them on here at the moment, live in the affected area.

    Do we know that the message has got out to those people who are actually affected?

    Edit - now @RochdalePioneers is posting one of us is directly affected. Since he appears to be complaining about the lack of clarity, however...

    I am clear as I follow social media. I don't live in Rochdale. My 73 year old parents barely know one end of a computer to another but do live in Rochdale. They get stuff off TV news, which means until they watch a bulletin they won't know.

    Are you suggesting the means of communication is effective because it was on Twitter? As for the rules being clear I am clear they are not clear. Don't meet. It's not safe, too big a risk. But the pubs are open. That's safe, not too big a risk. Be in a room with my parents at their house? Risk. Be in a large room full of everyone else's parents? Not risk.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,546
    eek said:

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    I think they know what they are doing - close restaurants and pubs and the Government is closing them permanently.

    Allow the pubs to stay open and while the lack of trade will kill them at least the Government (by not banning visits) can say we did what we could.
    Again, I come back to why is it spreading in specific parts of the country. Pubs are ubiquitous across England. So what's happening in parts of the north that's different to other parts of the country?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300

    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
    Based on what? Interesting that his tweet on the subject is prefaced with “our understanding is...” which doesn’t exactly fill you full of confidence.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    What people should also be thinking about is how this bodes ill for the largest act of social gathering since February - the return of schools, in Scotland a fortnight or so from today, and in England, Wales and Northern Ireland from September.

    If we can’t meet in a couple of small pubs without causing alarming surges, how do we manage many hundreds of people all in one building?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 6,100
    edited July 31

    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.

    The Q&A says you cant socialize with another household even in a pub garden. You can only visit a pub etc with members of your bubble.
    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/north-west-of-england-local-restrictions-what-you-can-and-cannot-do

    Can I still meet people outdoors?
    In line with the national guidance, you can continue to meet in public outdoor spaces in groups of no more than six people, unless the group includes only people from two households. You cannot meet people you do not live within a private garden.

    At all times, you should socially distance from people you do not live with – unless they are in your support bubble.


    ----------------

    So you can meet outdoors in groups of up to six, as long as the group is not from exactly two households. 1,3,4,5,6 households are all fine, but needs to be publicly owned, not private. Perfectly logical I am sure.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 31

    ydoethur said:

    WE are all talking about it.

    Most of us being anonymous people on the internet of whom about three, none of them on here at the moment, live in the affected area.

    Do we know that the message has got out to those people who are actually affected?

    Edit - now @RochdalePioneers is posting one of us is directly affected. Since he appears to be complaining about the lack of clarity, however...

    I am clear as I follow social media. I don't live in Rochdale. My 73 year old parents barely know one end of a computer to another but do live in Rochdale. They get stuff off TV news, which means until they watch a bulletin they won't know.

    Are you suggesting the means of communication is effective because it was on Twitter? As for the rules being clear I am clear they are not clear. Don't meet. It's not safe, too big a risk. But the pubs are open. That's safe, not too big a risk. Be in a room with my parents at their house? Risk. Be in a large room full of everyone else's parents? Not risk.
    No. Quite the opposite. I’m saying the fact you are angry shows it’s been bungled. Apologies if that was in itself unclear.

    My original point was we as a group are unrepresentative and not the target audience, so the fact we have heard about it proves nothing about the effectiveness of the government’s communications strategy (insofar as we can call it that).
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 29,207

    alex_ said:

    Perhaps if politicians are so concerned about the Government announcing new measures at very short notice and by the fastest route to get the message out, then they shouldn’t have spent so much time criticising the Government for being slow to react at the start of the pandemic (“every hour/day cost x lives...”), or even more recently when mocking things like new mask rules giving advance notice for people to adapt?

    Is Starmer saying there should have been a press conference at 10pm?

    With the worst death statistics in Europe, the English government has failed her people. It is simply a fact that HMG were far too slow to act in the early stages of the pandemic, when Italians, Spaniards, French and Germans were warning you of the obvious error. England is still too slow in doing the right things. What we are witnessing now is Westminster in full panic mode.
    England worst. Scotland not far behind in third. Tone down the moral outrage, you risk sounding smug - with so little cause.
    That the best you can do , all well as Scotland is half as bad as England and the Spanish are not great either. Not care to comment on your heroes great performance rather than pointing at squirrels.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 2,273
    Overreaction from the government . Society needs to get back to normal and being fun not have inconsistent and bossy restrictions for an illness that isn't very dangerous and not very widespread.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300
    I think the Government is doing the right thing - and in some ways is improving and learning from previous mistakes - however you can’t honestly say the overall package is “what good looks like”.

    The waiting 7 hours from announcement to detailed rules/guidance is particularly pathetic. I’d be embarrassed if that was a project I was running.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 29,207
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Government by tweet.
    Opposition by tweet.
    Where is Parliament?

    Most will be abroad , at holiday homes , generally living high on the hog whilst UK burns
    I thought that was what you wanted, Malc?
    I would prefer them in sackcloth in stocks getting rotten vegetables thrown at them or tarred and feathered and run out of town
  • eekeek Posts: 8,645
    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    I think they know what they are doing - close restaurants and pubs and the Government is closing them permanently.

    Allow the pubs to stay open and while the lack of trade will kill them at least the Government (by not banning visits) can say we did what we could.
    Again, I come back to why is it spreading in specific parts of the country. Pubs are ubiquitous across England. So what's happening in parts of the north that's different to other parts of the country?

    It seems to be poorer areas with high Asian populations..
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 27,168
    Breaking: in light of the latest virus infection statistics, from midday today 5cm is being added to the social distance people must keep from others.

    Only joking. Hopefully.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300

    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.

    The Q&A says you cant socialize with another household even in a pub garden. You can only visit a pub etc with members of your bubble.
    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/north-west-of-england-local-restrictions-what-you-can-and-cannot-do

    Can I still meet people outdoors?
    In line with the national guidance, you can continue to meet in public outdoor spaces in groups of no more than six people, unless the group includes only people from two households. You cannot meet people you do not live within a private garden.

    At all times, you should socially distance from people you do not live with – unless they are in your support bubble.


    ----------------

    So you can meet outdoors in groups of up to six, as long as the group is not from exactly two households. 1,3,4,5,6 households are all fine, but needs to be publicly owned, not private. Perfectly logical I am sure.
    Is a pub garden a “public outdoor space”?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,664

    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.

    The Q&A says you cant socialize with another household even in a pub garden. You can only visit a pub etc with members of your bubble.
    How do they do that then? Will pubs be private for that bubble? Or will other bubbles be there...?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 31

    Overreaction from the government . Society needs to get back to normal and being fun not have inconsistent and bossy restrictions for an illness that isn't very dangerous and not very widespread.

    We have the most stringent public health restrictions since the Great Plague of 1664. We have all our medical industry turned to fighting this disease, with mixed success. We have some of the most advanced chemical industries in the world pumping out cleaning materials for all they’re worth.

    And we still have at this moment north of sixty thousand dead, making this even at a fairly early stage the most lethal epidemic to hit this country since 1919.

    If this illness ‘isn‘t very dangerous’ I’d hate to see one that you think IS very dangerous.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809
    edited July 31

    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
    Of course he is I believe he insisted on the all Manchester coverage to make it look less like religious targeting. If it stops 80% of the cross community Eid celebrations then it will have been successful. They have know for weeks these celebrations were coming, did the wait until 8 pm last night to discuss it?
    You can’t believe that they did wait can you so why wait till mid evening last night to announce it?
    Anyway it’s probably the right decision and it won’t be long before every household in the affected area gets a multi lingual leaflet hand delivered to explain the detail at some time today.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,546
    ydoethur said:

    What people should also be thinking about is how this bodes ill for the largest act of social gathering since February - the return of schools, in Scotland a fortnight or so from today, and in England, Wales and Northern Ireland from September.

    If we can’t meet in a couple of small pubs without causing alarming surges, how do we manage many hundreds of people all in one building?

    I'll be amazed if schools in England go back in September.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,664

    Overreaction from the government . Society needs to get back to normal and being fun not have inconsistent and bossy restrictions for an illness that isn't very dangerous and not very widespread.

    Hi Donald
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 906
    edited July 31

    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
    Based on what? Interesting that his tweet on the subject is prefaced with “our understanding is...” which doesn’t exactly fill you full of confidence.

    This came out before his tweet

    https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/news/mayor-of-greater-manchester-andy-burnham-issues-statement-following-health-secretary-announcement/

    Strange that he claims in a tweet that he didn't know what the measures were when two hours before he clearly did.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 29,207
    edited July 31
    eek said:

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    I think they know what they are doing - close restaurants and pubs and the Government is closing them permanently.

    Allow the pubs to stay open and while the lack of trade will kill them at least the Government (by not banning visits) can say we did what we could.
    Like everything they are doing , it is all around how they can deflect the blame from themselves, they are a bunch of useless lying conniving barstewards
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 6,100

    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.

    The Q&A says you cant socialize with another household even in a pub garden. You can only visit a pub etc with members of your bubble.
    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/north-west-of-england-local-restrictions-what-you-can-and-cannot-do

    Can I still meet people outdoors?
    In line with the national guidance, you can continue to meet in public outdoor spaces in groups of no more than six people, unless the group includes only people from two households. You cannot meet people you do not live within a private garden.

    At all times, you should socially distance from people you do not live with – unless they are in your support bubble.


    ----------------

    So you can meet outdoors in groups of up to six, as long as the group is not from exactly two households. 1,3,4,5,6 households are all fine, but needs to be publicly owned, not private. Perfectly logical I am sure.
    Is a pub garden a “public outdoor space”?
    To a layman yes, but ianal! Also not sure any of the above is law actually, think its just guidance that your own judgment can override apparently.

    What they say is illegal is quite limited and does not include the pub:

    What will be illegal?
    It will be illegal for people who do not live together to meet in a private home or garden, except for limited exceptions to be set out in law. You should not host or visit people you do not live with, unless they are in your support bubble. If you live in the affected areas, you should not visit someone’s home or garden regardless of whether this is in or outside of the restricted area.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 27,168
    edited July 31
    R4 now doing a slot on how no-one understands what they are supposed to be doing

    New poll shows only 14% of people say that the fully understand the guidelines
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,546
    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    Can't meet indoors. Unless you are spending money like travelling or working or drinking in which case it's fine.

    They genuinely don’t know what they are doing. The lack of clarity is inexcusable. All it will do is further undermine confidence in the government’s ability to manage the crisis, which in turn will make it less likely rules are followed.

    I think they know what they are doing - close restaurants and pubs and the Government is closing them permanently.

    Allow the pubs to stay open and while the lack of trade will kill them at least the Government (by not banning visits) can say we did what we could.
    Again, I come back to why is it spreading in specific parts of the country. Pubs are ubiquitous across England. So what's happening in parts of the north that's different to other parts of the country?

    It seems to be poorer areas with high Asian populations..
    Right, so pubs aren't exactly relevant to the discussion, not that government can be especially explicit about this. The media are allowed to moan at the government about how COVID-19 appears to be affecting non-white populations, but the government will get it in the neck if they effectively say that the non-white communities are behaving in a way that is spreading the disease.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 3,198

    Evening all.

    Scottish Tory bloke resigning is potentially good ground for Labour if they dump useless Leonard.

    Agreed. Especially when the replacement being hyped - Douglas Ross MP (Moray) - is not even an MSP, and holds views repulsive to most Labour voters.

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/08/26/exclusive-interview-torys-traveller-shame-and-the-last-acceptable-racism/

    And right on cue, the SLab grassroots finally start to grow a backbone.

    - “Keir Starmer will get nowhere in his ambitious plans until he wades into this issue, whatever the almost inevitable criticism of interfering in domestic matters, and awaken Scottish Labour from their apparent slumbers and their notion that they will get somewhere in political life grimly holding on to their present status as a nostalgic cult.”

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/tv-legend-archie-macpherson-calls-22437243.amp

    Ian Murray is by far their best option, but he also has the handicap of being in the wrong parliament.

    All the SLab MSPs are utterly useless, with the key leadership candidates Jackie Baillie and Anas Sarwar being some of the biggest dumplings.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 29,207

    Overreaction from the government . Society needs to get back to normal and being fun not have inconsistent and bossy restrictions for an illness that isn't very dangerous and not very widespread.

    Nutjob
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,546

    I think the Government is doing the right thing - and in some ways is improving and learning from previous mistakes - however you can’t honestly say the overall package is “what good looks like”.

    The waiting 7 hours from announcement to detailed rules/guidance is particularly pathetic. I’d be embarrassed if that was a project I was running.

    It isn't a project, it's an emergency.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300

    We are back to the private gardens thing. Fine to meet outdoors in public but not in your garden. Why does it matter to the virus if the garden is privately or state owned, this is a curious virus - is it because it came from a communist run country?

    Actually you can meet in a pub garden so private is just personally owned rather than not owned by the government.

    Indoors/outdoors I could see the point of.

    The Q&A says you cant socialize with another household even in a pub garden. You can only visit a pub etc with members of your bubble.
    How do they do that then? Will pubs be private for that bubble? Or will other bubbles be there...?
    We know what they want - they are simply trying to minimize transmission between bubbles.

    Anyone who has been to a pub since the have opened will know that social distancing completely breaks down after a few pints - at least with the people you went there to meet. If you’re there only with your bubble, the risk is reduced.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 2,273
    The only way pubs can possibly make this financially viable is if people ignore the rules so many will have to shut again - This is a further attack on peoples jobs and businesses . This country is finished as a economic prosperous nation all because of a relatively mild virus
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369

    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
    Based on what? Interesting that his tweet on the subject is prefaced with “our understanding is...” which doesn’t exactly fill you full of confidence.

    That tweet was last night and a far cry from his Sky interview this am
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    tlg86 said:

    I think the Government is doing the right thing - and in some ways is improving and learning from previous mistakes - however you can’t honestly say the overall package is “what good looks like”.

    The waiting 7 hours from announcement to detailed rules/guidance is particularly pathetic. I’d be embarrassed if that was a project I was running.

    It isn't a project, it's an emergency.
    It isn’t a government either, it’s a mess.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 6,100
    edited July 31
    IanB2 said:

    R4 now doing a slot on how no-one understands what they are supposed to be doing

    New poll shows only 14% of people say that the fully understand the guidelines

    Test them! I bet they dont know that if 5 people meet in a park from 3 households thats fine, but from 2 households its not!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 17,637
    Anyone else having trouble signing in to PB ?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300
    tlg86 said:

    I think the Government is doing the right thing - and in some ways is improving and learning from previous mistakes - however you can’t honestly say the overall package is “what good looks like”.

    The waiting 7 hours from announcement to detailed rules/guidance is particularly pathetic. I’d be embarrassed if that was a project I was running.

    It isn't a project, it's an emergency.
    Exactly. Even more embarrassing.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 29,207

    Evening all.

    Scottish Tory bloke resigning is potentially good ground for Labour if they dump useless Leonard.

    Agreed. Especially when the replacement being hyped - Douglas Ross MP (Moray) - is not even an MSP, and holds views repulsive to most Labour voters.

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/08/26/exclusive-interview-torys-traveller-shame-and-the-last-acceptable-racism/

    And right on cue, the SLab grassroots finally start to grow a backbone.

    - “Keir Starmer will get nowhere in his ambitious plans until he wades into this issue, whatever the almost inevitable criticism of interfering in domestic matters, and awaken Scottish Labour from their apparent slumbers and their notion that they will get somewhere in political life grimly holding on to their present status as a nostalgic cult.”

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/tv-legend-archie-macpherson-calls-22437243.amp

    Ian Murray is by far their best option, but he also has the handicap of being in the wrong parliament.

    All the SLab MSPs are utterly useless, with the key leadership candidates Jackie Baillie and Anas Sarwar being some of the biggest dumplings.
    Fact that Murray is more Tory than the Tories is also a bit of a handicap. He would be better going for Jackson's job.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 6,100
    IanB2 said:

    R4 now doing a slot on how no-one understands what they are supposed to be doing

    New poll shows only 14% of people say that the fully understand the guidelines

    Id be quite surprised if over 14% of cabinet ministers could get 10/10 on a quiz on the rules.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 27,168
    35 or 36 C the forecast max today for London and the SE
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300

    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
    Based on what? Interesting that his tweet on the subject is prefaced with “our understanding is...” which doesn’t exactly fill you full of confidence.

    That tweet was last night and a far cry from his Sky interview this am
    Well the details have been announced now!

    What is with you guys being unable to accept any tiny amount of criticism of the government?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    What people should also be thinking about is how this bodes ill for the largest act of social gathering since February - the return of schools, in Scotland a fortnight or so from today, and in England, Wales and Northern Ireland from September.

    If we can’t meet in a couple of small pubs without causing alarming surges, how do we manage many hundreds of people all in one building?

    I'll be amazed if schools in England go back in September.
    The first test will be Scotland with all school attendance on tne 18th August

    I really fear it will prove very problematic and that both England and Wales will struggle in early September to fully return
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 31

    Evening all.

    Scottish Tory bloke resigning is potentially good ground for Labour if they dump useless Leonard.

    Agreed. Especially when the replacement being hyped - Douglas Ross MP (Moray) - is not even an MSP, and holds views repulsive to most Labour voters.

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/08/26/exclusive-interview-torys-traveller-shame-and-the-last-acceptable-racism/

    And right on cue, the SLab grassroots finally start to grow a backbone.

    - “Keir Starmer will get nowhere in his ambitious plans until he wades into this issue, whatever the almost inevitable criticism of interfering in domestic matters, and awaken Scottish Labour from their apparent slumbers and their notion that they will get somewhere in political life grimly holding on to their present status as a nostalgic cult.”

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/tv-legend-archie-macpherson-calls-22437243.amp

    Ian Murray is by far their best option, but he also has the handicap of being in the wrong parliament.

    All the SLab MSPs are utterly useless, with the key leadership candidates Jackie Baillie and Anas Sarwar being some of the biggest dumplings.
    You have just cited a website whose own lawyer said nobody believes a word it writes, run by a man who deliberately and knowingly publishes fake news to support a far-left agenda, and who sees nothing wrong with taking money from ordinary working people to pay his legal bills, and whose own views are repellent to all sane Labour members, as evidence of something?

    Doesn’t really do your credibility on this point any favours.

    He may of course be right in this case - I know very little about Douglas Ross and the boy who cried wolf is apposite - but if you want anyone to believe you, try citing an actual publication not run by a deranged extremist, forger and liar.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 906

    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
    Based on what? Interesting that his tweet on the subject is prefaced with “our understanding is...” which doesn’t exactly fill you full of confidence.

    That tweet was last night and a far cry from his Sky interview this am
    Well the details have been announced now!

    What is with you guys being unable to accept any tiny amount of criticism of the government?
    Please explain this interview last night from Andy Burnham.He clearly knew what the measures were before he pretended that he didn't in his tweet last night.

    https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/news/mayor-of-greater-manchester-andy-burnham-issues-statement-following-health-secretary-announcement/
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 3,198

    This country is finished as a economic prosperous nation all because of a relatively mild virus

    And look at the 33% contraction in the US economy announced yesterday.

    Buy gold. This is going to get extremely ugly and people must realise that they need to protect the fundamentals in Maslow’s hierarchy. Things like annual foreign holidays are going to seem extremely luxurious and extravagant in the near future. And regarding your pension: if you haven’t spread your risks extremely well - far beyond the stock market and property - you are going to face an unpleasant old age. The state pension in the UK won’t even get close to covering even the most basic needs.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 2,273
    ydoethur said:

    Overreaction from the government . Society needs to get back to normal and being fun not have inconsistent and bossy restrictions for an illness that isn't very dangerous and not very widespread.

    We have the most stringent public health restrictions since the Great Plague of 1664. We have all our medical industry turned to fighting this disease, with mixed success. We have some of the most advanced chemical industries in the world pumping out cleaning materials for all they’re worth.

    And we still have at this moment north of sixty thousand dead, making this even at a fairly early stage the most lethal epidemic to hit this country since 1919.

    If this illness ‘isn‘t very dangerous’ I’d hate to see one that you think IS very dangerous.
    We just need to get to herd immunity (its the only way to get over this). The quicker we get there the better for long term society in many ways. Cut pretending this is something we can control - We need King Canute back to show people we cannot control nature
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100

    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    What people should also be thinking about is how this bodes ill for the largest act of social gathering since February - the return of schools, in Scotland a fortnight or so from today, and in England, Wales and Northern Ireland from September.

    If we can’t meet in a couple of small pubs without causing alarming surges, how do we manage many hundreds of people all in one building?

    I'll be amazed if schools in England go back in September.
    The first test will be Scotland with all school attendance on tne 18th August

    I really fear it will prove very problematic and that both England and Wales will struggle in early September to fully return
    That’s worrying me as well. @Fysics_Teacher and I went through some of the problems schools face last night, but it’s not easy to see solutions.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369

    Anyone else having trouble signing in to PB ?

    I cannot sign in on my tablet and use vanilla

    It works on my phone, laptop and desktop
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 8,300

    Scott_xP said:
    Andy Burnham seems quite happy with it
    Based on what? Interesting that his tweet on the subject is prefaced with “our understanding is...” which doesn’t exactly fill you full of confidence.

    That tweet was last night and a far cry from his Sky interview this am
    Well the details have been announced now!

    What is with you guys being unable to accept any tiny amount of criticism of the government?
    Please explain this interview last night from Andy Burnham.He clearly knew what the measures were before he pretended that he didn't in his tweet last night.

    https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/news/mayor-of-greater-manchester-andy-burnham-issues-statement-following-health-secretary-announcement/
    I don’t know, or care. What Burnham knew, or didn’t know, is irrelevant.

    Like I said, what the Government is doing is the right thing, and they are learning, but it certainly is not what good looks like.
Sign In or Register to comment.