Jump to content

When will this shit end?

Chrisp1986

By Chrisp1986,
in Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 94.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • steviewevie

    10647

  • zahidf

    6871

  • Crazyfool01

    6413

  • Ozanne

    7531

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

jparx
jparx

I think on a music festival message board it’s a legitimate question to ask. It doesn’t suggest the OP doesn’t give a shit about anything else. Of course there are much bigger things to be worrie

Toilet Duck
Toilet Duck

So...OX/AZ, blood clots, suspension of vaccinations, politics, vaccine hesitancy, convoluted data, PR problems, Brexit, EU procurement naivety, poor logistics, national identity...there’s an awful lot

Lycra
Lycra

A while since I/we posted because just like everyone else we get fed up of this shit. So just like to say..... For the first time since last March we are free of covid patients 😊

Posted Images

ace56blaa Enthusiast

ace56blaa

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Who told me earlier that Burnham wasn't against the restrictions? :D

This doesn't prove that he is against them. I think he can be critical of the way restrictions are implemented without financial support or acknowledge of the true scope of business affected.

For example cinemas are allowed to stay open, no matter what tier, but if a place where the virus is raging how many people are going to the cinema? - The government since the beginning has loved finding loopholes to makesure they don't have to support the true scope of the financial damage covid and their response has caused

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stuartbert two hats Grand Master

stuartbert two hats

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Who told me earlier that Burnham wasn't against the restrictions? :D

Me.

3 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

This doesn't prove that he is against them. I think he can be critical of the way restrictions are implemented without financial support or acknowledge of the true scope of business affected.

For example cinemas are allowed to stay open, no matter what tier, but if a place where the virus is raging how many people are going to the cinema? - The government since the beginning has loved finding loopholes to makesure they don't have to support the true scope of the financial damage covid and their response has caused

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reckoner Collaborator

Reckoner

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, JoeyT said:

:D

It's crazy when we speak to them on facetime and they've been doing whatever they like when we're under restrictions here.

They have a 50% capacity limit on their major stadiums and venues at the moment so at the Optus (the biggest) they can have 35,000 people for a music event.

Definitely makes you realise how far away from that sort of thing we are!

It's possible that all remaining restrictions (if you can even call them that) apart from the hard border will be removed by the end of this week as well. So back up to 100% capacity at all venues!

WA have gone 6 months without a case of community transmission. They've done very well, albeit by cutting themselves off from the east coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alanr Contributor

alanr

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, The Dawg said:

My sister and family live in Perth and you're right, no restrictions there as there is no covid (apart from a ship that is/was docked and they wouldn't let anyone off as they had the virus.

The issue they have is, nobody is allowed in and out of Perth, the borders are shut, which makes sense.

She mentioned a young girl that stowed away in a lorry to get into Perth and she caught and jailed!! 

Hi,

My daughter lives near Perth, and tell us there are very few restrictions. Travel within the state is now allowed, but the borders with other states are essentially closed. Anyone who does get permission to enter is subject to 14 hotel quarantine at their own expense.

This is with a total of 739 cases and 9 deaths since this started in February, so still very strict measures in place to make sure the virus has no chance to get out of control. 

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/359bca83a1264e3fb8d3b6f0a028d768

Untitled.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fuzzy Afro Community Regular

Fuzzy Afro

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

But if he wins the legal action, what does he do then? It's not a legal action to make the government give Manchester more money. It's a legal action to declare the lockdown unlawful, which presumably means not implementing it? Otherwise what's the point?

It'll be like the parliament being unprorogued by the courts all over again, right? So if he wins the legal action then Manchester would default to their previous position of tier 2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zahidf Grand Master

zahidf

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

But if he wins the legal action, what does he do then? It's not a legal action to make the government give Manchester more money. It's a legal action to declare the lockdown unlawful, which presumably means not implementing it? Otherwise what's the point?

Nope, means the govt has to give scientific basis for the restrictions. ( which he is arguing they arent at the moment)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frankly Mr Shankly Collaborator

Frankly Mr Shankly

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

 

Or you know, they could not be Tories and tax people who are still in work an extra 1% corona tax in order to pay for furlough and enhanced redundancy payments for those that have lost their jobs. I don't think many people would object to that at all because very few of us are in jobs that 100% safe right now, and there's a good chance we'd know we might need that fund in the near future.

 

Or you know rather than taxing working people extra they could sort out corporate tax dodging...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ace56blaa Enthusiast

ace56blaa

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Disappointed in Angela Rayner’s behaviour today, and that’s speaking at someone who voted for her for deputy leader 

I mean at this point, when the Tories are shitting on every single respect of a democratic parliament, breaking international law, lying without consequence, refusing to give notice on policies until their hands were forced. 

Doing despicable things like condemning migrants for simply trying to live a better life and taking every turn this week to make addresses to the public to simply shame andy burnham.

I think it's about time someone in parliament said it. The tories are scum right now. It doesn't matter if some are not as bad. The current government are so harmful and damaging and have no regard for the rule of law and decency, they have no interest in governing their people. If you are contributing to this horrible state and lying about being for the interests of your constituents. Once in a while you deserve to be called scum

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fuzzy Afro Community Regular

Fuzzy Afro

Posted
Posted
Just now, steviewevie said:

calling tory scum? Can't see anything wrong with that.

You don't call an honourable member "scum" in the house of commons. It's incredibly poor behaviour and something I'd expect from far left/far right weirdos and not the deputy leader of the party. It undermines the centrist approach of Starmer and is unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...