When will this shit end?

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 minute ago, jparx said:

I also can't see sense in this while the football is on. Is that not begging for trouble? Surely pubs need a band on showing the games, or a very strict and policed limit of the numbers allowed in?

Aye. They've flushed their strategy down the toilet to protect that cretin. Blood on their hands.

Well that’s exactly what will happen, it’s just going to be outside with social distanced seating. 

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Well that’s exactly what will happen, it’s just going to be outside with social distanced seating. 

and the brits will ignore it ... just like they do in supermarkets at the moment 

[Sasperella]

23 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

This is the pub story (originally in FT). Surely this is all about boosting government approval ratings now?

Pubs in England 'could reopen on 22 June'

Getty ImagesCopyright: Getty Images

June 22 is the target date identified by ministers for pubs and restaurants to reopen outdoors in England, the Financial Times (FT) reports, nearly two weeks earlier than previously planned.

The reported plans are part of an effort to get the economy moving again and to save millions of jobs in the hospitality sector. The date has not yet been signed off but will be discussed in a cabinet meeting on Tuesday, the FT says.

Half a dozen ministers - dubbed the "save summer six" - are spearheading the push for an earlier reopening. The hospitality sector had not been due to open until July 4.

Business Secretary Alok Sharma is reportedly pushing for the 2m (6ft) social distancing rule to be cut to 1m, to make reopening more commercially viable.

So, does this mean we can go to the pub crowded with people but only sit with members of one other household?

[jparx]

6 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Well that’s exactly what will happen, it’s just going to be outside with social distanced seating. 

For definite on the football? Plenty of pubs have screens outside, and those without will probably install one...

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Just now, jparx said:

For definite on the football? Plenty of pubs have screens outside, and those without will probably install one...

I don’t know about the football, but there will naturally be a limit on capacity due to the restrictions 

[jparx]

2 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I don’t know about the football, but there will naturally be a limit on capacity due to the restrictions 

Hmmm. I can already see the scenes of loads of pissed up fans celebrating and hugging together.

[Sasperella]

29 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

I’m telling you now. If a second wave hits things are about to get very very very ugly.

The right wing press will finally have a scapegoat to blame COVID on which isn’t Boris and isn’t China.

Its unlikely we will lock down again - it will probably just be a case of “living with the virus”. 
 

I honestly think 2020 is about to be totally and utterly written off in ways that we can’t even imagine. I feel like society is about to implode  

Sigh yes, I agree. I went to the Glasgow protest but sat right at the edge of the park with my mask on. I was expecting it to be hard to find a spot because I'd assumed everyone would be trying to sit/stand away from others. That wasn't the case...

Finally watched Charlie Brooker's antiviral wipe last night. Hilarious as always obviously, but it's a bit weird watching it a few weeks later than it aired.  At some point he says, "in tv shows this sort of shit usually ends with lotting and destruction , and thats hasnt happened yet..."

What with this, Nathan Barley and the story about Cameron and the pig, Brooker creeps me out... (I love him all the same though)

[fatyeti24]

4 minutes ago, jparx said:

For definite on the football? Plenty of pubs have screens outside, and those without will probably install one...

Pubs that show football are generally the ones I avoid.  I like football, but I'm strangely snobbish in this regard.

I think I'll stick to my garden for the forseeable.

Edited June 8, 2020 by fatyeti24

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

I don’t really get the big deal anyway, if we can open more things up (outside, with social distancing) then surely we’re spreading people around more and giving them more choice?

Will the people in the pubs not also have been at the beaches when everyone was complaining about those? 

[jparx]

3 minutes ago, fatyeti24 said:

Pubs that show football are generally the ones I avoid.  I like football, but I'm starngely snobbish in this regard.

I think I'll stick to my garden for the forseable.

Ha, agreed. I like football but don't like football fans. That's probably how I'd put it.

 

[squirrelarmy]

Based on current government logic I think they will allow pubs and restaurants to reopen but require us to wear masks at all times when visiting one. 
 

I can’t see any problem with that solution /s

Edited June 8, 2020 by squirrelarmy

[Ozanne]

34 minutes ago, jparx said:

I also can't see sense in this while the football is on. Is that not begging for trouble? Surely pubs need a band on showing the games, or a very strict and policed limit of the numbers allowed in?

Aye. They've flushed their strategy down the toilet to protect that cretin. Blood on their hands.

The Gov wanted all Premier League games on TV some free to air so people would watch the games at home and not go out. So why now have pubs open at the same time, well we know why. 

[Ozanne]

24 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I don’t really get the big deal anyway, if we can open more things up (outside, with social distancing) then surely we’re spreading people around more and giving them more choice?

Will the people in the pubs not also have been at the beaches when everyone was complaining about those? 

It’s the point about government goal posts being moved once again, goal posts they put up themselves. They have no authority by constantly changing things. If they say 4th July originally for opening of pubs then just stick to it. It’s also perception to constantly change their plan gives off the perception that they don’t know what they are doing. 
 

It’s also a bit different a pub opening to being on the beach. More people out getting drunk meaning less close attention to social distancing. 

[zahidf]

They have unofficially given up on a second lockdown and are just going to cope with the second wave by hoping people stay at home by themselves or live with the risks of getting it. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

They have unofficially given up on a second lockdown and are just going to cope with the second wave by hoping people stay at home by themselves or live with the risks of getting it. 

There is a big difference between ‘given up’ and gradual loosening. If they’d given up I’d be going to Glastonbury and sonar in a few weeks and seeing one of my best mates get married next weekend, I’d also be back working in my office in London, but I’m not.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

10 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It’s the point about government goal posts being moved once again, goal posts they put up themselves. They have no authority by constantly changing things. If they say 4th July originally for opening of pubs then just stick to it. It’s also perception to constantly change their plan gives off the perception that they don’t know what they are doing. 
 

It’s also a bit different a pub opening to being on the beach. More people out getting drunk meaning less close attention to social distancing. 

I get that, they also said they could slow any of the stages down if necessary, so might the same not apply anyway in the other direction?

Apart from one report (out of about three or four separate reports that all five different numbers) that’s said the NW R was at 1.01, there isn’t any evidence to suggest what has been relaxed so far has caused an issue, cases are still dropping. All the other reports put the R below one everywhere. 

There were reports a couple or weeks ago that the R in Brighton went to 1.70 because they had 5 new cases, but then it was back down again. One single report with a regional R at 1.01 own or evidence of anything yet, especially when all the evidence points the other way.

There is also the question of these 3.5m jobs in the hospitality industry, they obviously feel its with bringing it all forward one week to help them.

[zahidf]

8 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

There is a big difference between ‘given up’ and gradual loosening. If they’d given up I’d be going to Glastonbury and sonar in a few weeks and seeing one of my best mates get married next weekend, I’d also be back working in my office in London, but I’m not.

Well not really, you cant set up live tours in a few weeks!

Gradually loosening with a view that they wont reimpose a second lockdown and will move towards a 'get back to normal life' advices

[Toilet Duck]

1 hour ago, Cream Soda said:

Do you think there could be any detrimental effect to wearing masks? I'm sure lots of people won't wash them enough for example.  Could that make the issue worse?

So, there are a few arguments against mask wearing. The first and most prominent is that they install a false sense of security in the wearer and encourage risky behaviour as well as abandoning of social distancing and hand hygiene. The most cited reasoning for this is the use of body armour in contact sports (where injuries actually increase with the use of protective gear). Personally, I don't think adrenalin-fuelled activities are a reasonable proxy for what people will do during their everyday lives, but there you go, that's among the excuses being held up. The same argument was used for crash helmets and motorcycle/bike use, condoms during the early stages of the HIV epidemic and even seatbelts in cars. Yes, some people will engage in risky behaviour, but some people always will. There isn't any evidence of population level increases in risk taking when precautionary safety measures are introduced. So, I think it's a weak argument. Reinforcing that they are an addition to hand hygiene and social distancing and not a replacement for them is not a difficult message to get across. 

The next argument against them is that PPE is in short supply for frontline workers. This too doesn't wash as the type of protection required by people exposed to large amounts of the virus on a regular basis is entirely different to the types of face coverings required for source control. There's no need for everyone to be wearing respirator masks on public transport and in shops, a simple multi-layered mask will do (cotton on the inside for comfort, moisture-repellent on the outside to keep the droplets you exhale in...and I completely agree that respirators etc should be for frontline workers). These different types of masks have been conflated and to my mind the advice against mask wearing early on was to prevent panic buying of hospital-grade masks so they could be preserved for those that really needed this type. 

The last argument against them is that they can be used incorrectly and can increase infection. This is true, but it is more important when you are wearing a mask to protect yourself, rather than when you are wearing one to protect others (if you contaminate yourself with your own virus, it's not going to make that much difference). Touching surfaces, touching your face etc can all theoretically still get you infected, but if everyone is wearing a mask, then the chances of you touching something and transferring virus to your face are a whole lot lower (since there is increased source control through everyone wearing a mask). Reusable masks require a routine. You wear it then you wash it. If you go to the gym every day, I doubt you pop on the same sweaty gear the next day. So, I think it's a bit insulting to suggest that people can't get their head around how to use one. 

Basically, I see source control by mask wearing in confined spaces as the socially responsible thing to do. If around 70% of people wear even poorly constructed face coverings, it's sufficient to eradicate the virus

Edit: Sorry, read that back and it could have been misunderstood...for clarity, I wasn't suggesting that you were being insulting! The suggestion was that those who might promote their use don't think that we can figure out how to correctly use one! 😀

Edited June 8, 2020 by Toilet Duck

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Well not really, you cant set up live tours in a few weeks!

Gradually loosening with a view that they wont reimpose a second lockdown and will move towards a 'get back to normal life' advices

When can you attend live tours? 

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

When can you attend live tours? 

The rumours are that fans will be let into football games in sept. So then onwards maybe!

[Cream Soda]

6 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Reusable masks require a routine. You wear it then you wash it. If you go to the gym every day, I doubt you pop on the same sweaty gear the next day. So, I think it's a bit insulting to suggest that people can't get their head around how to use one.

You are such a wealth of info on here, thanks for sharing your knowledge.  I don't doubt people wouldn't understand how to use one but I do think there are some scruffy buggers out there who just wouldn't care.  The sort of people who don't wash their hands after using the toilet in the pub and walk off without a care in the world.  I suppose we'd just have to hope they were in the minority and so wouldn't have too much of a negative effect.

[Ozanne]

5 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I get that, they also said they could slow any of the stages down if necessary, so might the same not apply anyway in the other direction?

Apart from one report (out of about three or four separate reports that all five different numbers) that’s said the NW R was at 1.01, there isn’t any evidence to suggest what has been relaxed so far has caused an issue, cases are still dropping. All the other reports put the R below one everywhere. 

There were reports a couple or weeks ago that the R in Brighton went to 1.70 because they had 5 new cases, but then it was back down again. One single report with a regional R at 1.01 own or evidence of anything yet, especially when all the evidence points the other way.

There is also the question of these 3.5m jobs in the hospitality industry, they obviously feel its with bringing it all forward one week to help them.

They said repeatedly over the past few weeks that they are opening things up cautiously and very slowly. To then go and open pubs 2 weeks before their initial deadline is hardly cautiously. It’s not hard to just wait and stick to their first measures. Stick to the plan, go slowly and wait 2 weeks for non-retail stores to open then we can see what impact that is happening. It’s 2 weeks by the way not 1.

 

Besides the furlough scheme is in place along with bounce back loans, CBILS or CLBILS (depending on size of the business) which are providing support. Many businesses I’ve seen saying that whilst requirements in venues are so tight and furlough is available it’s better for the businesses to stay shut. That’s from actual businesses, are they wrong?

[Toilet Duck]

Just now, Cream Soda said:

You are such a wealth of info on here, thanks for sharing your knowledge.  I don't doubt people wouldn't understand how to use one but I do think there are some scruffy buggers out there who just wouldn't care.  The sort of people who don't wash their hands after using the toilet in the pub and walk off without a care in the world.  I suppose we'd just have to hope they were in the minority and so wouldn't have too much of a negative effect.

We can have 30-40% "scruffy buggers" and it'll still make huge difference! I think things will change a bit as they become mandatory in a coupe of weeks . We are still sticking to "guidance" in Ireland, but I expect that to change too as things start to open up a bit more. 

[Cream Soda]

1 minute ago, Toilet Duck said:

We can have 30-40% "scruffy buggers" and it'll still make huge difference! I think things will change a bit as they become mandatory in a coupe of weeks . We are still sticking to "guidance" in Ireland, but I expect that to change too as things start to open up a bit more. 

Do you think they will become mandatory in all indoor spaces eventually?  (Shops, pubs, etc?)  And would it have to stay that way until there is a vaccine?

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

5 minutes ago, zahidf said:

The rumours are that fans will be let into football games in sept. So then onwards maybe!

That’s as maybe, I’d be amazed if that meant full capacity though. We can’t simultaneously be worried that Glasto won’t go ahead next year but also he abandoning the lockdown.