Will the 2021 festival go ahead?

[eFestivals]

8 hours ago, danbailey80 said:

Popped in. It's all a bit unpleasant in here. Shame. Bye. Will try again tomorrow. 

oh c'mon, there's naff all unpleasant about asking Matt for his source. People get asked for their sources here every day.

He said the govt had made it clear festivals weren't happening until everyone had been vaccinated. If the govt have made that clear there should be a source.

Turns out he was making it up, but at least that's now clear and people aren't believing his fake news.

We can go back to everyone's guesses again.

Edited January 14, 2021 by eFestivals

[gazzared]

11 hours ago, Matt42 said:

I have it on good authority events with capacities way lower than Glastonbury are going on with this approach.

Who's authority?

[Paul ™]

8 hours ago, Suprefan said:

It ends up becoming the same legal scenario as last year, you dont cancel until the government says so. Nobody will say a word until that happens. Insurance pay outs yet again.

As Neil has said, no one has cancellation cover for Covid and last year most didn't get any pay outs either...

All I've heard is more events are being organised, companies are going ahead with planning for a summer start up. More events are going on sale soon again and as long as vaccinations go to plan (yes I know) then we should be good to go for at my best guess..July.

[Paul ™]

8 hours ago, Suprefan said:

It ends up becoming the same legal scenario as last year, you dont cancel until the government says so. Nobody will say a word until that happens. Insurance pay outs yet again.

Oops double post

Edited January 14, 2021 by Paul ™

[Suprefan]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

except no one has insurance for covid cancellation for this year (and plenty of insurers haven't paid out on last year).

theyre still not going to pull the trigger early til bojo says otherwise though.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

theyre still not going to pull the trigger early til bojo says otherwise though.

there won't be that sort of trigger pulling this year, as within current circumstances (including tiers) the vast majority of festivals aren't able to go ahead (only small ones, within the crowd limits they've set [currently <2,000, I think] and with anti-covid measures).

From the point of view of the restrictions all festivals are off until the govt says they're on, as opposed to last year where they were all on until the govt said they were off.

Festivals will pull the trigger this year based on their personal circumstances for when they feel pushing ahead isn't viable.

[aj6658]

19 hours ago, Matt42 said:

Yeah if I could put on a scale what the likelihood is of the festival I’d honestly put it at 0%. I think the events industry is going to see another year off. If things continue as they are I think we will be out of the woods by October 2021.

This summer I could see travel, pubs, small gatherings, and probably sporting events going ahead - but mass 200,000 gatherings will not go ahead.

Aye I agree. 

 

I see the summer where restrictions are being lifted and we will be allowed to go in small groups to the pub e.c.t (similar to 2020 summer but a bit lighter) and by the end of the year we should be restriction free

[Ozanne]

21 minutes ago, aj6658 said:

Aye I agree. 

 

I see the summer where restrictions are being lifted and we will be allowed to go in small groups to the pub e.c.t (similar to 2020 summer but a bit lighter) and by the end of the year we should be restriction free

If anything I could see a loose summer for restrictions then some small restrictions being brought back for next winter, just in case. 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

If anything I could see a loose summer for restrictions then some small restrictions being brought back for next winter, just in case. 

Based on what the govt has done so far, that seems the most likely.

Although I'm starting to worry that the govt will suddenly take a cautious approach at the end when it's been anything but cautious so far. 

[gooner1990]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Festivals will pull the trigger this year based on their personal circumstances for when they feel pushing ahead isn't viable.

I'm sure each festival will have their own cut off date already decided as to whether they go ahead or not.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Yeah, this year is the opposite of last year, last year it was a case of plough ahead until the government pulled the rug out, even though everyone knew it wasn’t happening. This year it’s don’t do anything and hold out as long as possible in the hope the Government give the go ahead or some clarity. Contrary to what Matt was claiming they’ve given absolutely no clarity at all, which is understandable because they can’t yet. If we knew for sure they couldn’t go ahead without everyone being vaccinated at least we’d know where we all are and could get on with talking about 2022!

[eFestivals]

34 minutes ago, gooner1990 said:

I'm sure each festival will have their own cut off date already decided as to whether they go ahead or not.

yep, but quite naturally, they'll all be as late as possible as the circumstances of each particular festival allows.

And I think that'll mean later cancellations (if they have to cancel) this year for many, as they should have been able to arrange stuff without incurring costs (as everyone knows cancellation is a huge possibility), plus we all know that the situation should hugely improve as the vaccine gets rolled out.

[FakeEmpire]

Declan McKenna has cancelled Feb-May tour but is holding off announcing new dates until it's clear when they can go ahead. Just shows the uncertainty in the live music sector at the moment.  Despite promises of "back to normal by Spring / Easter / the end of the Daffodil season / mid to late Spring / the great British Summer we can all enjoy", nobody has a clue when these things are likely to resume.
 

 

[Leyrulion]

Just now, FakeEmpire said:

Despite promises of "back to normal

Also everyone has different definitions of what normality might be achieved by those dates. No social distancing or hospitality open or it not being illegal to sit on a park bench.

[FakeEmpire]

3 minutes ago, Leyrulion said:

Also everyone has different definitions of what normality might be achieved by those dates. No social distancing or hospitality open or it not being illegal to sit on a park bench.

Quite and they shouldn't. Back to normal should only mean back to how things were before the Pandemic. It's why politicians should be more careful using that term. Otherwise what we're actually discussing is a return to doing some things but not in the normal way.

It's quite clear that what we remember as "normal" is further off than they have indicated. 

[kalifire]

Over here they use the term 'COVID-normal'. That's to say, normal but with some basic restrictions in place until vaccination has been sufficiently rolled out (something they haven't addressed yet).

COVID-normal restrictions still include masks on public transport and in shopping centres/supermarkets, and social distancing where possible. Practically speaking, most people adhere to social distancing if they can but don't really avoid areas where they can't. Most people are wearing masks where they're supposed to. It's accepted that big events simply can't happen until the vaccination process is close to complete.

[gooner1990]

3 minutes ago, kalifire said:

Most people are wearing masks where they're supposed to. 

Seems Australians are more compliant than British people!

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

31 minutes ago, FakeEmpire said:

Quite and they shouldn't. Back to normal should only mean back to how things were before the Pandemic. It's why politicians should be more careful using that term. Otherwise what we're actually discussing is a return to doing some things but not in the normal way.

It's quite clear that what we remember as "normal" is further off than they have indicated. 

A lot of people have come to regard the current situation as normal, and that to return to the old normal we have to hit some absolute extremes like everyone vaccinated etc.

I think it’s easy to forget that nobody wants these restrictions the government included, and Covid also isn’t going anywhere in the long term. There will come a point when it’s deemed suitable to return to normal as we know it in the old way. There isn’t any reason not to at the very earliest opportunity, whenever that may be.

I suppose what I’m saying is if one day it’s deemed ok to return to normal, well then we can. No need to keep restrictions for the fun of it, and because it’s what everyone is used to. If the virus disappeared tomorrow we wouldn’t carry on social distancing ‘just in case’.  

Edited January 14, 2021 by Deaf Nobby Burton

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, gooner1990 said:

Seems Australians are more compliant than British people!

or just sold the message in a different manner !!  

[gooner1990]

Just now, crazyfool1 said:

or just sold the message in a different manner !!  

Possibly, but I do think there is that thing where some British people just won't/don't like/can't be bothered to comply with something.  

I only have to look out of my window to see the amount of cars driving past to see that. 

[kalifire]

1 minute ago, gooner1990 said:

Seems Australians are more compliant than British people!

There's been less fart-arsing around here. The restrictions were simple, clear and brought in early. They've been target rather than date driven, and presented as a series of steps leading to COVID-normal. I have to hand it to the State government where I live, for documents like this: Victoria-roadmap-Melbourne-Metro_0.pdf

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, gooner1990 said:

Possibly, but I do think there is that thing where some British people just won't/don't like/can't be bothered to comply with something.  

I only have to look out of my window to see the amount of cars driving past to see that. 

we arent so many generations away from Australians .....

Edited January 14, 2021 by crazyfool1

[gooner1990]

Just now, kalifire said:

There's been less fart-arsing around here. The restrictions were simple, clear and brought in early. They've been target rather than date driven, and presented as a series of steps leading to COVID-normal. I have to hand it to the State government where I live, for documents like this: Victoria-roadmap-Melbourne-Metro_0.pdf

That has also been some of the problem, that here there has been too much confusion as to what is and isn't allowed. I would have preferred much more simple guidlines myself so there was no muddy waters.

[kalifire]

2 minutes ago, gooner1990 said:

That has also been some of the problem, that here there has been too much confusion as to what is and isn't allowed. I would have preferred much more simple guidlines myself so there was no muddy waters.

Part of the issue in the UK is that it's being driven nationally. Australia largely devolved the issue - in terms of day to day living - to the State and Territory governments, who in turn often ran parallel restrictions for metro and regional areas. That decentralisation made it easy to know who to listen to and easy to pay no attention to whatever other restrictions were happening in other parts of the country. The national leaders didn't butt in to any of that and concentrated on budgetary and international border stuff.

The UK can't do that because it's too small and not enough power is devolved to local councils, so in maintaining different level of restrictions for different parts of the country, they've sewn confusion and frustration, all far too late in the process. Now they're stuck in a perpetual loop of damage limitation, with nobody happy.

Anyway - I feel I'm diverting the point of this thread!

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 minute ago, kalifire said:

Part of the issue in the UK is that it's being driven nationally. Australia largely devolved the issue - in terms of day to day living - to the State and Territory governments, who in turn often ran parallel restrictions for metro and regional areas. That decentralisation made it easy to know who to listen to and easy to pay no attention to whatever other restrictions were happening in other parts of the country. The national leaders didn't butt in to any of that and concentrated on budgetary and international border stuff.

The UK can't do that because it's too small and not enough power is devolved to local councils, so in maintaining different level of restrictions for different parts of the country, they've sewn confusion and frustration, all far too late in the process. Now they're stuck in a perpetual loop of damage limitation, with nobody happy.

Anyway - I feel I'm diverting the point of this thread!

Having visited Australia a lot on holiday, would you say as well that their general approach to health and safety and protecting its citizens has helped?

By that I mean, they were first to ban cigarette branding on boxes, moving gambling machines out of pubs, bottle shops, strict drinking laws, daylight saving rules etc.

I’ve no idea, just hypothesising, but I’ve always been shocked how strict the rules are there compared to the U.K. and a think a lot of people aren’t aware of that.