Last orders: Boris puts 10pm curfew on pubs and restaurants - commencing Thursday 24th September

As usual they're directing those to make decisions with regards to the workplace that haven't the power to make those decisions, that being the workforce. The erosion of trade union power and lack of representation mean that workers' health depends on the ability and willingness of the company to provide safe measures.
 
That is a good point CtC, without legislation it puts people at the mercy of their employer, particularly galling if you are older or vulnerable in some other way.

The point you raise FC about stiffer penalties and enforcement only works if you have a police force to actually enforce the legislation, which we are sadly lacking.
 
As usual they're directing those to make decisions with regards to the workplace that haven't the power to make those decisions, that being the workforce. The erosion of trade union power and lack of representation mean that workers' health depends on the ability and willingness of the company to provide safe measures.

Spot on
Leaders should be told to send their people home if they can work from home
That’s what I’ll be doing this morning
 
I know there is probably a need for a balancing act but this just seems non-sensical. You either need to protect the NHS and population, or you need to keep the economy ticking over.

I can't see an hours less drinking making any difference to those who are going out and meeting mates and flouting the social distance rules anyway.

Telling people to work from home a month after telling them to get back in to the office seems a bit stupid too, which is it?

Surely most of the spikes are from schools reopening? This must have thousands and thousands more social interactions than pubs?

Either close the schools and enforce work from home to limit the spread and protect the population.

Or close pubs, restaurants, cafes, gyms etc. that are by no means essential and damages the economy further.

This seems like an almost pointless halfway house to look like they are doing something.

I'd also add that if a much stricter lockdown comes into force I can see a lot of people mutinying against it. People have had enough of flip-flopping muddied decision making, politicians flouting the rules and going unpunished and the still perceived 'it's not much of a threat'.

They really have handled the entire thing as a complete and utter cluster fcuk since February.

I'm at a loss as to where we go from here.

Unfortunately I think BoJo and his cabinet of the dammed have no clear idea either.
 
Whilst I understand it, I can see it being counter productive and having the opposite effect, at present some people go out early, others go out late if you remove one of those options you’re going to have more people in the same place at the same time which is surely what any legislation should try and avoid ?
 
Whilst I understand it, I can see it being counter productive and having the opposite effect, at present some people go out early or go out late if you remove one of those options you’re going to have more people in the same place at the same time which is surely what any legislation should try and avoid ?

I agree Mary, it just seems to be an announcement that makes it looks like they are trying to do something rather than any real substance.

I've not been out for about six weeks or so, but other than the Weatherspoons, most pubs in Billingham seemed to be operating table service via an App and closing at 2200 anyway.
 
Time to get the chequebook out again Rishi 👍

You can’t tell people to go back to work whilst simultaneously stopping them from working or restricting their hours.

Just furlough me for six months and be done with it otherwise you will be paying benefits to my ex and son for the next 5 years until my industry recovers.
 
Last edited:
I agree Mary, it just seems to be an announcement that makes it looks like they are trying to do something rather than any real substance.

I've not been out for about six weeks or so, but other than the Weatherspoons, most pubs in Billingham seemed to be operating table service via an App and closing at 2200 anyway.

The real story is surely ‘work from home if you can’
Of course it is hidden by last nights 10.00 pm curfew because it directly contradicts what ministers have being saying for weeks.
 
This is a token gesture which will have little effect, as people will adjust their habits accordingly, they will just go out an hour or two early, I mean come on, you can get a drink at 9am if you want.
 
So the rule of six remains in place. People are going to be advised to work from home but those that can probably already still are. And we are closing pubs a bit early. I feel safe now.
 
I’m hoping it’s these are the measures and we will review after two weeks and if people aren’t complying move to a full lockdown.
 
I know there is probably a need for a balancing act but this just seems non-sensical. You either need to protect the NHS and population, or you need to keep the economy ticking over.

I can't see an hours less drinking making any difference to those who are going out and meeting mates and flouting the social distance rules anyway.

Telling people to work from home a month after telling them to get back in to the office seems a bit stupid too, which is it?

Surely most of the spikes are from schools reopening? This must have thousands and thousands more social interactions than pubs?

Either close the schools and enforce work from home to limit the spread and protect the population.

Or close pubs, restaurants, cafes, gyms etc. that are by no means essential and damages the economy further.

This seems like an almost pointless halfway house to look like they are doing something.

I'd also add that if a much stricter lockdown comes into force I can see a lot of people mutinying against it. People have had enough of flip-flopping muddied decision making, politicians flouting the rules and going unpunished and the still perceived 'it's not much of a threat'.

They really have handled the entire thing as a complete and utter cluster fcuk since February.

I'm at a loss as to where we go from here.

Unfortunately I think BoJo and his cabinet of the dammed have no clear idea either.

"Surely most of the spikes are from schools reopening? This must have thousands and thousands more social interactions than pubs? "

I think this is your answer and a general lack of compliance wrt following the rules rather than schools
 

Attachments

  • TELEMMGLPICT000233725784_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqpVlberWd9EgFPZtcLiMQfyf2A9a6I9YchsjMeADBa08.jpeg
    TELEMMGLPICT000233725784_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqpVlberWd9EgFPZtcLiMQfyf2A9a6I9YchsjMeADBa08.jpeg
    281.7 KB · Views: 13
I think at the least they should ban households mixing.

I don't know, that to me has more negative implications on families and personal mental well being than closing parks, beaches, gyms, restaurants and pubs. It is hard on separated families, people who rely on relatives, couples who live in two homes etc. I think people have more of a 'right' to social interactions with family and friends than they do to eat out or get lashed up, or go to the gym or play five-a-side etc.

If I can't see my sister or son who lives with his mum, but everyone can go on the p155 and play footie together, that seems a tad unfair.

Is there any data from a reliable track and trace that shows where new cases arise from interactions most regularly?

You see the odd story about one restaurant or one house party where x number of attendees test positive, but is this the norm or a major contributor? Or is it just people going shopping to travelling on buses etc?
 
I don't know, that to me has more negative implications on families and personal mental well being than closing parks, beaches, gyms, restaurants and pubs. It is hard on separated families, people who rely on relatives, couples who live in two homes etc. I think people have more of a 'right' to social interactions with family and friends than they do to eat out or get lashed up, or go to the gym or play five-a-side etc.

If I can't see my sister or son who lives with his mum, but everyone can go on the p155 and play footie together, that seems a tad unfair.

Is there any data from a reliable track and trace that shows where new cases arise from interactions most regularly?

You see the odd story about one restaurant or one house party where x number of attendees test positive, but is this the norm or a major contributor? Or is it just people going shopping to travelling on buses etc?
It's hard to argue with that. I guess these measures just seem half ars*d when now is the time to act.
 
Back
Top