Connections 322 - Sunday 28 April
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
10Pm Closing. What Is The Evidence ?
// Boris Johnson has been challenged to publish the scientific evidence behind the 10pm closing time for English pubs ahead of a vote by MPs next week. Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said the public "deserved to know" the basis for the restriction and if it could not be justified the rule must be reviewed. //
It is unlikely the Government will supply any compelling evidence in support of the measure (probably because none exists).
It is also unlikely that the Conservative new recruits will rebel and the vote will go with the Government.
But it is an unpopular diktat. Are they taking the mandate of the electors for granted, and risk becoming unpopular ?
It is unlikely the Government will supply any compelling evidence in support of the measure (probably because none exists).
It is also unlikely that the Conservative new recruits will rebel and the vote will go with the Government.
But it is an unpopular diktat. Are they taking the mandate of the electors for granted, and risk becoming unpopular ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Sunk. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The police were very supportive of their town centre night "life", even given the grief it gave them.
It never used to be anywhere near that bad. Something's gone very wrong somewhere.
But to the topic at hand - if you see that behaviour, and then imagine crossing it with Covid, it's clear why they're trying curb it.
It never used to be anywhere near that bad. Something's gone very wrong somewhere.
But to the topic at hand - if you see that behaviour, and then imagine crossing it with Covid, it's clear why they're trying curb it.
The evidence was to be seen in Liverpool the other weekend, no mater whether the pubs closed at 10pm or 11 pm, when drunken idiots were demonstrating in the streets as they left the pubs at 10pm. When you get this sort of stupidity then the government will only see this being an even bigger risk of increasing the infection rate, so if they now close the pubs completely, they only have themselves to blame, and the complete destruction of this industry.
//Off course pubs will suffer but hopefuly a few week's shut will help keep infection's down//
Well, the 5% that are transmitted in hospitality venues might. You need to consider two things:
1. Why, when pubs and restaurants have been open since 4th July, are you blaming them fairly and squarely for the increase in infections that has been evident since the end of September?
2. Have you asked yourself why that increase has occurred since the 10pm curfew was imposed?
You seem to have no consideration for the collateral damage that closing down businesses and services on a whim inflicts. Jourdain has explained just one aspect, above. There are many, many more. And you need to accept, even if you don't understand, that this virus will spread. It will spread whether or not the pubs are open; it will spread whether or not schools are open; it will spread. If you don't like that you need to stay indoors.
Well, the 5% that are transmitted in hospitality venues might. You need to consider two things:
1. Why, when pubs and restaurants have been open since 4th July, are you blaming them fairly and squarely for the increase in infections that has been evident since the end of September?
2. Have you asked yourself why that increase has occurred since the 10pm curfew was imposed?
You seem to have no consideration for the collateral damage that closing down businesses and services on a whim inflicts. Jourdain has explained just one aspect, above. There are many, many more. And you need to accept, even if you don't understand, that this virus will spread. It will spread whether or not the pubs are open; it will spread whether or not schools are open; it will spread. If you don't like that you need to stay indoors.
// It will spread whether or not the pubs are open; it will spread whether or not schools are open; it will spread.//
it will spread in the streets - it will spread on the beaches and the factories - - I will spread it on bread !
on and on it will go - maiming, killing and mutilating men women and children of all colours and hues
there is nothing nothing you can do tos top it
we will all DDDIIIIIIEEEEEEE
well that is public health over the last 200 put back in its box
must be AB near midnight .....
it will spread in the streets - it will spread on the beaches and the factories - - I will spread it on bread !
on and on it will go - maiming, killing and mutilating men women and children of all colours and hues
there is nothing nothing you can do tos top it
we will all DDDIIIIIIEEEEEEE
well that is public health over the last 200 put back in its box
must be AB near midnight .....
A link worth reading. (It doesn't come to any firm conclusions but it analyses the arguments well):
https:/
https:/
//we will all DDDIIIIIIEEEEEEE//
We will eventually, Peter, but not many of us will die from Covid.
In September there were 117,391 new infections (so we're told). In the same month there were 642 deaths (0.5% of those we believe were infected). In the same months around 57,000 people dies from all causes so Covid accounted for 1.1% of all deaths. Yes, I know there's a lag between becoming infected and death. I'm just putting the numbers into some sort of perspective.
The vast majority of people who contract it experience few if any symptoms. Many people who test positive don't even know they have it. The overwhelming majority of people who become infected survive. So we're not all going to die (of Covid, at any rate) and I've never said that we would. I've only ever said that it will spread - and it seems I'm being proved right.
Nineteen out of twenty areas currently under local restrictions have seen an increase in infections - some of those increases quite dramatic. So it will spread. That's all I've ever said, apart from suggesting that the "cure" is far worse than the disease. Thankfully there are a few more voices among people who are likely to be listened to now spouting a similar opinion so we may at some time in the future escape from this lunacy before we all do die (of something else).
We will eventually, Peter, but not many of us will die from Covid.
In September there were 117,391 new infections (so we're told). In the same month there were 642 deaths (0.5% of those we believe were infected). In the same months around 57,000 people dies from all causes so Covid accounted for 1.1% of all deaths. Yes, I know there's a lag between becoming infected and death. I'm just putting the numbers into some sort of perspective.
The vast majority of people who contract it experience few if any symptoms. Many people who test positive don't even know they have it. The overwhelming majority of people who become infected survive. So we're not all going to die (of Covid, at any rate) and I've never said that we would. I've only ever said that it will spread - and it seems I'm being proved right.
Nineteen out of twenty areas currently under local restrictions have seen an increase in infections - some of those increases quite dramatic. So it will spread. That's all I've ever said, apart from suggesting that the "cure" is far worse than the disease. Thankfully there are a few more voices among people who are likely to be listened to now spouting a similar opinion so we may at some time in the future escape from this lunacy before we all do die (of something else).
You’ve got to admire New judge for his perseverance and his patience. Repeatedly stating facts and figures to explain to the fearful and the ignorant the circumstances of COVID-19 and the consequences therefore experienced. Unfortunately instead of singing to the choir, he is spitting into the wind. There are those that will not hear, will not see, will not even consider an opinion that conflicts with their own. Well done NJ. Keep on keeping on. Some of us value your input.
Infections predict hospital admissions
Hospital admissions predict intensive care cases
Intensive care cases predict deaths
We're running behind Paris and France again. Here's where they're at:
https:/
* Covid-19 patients now fill 40% of all intensive care unit beds in the Paris region
* As of Tuesday night, there were 1,426 patients being treated in intensive care across France. That compares with only 420 patients a month ago.
Hospital admissions predict intensive care cases
Intensive care cases predict deaths
We're running behind Paris and France again. Here's where they're at:
https:/
* Covid-19 patients now fill 40% of all intensive care unit beds in the Paris region
* As of Tuesday night, there were 1,426 patients being treated in intensive care across France. That compares with only 420 patients a month ago.
// Haven't you noticed Parliament is not getting a say? //
Yes, there have been some stern rebukes for the Government's approach from the Speaker. Part of the reason Parliament has not got a say is arguably its own fault, as a lot of this is due to powers they handed Government in the Coronavirus Act earlier this year. I should say that, at the time (late March/early April), I commended the speed in which this was rushed through, and the goodwill between parties to see it done quickly, but in retrospect it was clearly forced through too quickly, and the six-month refresh vote should have been established as a six-month hard time limit, and only "renewed" if necessary by passing a second, equivalent Act.
Also -- I'm wary of dragging this into the debate, but it *is* sadly relevant -- I'd suggest that Johnson's contempt for Parliament stems from Cummings and is significantly motivated/amplified by the Brexit "scuffles" (understatement). Parliament did not necessarily cover itself in glory in the last few years (also an understatement), but if one of the outcomes of that period has been to encourage Government to avoid as much Parliamentary scrutiny as possible then it would be a disaster for UK democracy as it's meant to work.
Yes, there have been some stern rebukes for the Government's approach from the Speaker. Part of the reason Parliament has not got a say is arguably its own fault, as a lot of this is due to powers they handed Government in the Coronavirus Act earlier this year. I should say that, at the time (late March/early April), I commended the speed in which this was rushed through, and the goodwill between parties to see it done quickly, but in retrospect it was clearly forced through too quickly, and the six-month refresh vote should have been established as a six-month hard time limit, and only "renewed" if necessary by passing a second, equivalent Act.
Also -- I'm wary of dragging this into the debate, but it *is* sadly relevant -- I'd suggest that Johnson's contempt for Parliament stems from Cummings and is significantly motivated/amplified by the Brexit "scuffles" (understatement). Parliament did not necessarily cover itself in glory in the last few years (also an understatement), but if one of the outcomes of that period has been to encourage Government to avoid as much Parliamentary scrutiny as possible then it would be a disaster for UK democracy as it's meant to work.
They are trying to restrict the amount of time people come into contact with each other, which is fair enough. The problem is that it's a measure devised by people that don't understand 'pub culture'.
All that's happening is that people are going out earlier and then having a big street party when they all get thrown out everywhere dunk at 10 pm on the dot.
They need to rethink it.
All that's happening is that people are going out earlier and then having a big street party when they all get thrown out everywhere dunk at 10 pm on the dot.
They need to rethink it.
I think this is spreading because people are not abiding by simple rules. I have been to a supermarket twice I the last 10 days. I have washed my hands before I left and then sanitised them at the station on entry. I haven't queued to do this and no one has queued behind me. People walk past me in close groups and look at me like I'm mental. Then in the supermarket they have no idea of social distancing if it doesn't suit them. But it's ok because they have a mask on.
Imho a lot of people are thinking that masks are the ultimate protection. They aren't.
Imho a lot of people are thinking that masks are the ultimate protection. They aren't.
I'm sure that the public "relaxing" has had something to do with this, but it was also a more or less inevitable consequence of the Government easing restrictions. Over the Summer, I was relieved to see that case numbers and death numbers remained largely stable, but it also seemed like the easing of restrictions was too early if you wanted to contain the spread indefinitely. Also, of course, the mass migration of University students and of returning to school will have played a huge part in driving the spread.
All of this should have been foreseen, in other words, and therefore Summer should have been spent by the Government preparing for it in a way that doesn't repeat the trajectory of March. A far more stable test&trace programme, for example, would have been the bare minimum requirement, and it seems that even this has been missed.
All of this should have been foreseen, in other words, and therefore Summer should have been spent by the Government preparing for it in a way that doesn't repeat the trajectory of March. A far more stable test&trace programme, for example, would have been the bare minimum requirement, and it seems that even this has been missed.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles17 mins ago
Crosswords18 mins ago
News25 mins ago
ChatterBank27 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.