England's new three-tier lockdown system

[Bletchleyite]

Suppose we'll have to see what they mean by 'Slough' and whether they just mean Slough or a wider area. The general pattern so far seems to be to put rather large areas into the higher tier even with localised issues.

I suspect it'll be the Unitary area. They don't tend to go below Borough level, and Slough is a unitary that is a former borough of Berkshire.

 

[cactustwirly]

I suspect it'll be the Unitary area. They don't tend to go below Borough level, and Slough is a unitary that is a former borough of Berkshire.

Which also includes Langley and parts of Burnham

 

[Peter Sarf]

........

Burnham's challenging the ruling on bars in court, on the grounds that there's no scienticic evidence the closures are justified. No idea where or when the case is, but I did read of this threat a couple of weeks ago.

Think he's on dodgy ground, but hope he wins!!

I had a thought yesterday about pubs. First I thought simplistically - Well its a choice of shall we close pubs or supermarkets ?, answer food is more important. Then the horrible truth came to me. I recall on many occasions over many years hearing/reading that all/most hospital's Accident and Emergency departments are at their busiest just after closing time of the pubs. So there we have it - closing the pubs is to stop them feeding the hospitals with even more patients. I knew the NHS would come into it somewhere !.

 

[yorksrob]

I had a thought yesterday about pubs. First I thought simplistically - Well its a choice of shall we close pubs or supermarkets ?, answer food is more important. Then the horrible truth came to me. I recall on many occasions over many years hearing/reading that all/most hospital's Accident and Emergency departments are at their busiest just after closing time of the pubs. So there we have it - closing the pubs is to stop them feeding the hospitals with even more patients. I knew the NHS would come into it somewhere !.

If they were on that wavelength, they wouldn't have had them all chucking out at the same time.

 

[Peter Sarf]

If they were on that wavelength, they wouldn't have had them all chucking out at the same time.

Yes. That thought really convinced me that that was their motive.

 

[island]

There's a student bar in Preston which appears to be complying with the letter but not the spirit of the law by selling platters of chicken wings and chips for £0.01. (They tried doing it free but the Council said the meal had to be paid for).

Having ripped off most of the ROI’s regulation on substantial meals I’m surprised the government did not also adopt the bit requiring the meal to have a minimum price (€9 there).

 

[WelshBluebird]

There's a student bar in Preston which appears to be complying with the letter but not the spirit of the law by selling platters of chicken wings and chips for £0.01. (They tried doing it free but the Council said the meal had to be paid for).

Whilst some on here will support the guy who owns the bar, having read the quotes he's given he does sound like he would fail the "attitude test" in my eyes. Theres one quote specifically where a council officer said he was essentially providing free food so people could buy alcohol, which is exactly what he was doing, but the guy gave a quote saying something to the effect of "i replied saying exactly where he was wrong".

I mean by all means take advantage of loopholes of you want but don't get bitter and try to spout BS when you are called out on them.

 

[DB]

Whilst some on here will support the guy who owns the bar, having read the quotes he's given he does sound like he would fail the "attitude test" in my eyes. Theres one quote specifically where a council officer said he was essentially providing free food so people could buy alcohol, which is exactly what he was doing, but the guy gave a quote saying something to the effect of "i replied saying exactly where he was wrong".

I mean by all means take advantage of loopholes of you want but don't get bitter and try to spout BS when you are called out on them.

Does it not occur to you that people in this line of business have every justification for being bitter, given the way they are being treated?

 

[yorksrob]

I mean by all means take advantage of loopholes of you want but don't get bitter and try to spout BS when you are called out on them.

Why not. Tier 3 is fundamentally BS anyway !

 

[david1212]

BBC reporting that Slough, Stoke on Trent and Coventry Will move to tier 2 on Saturday.

Let's look at Coventry on the map : https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map - looks like the problem is in 'Cannon Park and University'.

Where's the purple bit in Exeter? 'Pennsylvania and University'.

Brighton? 'Coldean and Mouslecoomb North' - exactly where the two universities are.

Cambridge? Central and West Cambridge, and Castle - where most Cambridge University students live.

Norwich? 'University and Avenues'.

Slough? Eton.


Pretty clear pattern here - lots of positive tests found in universities and schools with regular testing.

As I posted when this system was introduced Coventry was only Tier 1 while Walsall was Tier 2 even though then the weekly rate for Coventry was higher. With the rates for much of Coventry still the similar to or lower than other areas still in Tier 1 this move is hard on the residents. I wonder if there will be resentment to the students ?

 

[takno]

Having ripped off most of the ROI’s regulation on substantial meals I’m surprised the government did not also adopt the bit requiring the meal to have a minimum price (€9 there).

9 euros for a pasty and chips? I'd want Jenrick to sort out my planning problems over dinner for that kind of money

 

[WelshBluebird]

Does it not occur to you that people in this line of business have every justification for being bitter, given the way they are being treated?

Why not. Tier 3 is fundamentally BS anyway !

Fine, but at least be honest about what you are doing.
He 100% was providing free food to allow people to buy alcohol.
To do that and then claim shock that the council would say he is doing that and deny it is just makes him come across like an arse. At least own up to it for crying out loud.

 

[Howardh]

Party time in Manchester tonight, at least where I was. Can't see anything in the rules stopping me going to Manchester Airport and flying away?

 

[Bantamzen]

Having ripped off most of the ROI’s regulation on substantial meals I’m surprised the government did not also adopt the bit requiring the meal to have a minimum price (€9 there).

Thinking about this, if this did become a requirement it would easily be overcome in a way I've suggested elsewhere, i.e. tapas style eating. So you could spend a day in the pub drinking, just making sure you add £9 worth of food along the way. It doesn't have to be a traditional main course, a few starters or sharing platters can be substantial even if eaten over several hours.

 

[Pete_uk]

Fine, but at least be honest about what you are doing.
He 100% was providing free food to allow people to buy alcohol.
To do that and then claim shock that the council would say he is doing that and deny it is just makes him come across like an arse. At least own up to it for crying out loud.

Well he is complying with the law so the council should leave him alone

 

[DelayRepay]

I understand why the guy is bitter but why is he selling the food for a penny, instead of charging at least cost price?

If I was the council, I would say 'fantastic, can we order 500 of your 1p meals please to feed the homeless?'

 

[island]

Thinking about this, if this did become a requirement it would easily be overcome in a way I've suggested elsewhere, i.e. tapas style eating. So you could spend a day in the pub drinking, just making sure you add £9 worth of food along the way. It doesn't have to be a traditional main course, a few starters or sharing platters can be substantial even if eaten over several hours.

Ireland also had a maximum 1 hour 45 minute table occupancy limit initially, though it rapidly became unenforceable.

 

[Bantamzen]

Ireland also had a maximum 1 hour 45 minute table occupancy limit initially, though it rapidly became unenforceable.

Yeah that would be difficult for a decent three course meal including the time spent choosing the meals,wine etc. But I'm sure someone will be along in a minute to offer their ideas for enforcing mandatory order in advance, time limits per course, maximum meal size etc.....

 

[yorksrob]

I understand why the guy is bitter but why is he selling the food for a penny, instead of charging at least cost price?

If I was the council, I would say 'fantastic, can we order 500 of your 1p meals please to feed the homeless?'

It sounds like a perfectly reasonable loss-leader to me.

This is supposed to be a country of free enterprise afterall.

 

[Ianno87]

It sounds like a perfectly reasonable loss-leader to me.

This is supposed to be a country of free enterprise afterall.

Shall we all turn up and order food without buying a drink and see how the guy likes it then...? Y'know, free enterprise and all that?

 

[yorksrob]

Shall we all turn up and order food without buying a drink and see how the guy likes it then...? Y'know, free enterprise and all that?

You can try it. But since he's only trying to find a way of continuing to trade in the face of an unreasonable and pointless law, I would be more inclined to order within the spirit of his offer, rather than just the letter of it.

Actually, I don't think there's anything stopping him requiring patrons to buy at least one drink for the offer to be valid at present, so you might have to buy a drink anyway.

 

[Ianno87]

You can try it. But since he's only trying to find a way of continuing to trade in the face of an unreasonable and pointless law, I would be more inclined to order within the spirit of his offer, rather than just the letter of it.

Actually, I don't think there's anything stopping him requiring patrons to buy at least one drink for the offer to be valid at present, so you might have to buy a drink anyway.

The spirit of his offer is "take the piss by buying food you don't want or need".

 

[43096]

Which also includes Langley and parts of Burnham

That'll be the reason: Boris and co don’t like Burnham.

 

[yorksrob]

The spirit of his offer is "take the piss by buying food you don't want or need".

The spirit of the offer is "support a business in the face of rules that make no sense and won't make any difference to virus transmission anyway".

Anyway, if you eat a meal, I fail to see what difference it makes whether it costs you 1p or £50.

 

[duncanp]

Can't help but admire this lady

'We should not surrender', warns grandmother who became overnight celebrity for coronavirus views

Maureen Eames won an army of fans after telling the BBC she did not 'give a sod' about coronavirus rules

www.telegraph.co.uk

especially this bit of the article:-

"The Tory voter said that she laid the blame for the response on Matt Hancock and believes that Mr Johnson has been “shackled” by his scientific advisors. The future of the young is in your hands Boris. And for God's sake, get some people around you who know what needs to be done, she said.
I would sack the lot of them, especially Matt Hancock. Get people who will tell you to open everything up and shield the vulnerable.”
One of the Health Secretary’s mistakes, Mrs Eames believes, was telling doctors to see patients on Zoom, which has made it “easier to get into jail” than a GP surgery. "

Boris needs to take note this lady is a Tory voter in the North of England, and he needs the support of people like her to win the next election. Unless of course he has already decided to step down beforehand, so he doesn't give a s**t (or "a sod" to use the lady's words) about the adverse consequences of his bad decisions.

A great grandmother who captured what many people were feeling when she said she “didn’t give a sod” about coronavirus rules has said that the country should not “surrender” to the pandemic.
Maureen Eames, 83, who became an overnight celebrity after expressing her anger at the impact of Government restrictions, said that Britain was supposed to be “a free country” and “life has to go on”.
Speaking from her South Yorkshire home just before parts of the region enter tier three restrictions, she warned that it is subsequent generations who will be paying the price for the lockdown, telling Boris Johnson: “The future of the young is in your hands.”
Mrs Eames told the Telegraph: “We were bombed in the blitz and we didn’t give in. I was at my aunt’s in Lincolnshire, next to an airfield, and they accidentally dropped a bomb and it blew our windows out.
“We didn’t surrender then and we shouldn’t now. We went into shelters then we went back to work. That’s what we have to do now.”

Mrs Eames has had a growing army of supporters since she was interviewed by the BBC whilst out shopping in Barnsley on Wednesday, with some saying she should be the next Prime Minister.
She told the broadcaster it was “ridiculous” that the town would be the next part of England plunged into the "very high" alert level.
She said: “We should never have been in lockdown. All the people who were vulnerable should have been helped and kept home safe. And all the rest of us, I'm 83, I don't give a sod.
“I look at it this way, I've not got all that many years left of me and I’m not going to be fastened in a house when the government have got it all wrong.”

Maureen Eames and her husband Michael have both recovered from coronavirus CREDIT: Ben Lack
The octogenarian, who served as a parish councillor for her home village of Notton for 50 years, warned that restriction would leave millions unemployed and those paying for it would be “all the young ones. Not me because I'm going to be dead”.
Mrs Elms, who has three grandchildren and two great grandchildren, said she had been overwhelmed by support since the interview.
She immediately drew comparisons with Brenda from Bristol, who summed up the feelings of many when she was told that the 2017 General Election had been called and responded: "You’re joking. Not another one."
An ordinary member of the public also caused some embarrassment for Gordon Brown when he was Prime Minister in 2010 and was recorded calling Gillian Duffy a "bigot" during a walkabout in Rochdale.
She had first-hand experience of the virus when her husband Michael, 82, developed severe coronavirus in late February, coughing up blood, and wasn’t fully recovered until May. She caught it at the end of May and developed deep chest pains but recovered after ten days.
The retired doctor’s housekeeper has revealed that she was against lockdown for the start and continued her routine of shopping three times a week.
She said: “What they should have done was ensure that all the old people and the people who have health problems were protected and if they wanted anything there was someone there to take it to the house. Then they let the rest of us get on with life.”
“All this money that's been spent and at the end of this year there'll be so many children, young people and old who'll be unemployed. “There's no future for the young ones where this is going.”
The Tory voter said that she laid the blame for the response on Matt Hancock and believes that Mr Johnson has been “shackled” by his scientific advisors.
“The future of the young is in your hands Boris. And for God's sake, get some people around you who know what needs to be done,” she said.
“I would sack the lot of them, especially Matt Hancock. Get people who will tell you to open everything up and shield the vulnerable.”
One of the Health Secretary’s mistakes, Mrs Eames believes, was telling doctors to see patients on Zoom, which has made it “easier to get into jail” than a GP surgery.
“It really does worry me is how many people at the outset were diagnosed with cancer and now are dying," she said. "They have no future because of this policy, they are dying."
Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield will move into the most stringent Tier 3 restrictions at Midnight on Saturday, joining Manchester, Lancashire and Liverpool.
It was not just those on social media who supported her frank views as Mr Eames, a retired coal mine electrical engineer, revealed he was proud of his wife.
"We watched it on the telly and I said ‘you’ll go viral with that and she said give over. But I was right," he said. “I call her My Hyacinth, my own Mrs Bouquet.”

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having ripped off most of the ROI’s regulation on substantial meals I’m surprised the government did not also adopt the bit requiring the meal to have a minimum price (€9 there).

Yes, that's a bizarre omission.

If you really want to control it to people actually having meals, a requirement to spend say £10 per head on food items for consumption on the premises (so no over-ordering and taking doggy bags home) per rolling two hour period would pretty much do it.

 

[C J Snarzell]

I read an article early this morning in which Chancellor Rishi Sunak has stated the funding to help businesses will not last forever.

The way I look at that is - if the government is now saying there will be a cut off switch with cash being handed out to save jobs and keep business afloat then there has to be a cut off switch for all these Covid restrictions.

The government simply cannot enforce the restrictions without financial support. If Sunak is suggesting an end point for government money being handed out, then there has to be an end point for all these restrictions too.

CJ

 

[Bletchleyite]

Anyway, if you eat a meal, I fail to see what difference it makes whether it costs you 1p or £50.

It's not the act of eating a meal. It's about reducing the time people spend there, and the frequency with which they do, and what they do when they are there.

If you charge 1p, people will be quite happy to order the chicken and chips and not eat it every time they have a pint. I bet in that pub in Preston they will collect it, put it in the microwave and bring it back out as you get each round. That is not the point. He's probably legal by doing it, but it really is taking the mick, will cause spread and people should not be supporting it.

It's actually quite a clever idea - get people to go to the pub less and for less time but to spend more when they are there, so the business is still viable but there's less spread of COVID.

 

[yorksrob]

It's not the act of eating a meal. It's about reducing the time people spend there, and the frequency with which they do, and what they do when they are there.

If you charge 1p, people will be quite happy to order the chicken and chips and not eat it every time they have a pint. I bet in that pub in Preston they will collect it, put it in the microwave and bring it back out as you get each round. That is not the point. He's probably legal by doing it, but it really is taking the mick, will cause spread and people should not be supporting it.

It's actually quite a clever idea - get people to go to the pub less and for less time but to spend more when they are there, so the business is still viable but there's less spread of COVID.

I don't support wasting food (I would eat the chicken and chips) however I do support the undermining of these farcical rules that seem designed to have minimal impact on the virus spread whilst doing maximum damage to the economy. The tier three rules are unjustifiable, and the sooner they are repealed, the better.

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes, that's a bizarre omission.

If you really want to control it to people actually having meals, a requirement to spend say £10 per head on food items for consumption on the premises (so no over-ordering and taking doggy bags home) per rolling two hour period would pretty much do it.

You do know that at many pub / gastro-pubs it is possible to get a main course for less than £10, often considerably less. Are you suggesting these prices be increased to suit such a requirement?