New Scottish COVID-19 Restrictions 07/10/2020

[bramling]

It looks like she’s got away with it again, the news agenda has quickly moved on as per usual

The media now more concerned about possible restrictions on the north effecting the hospitality industry there, but no mention of the actual restrictions effecting the industry in Scotland. No interviewing confused people on the street or publicans worried about their business for days on end

To be fair, whilst Sturgeon May have got an easy ride, Boris is getting absolutely torn apart today - though the TV news seems to strangely muted, with some other comparatively insignificant stories taking up quite a bit of time.

 

[Journeyman]

It looks like she’s got away with it again, the news agenda has quickly moved on as per usual

The media now more concerned about possible restrictions on the north effecting the hospitality industry there, but no mention of the actual restrictions effecting the industry in Scotland. No interviewing confused people on the street or publicans worried about their business for days on end

What makes me absolutely furious is that thousands of jobs and many businesses are at risk due to a draconian, unnecessary unilateral move that Scotland has made...and expects Westminster to pay for. Funny how they always get the blame when things go pear-shaped.

 

[kez19]

I watched a bit of STV News at 6 today it spoke to one of the scientists oddly enough what came about? .... he spoke of a third wave in New Year! To me the way the interview went it was as if he "tripped" over himself or nerves but to say a third wave felt like it was taking the biscuit! Seems a bit more obvious they want to drag this out.

Found article but on ITV News website it maybe the guy I am thinking of but...

Third wave of coronavirus ‘entirely possible’, expert warns | ITV News

Professor Mark Woolhouse said strict measures quickly reduce transmission but do not make the virus go away. | ITV National News

www.itv.com

A third wave of coronavirus is “entirely possible”, with lockdowns only deferring the problem, an expert has warned.

Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said that while strict measures stop the immediate crisis and quickly reduce transmission, they do not make the virus go away.

Speaking on BBC One’s The Andrew Marr Show on Sunday he said that modelling had previously shown it was “entirely possible” that a second lockdown would be needed in September.

When asked if there could be a third wave of coronavirus he said: “That’s entirely possible.

“The scenario I mentioned earlier does actually include this possibility and this is just another demonstration of what I was saying earlier that lockdown doesn’t solve the problem, it defers its.

Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said that while strict measures stop the immediate crisis and quickly reduce transmission, they do not make the virus go away.

Just to point out article was from last month but I am just guessing STV is playing catchup on speaking to him...

 

[Journeyman]

Knives are out in The Guardian, normally a very pro-Sturgeon paper.

Coronavirus: Scotland’s drinking ban in chaos over meaning of 'cafe'

Nicola Sturgeon’s 16-day ban called ‘dysfunctional’ after contradictory statements

www.theguardian.com

Covid-19: Scotland’s drinking ban in chaos over meaning of cafe

Nicola Sturgeon’s 16-day ban called ‘dysfunctional’ after contradictory statements

Coronavirus – latest updatesSee all our coronavirus coverage

Libby Brooks Scotland correspondent

Thu 8 Oct 2020 22.27 BST

13

Scotland’s nationwide crackdown on indoor drinking descended into chaos on Thursday evening, less than 24 hours before strict new regulations on hospitality are due to come into force.

Many business owners in central Scotland, where a 16-day shutdown of pubs, restaurants and cafes that serve alcohol was announced by Nicola Sturgeon on Wednesday, claimed that they were still uncertain whether they were expected to close at 6pm on Friday as trade bodies described the Scottish government’s behaviour as “dysfunctional”.

In her statement to MSPs, the first minister said that the temporary shutdown would include all licensed premises, although cafes without an alcohol licence could stay open until 6pm “to support social isolation”.

But at lunchtime on Thursday, during first minister’s questions, Sturgeon brought in an exemption for licensed cafes, stating that they could likewise stay open provided they did not sell alcohol.

As businesses absorbed the news, many began to question precisely how a cafe is defined, as desperate owners asked whether they might be able to stay open after all.

Then on Thursday evening, Jason Leitch, the Scottish government’s national clinical director, compounded the confusion when he was asked to clarify the situation during an interview with BBC Radio Scotland. Leitch said it would be left to the environmental health officers of Scotland’s 32 local authorities to define and enforce the regulations.

This appeared to contradict Sturgeon’s earlier statement, when she insisted that a “specific exemption” for cafes would be set out in regulations to be published on Friday.

With businesses still waiting for clarification from the guidelines, hospitality bodies said that many establishments were still uncertain whether or not they would be expected to close.

Describing the unfolding chaos as “dysfunctional”, the chief executive of Scotland Food and Drink, James Withers, said that the problem could have been foreseen had the Scottish government consulted with businesses in advance. “Had we been approached even on Monday we could have worked through this in time for a Wednesday announcement,” he said, adding that it was “also madness” that licensed restaurants cannot remain open but not serve alcohol.

The Scottish Licensed Trade Association stated plainly that “there is no such thing as a licensed cafe” and therefore no definition in law of a cafe versus a restaurant, while leading licensing lawyer Stephen McGowan, of the law firm TLT, called on the Scottish government to offer clarity. “If parliament does not define cafe and it is left to local interpretation as is suggested here, then expect absolute carnage across the country. You’ll have one premises shut and the one next door open over the subjective view of a council officer? What a position to be in.”

Earlier on Thursday, businesses vented their anger and despair at the “catastrophic” and “scapegoating” new regulations and highlighted the lack of industry consultation, while local residents on online forums decried the “prohibition” that would result from harsher restrictions in central Scotland.

 

[takno]

Knives are out in The Guardian, normally a very pro-Sturgeon paper.

Coronavirus: Scotland’s drinking ban in chaos over meaning of 'cafe'

Nicola Sturgeon’s 16-day ban called ‘dysfunctional’ after contradictory statements

www.theguardian.com

The Guardian has generally been pro-measures, but in general isn't particularly pro SNP. Even on the measures they haven't been holding a very strong line - the Australian journalists have been ludicrously panicky and pro lockdown, the US ones are just obsessed with masks, the UK politics ones are looking for government failures above all else, and the science ones flail between sensible reporting and drive-by hatchet-jobs on reports they don't like.

This report.concentrates quite specifically on some.procedural idiocy, which is low-hanging fruit because the SNP have always been bad at procedure. It doesn't seriously question the aim or need for the policy at all though

 

[Yew]

I watched a bit of STV News at 6 today it spoke to one of the scientists oddly enough what came about? .... he spoke of a third wave in New Year! To me the way the interview went it was as if he "tripped" over himself or nerves but to say a third wave felt like it was taking the biscuit! Seems a bit more obvious they want to drag this out.

Found article but on ITV News website it maybe the guy I am thinking of but...

Third wave of coronavirus ‘entirely possible’, expert warns | ITV News

Professor Mark Woolhouse said strict measures quickly reduce transmission but do not make the virus go away. | ITV National News

www.itv.com

Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said that while strict measures stop the immediate crisis and quickly reduce transmission, they do not make the virus go away.

Just to point out article was from last month but I am just guessing STV is playing catchup on speaking to him...

I haven't seen the interview, but in the article seemed to express some keen points around "lockdowns don't make it go away" which I think is important for people to hear.

 

[kez19]

I haven't seen the interview, but in the article seemed to express some keen points around "lockdowns don't make it go away" which I think is important for people to hear.

Yet you could say there is a bit of common sense in that but let’s also say another wave, if these people know lockdowns don’t help then why are the governments keen on doing it? I just find it in general that the media just love a frenzy so hence let’s encourage the terms such as “wave” and “lockdown” to keep the public in fear.

The Guardian has generally been pro-measures, but in general isn't particularly pro SNP. Even on the measures they haven't been holding a very strong line - the Australian journalists have been ludicrously panicky and pro lockdown, the US ones are just obsessed with masks, the UK politics ones are looking for government failures above all else, and the science ones flail between sensible reporting and drive-by hatchet-jobs on reports they don't like.

This report.concentrates quite specifically on some.procedural idiocy, which is low-hanging fruit because the SNP have always been bad at procedure. It doesn't seriously question the aim or need for the policy at all though

It does in a way if you read between the lines (personally speaking) as many others it feels they are making it up as they go along, I agree that people should be consulted ie Unions but seems to be none of that is considered (I’m guessing this is probably the same at UK level in terms of England and Wales)

 

[Andyh82]

I think I spoke too soon, there have been stories on both BBC News and ITV News tonight following up on the Scotland restrictions, and using terms like ‘confusion’ and giving off a general negative tone, putting pressure on the Scottish government.

First time I’ve ever seen this on the nationals, so maybe the tide is turning. Usually Scotland restrictions are given one factual report and then never heard of again.

Having said all that, I’m sure once Boris announces English restrictions on Monday, we won’t hear about Scotland again, and it’ll be back to interviewing random people on the street in Greater Manchester

 

[Journeyman]

I get the impression that there's a lot of anger in Scotland right now, and that for the first time since this kicked off, Sturgeon is losing control of the situation and facing increasing hostility.

Loads of businesses have no idea whether they can legally stay open or not, and it's wreaking havoc with loads of stock going to waste, and the supply chain getting completely messed up. The final arbiters of what is allowed to open or not are local authorities, and you can see what will happen here - branches of chains will be allowed to open in some areas, and will be forced to close in others. The whole thing has been massively botched.

Hardcore nationalists are still defending her because it's what they do, but the rest of us are really losing patience, especially because it looks like we'll be queueing outside supermarkets again, just as the weather is turning. There was a nasty cold wind in the Central Belt today. That's really going to test patience.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Loads of businesses have no idea whether they can legally stay open or not, and it's wreaking havoc with loads of stock going to waste, and the supply chain getting completely messed up. The final arbiters of what is allowed to open or not are local authorities, and you can see what will happen here - branches of chains will be allowed to open in some areas, and will be forced to close in others. The whole thing has been massively botched.

The whole "definition of a cafe" thing is ludicrous, as why is Costalottabucks or the local greasy spoon[1] any less likely to spread the virus than a pub?

I do get the issues surrounding alcohol - get people drunk and they will take less care. The South Africans went for full prohibition, for example. However, I see no particular reason why Costalottabucks should be allowed to open because they're a "cafe", but pubs shouldn't be able to open but just not serve alcohol (if you were loyal to your local, you could still go in and have food to keep them going, just have a soft drink with it, which would actually be more profitable for them than a beer in most cases!). It's almost like she has it in for pubs.

Either it's adequately safe for indoor seated premises for the serving of food and drink (but not alcohol) to be open, or it's not. The virus doesn't have a look at the sign before deciding whether to go in or not.

[1] I went to one this morning, it was far more crowded than any pub I've been in since COVID started, so far more of a spread vector.

 

[Journeyman]

The whole "definition of a cafe" thing is ludicrous, as why is Costalottabucks or the local greasy spoon[1] any less likely to spread the virus than a pub?

I know, it's ridiculous. The argument that keeping cafes open provides an opportunity for people to socialise is particularly stupid, because by closing loads of venues, all you'll do is make the remaining ones busier, and like you say, chains like Costa will weather the storm largely unscathed while my excellent village pub, which will have to close for the duration, will really struggle.

I'd have happily used it for lunch minus booze, but now I can't.

 

[Howardh]

My local down the road is a restaurant/pub, (this is in England) where food is the main seller. They have even put up a marquee to keep diners/drinkers dry in winter to increase capacity. If they keep restaurants open, can they sell alcohol? If not, can the diner take their own bottle and be charged corkage?

It's an omnishambles, and one that's hitting the wrong target.

 

[PaulC1309]

When asked yesterday the definition of cafe vs restaurant at her daily briefing Sturgeon couldn't give a proper answer, said the owners should know what they are. I'm getting really fed up with no one from the media giving her a harder time about things like this ridiculous ill thought out restriction which I'd be willing to get will be extended for at least a further 2 weeks.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When asked yesterday the definition of cafe vs restaurant at her daily briefing Sturgeon couldn't give a proper answer, said the owners should know what they are. I'm getting really fed up with no one from the media giving her a harder time about things like this ridiculous ill thought out restriction which I'd be willing to get will be extended for at least a further 2 weeks.

Yes, the cafe thing is bizarre.

All she needed to do was prohibit on-sales of alcohol in any premises other than where it was both delivered and consumed outdoors (and there's already a useful definition of "outdoors" from the smoking ban to use).

As I've said, my local greasy spoon (definitely a "cafe") has the tables closer together, and thus is less COVID secure, than any pub I've been in since March.

 

[MattA7]

Yes, the cafe thing is bizarre.

All she needed to do was prohibit on-sales of alcohol in any premises other than where it was both delivered and consumed outdoors (and there's already a useful definition of "outdoors" from the smoking ban to use).

As I've said, my local greasy spoon (definitely a "cafe") has the tables closer together, and thus is less COVID secure, than any pub I've been in since March.

wasn’t the ban on pubs and other licensed premises In other words bars, restaurants and cafes that serve alcohol.

 

[Bletchleyite]

wasn’t the ban on pubs and other licensed premises In other words bars, restaurants and cafes that serve alcohol.

Yes, it was. But surely it'd have been easier to simply ban the sale of alcohol, rather than differentiate the premises.

 

[Journeyman]

wasn’t the ban on pubs and other licensed premises In other words bars, restaurants and cafes that serve alcohol.

The ban included "licensed cafes", a category of premises that doesn't even exist in Scotland.

 

[MattA7]

Yes, it was. But surely it'd have been easier to simply ban the sale of alcohol, rather than differentiate the premises.

you would think so but they seem to like making everything more complex than it has to be. I appears the ban is definitely on premises that serve alcohol as judging by friends social media shisha bars are still open.

 

[HSTEd]

Yes, it was. But surely it'd have been easier to simply ban the sale of alcohol, rather than differentiate the premises.

That would immediately lead to demands to ban all alcohol sales which might not go down well with the public.

This way they can pretend its not the alcohol that is the problem they want to stamp out.

 

[kylemore]

"Whisky and Freedom Gang Together"

Alcohol prohibitionists tend to be unpleasant authoritarians.

Sage advice - never trust a teetotaler.

 

[Yew]

"Whisky and Freedom Gang Together"

Alcohol prohibitionists tend to be unpleasant authoritarians.

I cannot agree more.

 

[MattA7]

"Whisky and Freedom Gang Together"

Alcohol prohibitionists tend to be unpleasant authoritarians.

Sage advice - never trust a teetotaler.

I don’t drink (for religious reasons) I guess that means I have to be distrusted by those who drink

 

[kylemore]

I don’t drink (for religious reasons) I guess that means I have to be distrusted by those who drink

It is of course a generalisation, and slightly tongue in cheek.

Nothing personal, there are always exceptions to the rule!

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

The restrictions on hospitality have been extended a further week:

The first minister says the timescale for introducing the new level system means a short-term decision is required by the Scottish government on hospitality.

Ms Sturgeon points out these are due to expire on 26 October.

She says, after a cabinet meeting this morning, "we have decided to extend these measures for a further week".

And further restrictions cannot be ruled out:

'Even tougher restrictions' can't be ruled out, says FM
The detail of what level will be applied where in the country is being assessed in the coming days, continues the first minister.

Ms Sturgeon says this will be set out in advance of 2 November.

She adds: "We can't rule out that this new approach will entail further extension of existing restrictions, or perhaps even tougher restrictions for all or parts of the country."

The first minister says that will depend on up-to-date assessments of the restrictions and all of the decisions will be balanced by the wider harms that Covid and the restrictions are having.

 

[bramling]

The restrictions on hospitality have been extended a further week:



And further restrictions cannot be ruled out:

So those who predicted extension look to be proved right...

 

[kez19]

I was planning on going to Glasgow at end of November, this whole thing has put me right off (visiting for a few days let alone unable to meet family there), but with this all ongoing whats the point? (don't get me wrong I would rather support the hotel I would use), plus I am assuming with not much open ie museums limited to what I can really do there (other than gym/parks (weather permitting) and shopping centres not much I can really do there!) or as I am researching if I want to visit something I have to book ahead via websites (guessing the days of simply walking off the streets are long gone!)

 

[Carlisle]

So those who predicted extension look to be proved right...

For all his faults, Boris at least has to contend with a healthily growing number of increasingly vocal critics both from within his own party & throughout the various tiers of government, representing either side of the lockdown argument , whereas the devolved administrations & their First Ministers appear virtually free to force through much harsher restrictions for considerably longer time periods with what appears to be very little in the way of scrutiny or meaningful opposition of any kind, other than continually offering vague assurances that ‘they’re following the science’

 

[kez19]

For all his faults, Boris at least has to contend with a growing number of increasingly vocal critics both from within his own party & throughout the various tiers of government, representing either side of the lockdown agenda, whereas the devolved administrations & their First Ministers appear virtually free to force through much harsher restrictions for considerably longer time periods with what appears to be very little in the way of scrutiny or meaningful opposition of any kind, other than the offering a vague suggestion ‘they’re following the science’

The thing is the Scottish media let alone opposition parties seem to go along without questioning, hence Nicola Sturgeon gets an easy ride, I agree Boris gets more in the neck about it.

I take the more it dragged out there is more going on than we know in the devolved parliaments (just opinion).

 

[LAX54]

I watched a bit of STV News at 6 today it spoke to one of the scientists oddly enough what came about? .... he spoke of a third wave in New Year! To me the way the interview went it was as if he "tripped" over himself or nerves but to say a third wave felt like it was taking the biscuit! Seems a bit more obvious they want to drag this out.

Found article but on ITV News website it maybe the guy I am thinking of but...

Third wave of coronavirus ‘entirely possible’, expert warns | ITV News

Professor Mark Woolhouse said strict measures quickly reduce transmission but do not make the virus go away. | ITV National News

www.itv.com

Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said that while strict measures stop the immediate crisis and quickly reduce transmission, they do not make the virus go away.

Just to point out article was from last month but I am just guessing STV is playing catchup on speaking to him...

and of course the way we will be going, a 4th, 5th....till the penny drops !

 

[Freightmaster]

Bah, Humbug:

Covid: Scots told to prepare for 'digital Christmas'

The idea of people in Scotland having a normal Christmas in 2020 is "fiction", the national clinical director says.

www.bbc.co.uk

The idea of a normal Christmas is a "fiction" and Scots should prepare for digital celebrations, national clinical director Jason Leitch has said.

The government has insisted that the latest Covid-19 restrictions are having an impact on the spread of the virus.
But Mr Leitch told BBC Scotland there was "absolutely no question" of a "normal" Christmas being allowed.

I don't think that using patronising, contemptuous language such as saying that family Christmas
gatherings will not be "allowed" this year is the best way to get the Scottish public to comply with
any potential yuletide restrictions...







MARK