General Discussion on Current Situation 2/

[LizzieL]

Anyone seen the scenes from Durdle Door in Dorset yesterday?  Social Distancing, my ar*e!
Every picture tells a story.
So what's the answer to this then Boris?

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/18480360.crowds-flock-durdle-door-bank-holiday/?ref=nuo

It only made headlines because some idiots got injured. Local residents have been attempting to help out with crowd control over the last several days. The police have no powers to enforce social distancing apparently, only can issue fines if gatherings exceed the maximum.

The air ambulance took two of the morons injured jumping off the arch to the same  hospital where a friend of ours was admitted in early April with Covid and has only recently come off a ventilator.

And according to Dorset Echo, they're flocking back to the county today

https://www.dorsetecho.co.uk/news/18486648.congestion-reported-a31-crowds-flock-dorset-beaches/

 

[Llwyd]

This really is becoming one long yawn. Just how many circles can you all go around before you meet yourselves coming back or disappear somewhere you wouldn't wish to go?.
Oh, and not let's forget, the Cummings' 4 year old is, apparently, autistic. Just saying - it doesn't seem to have had a mention here, or anywhere else for that matter.
 
Anyway, here's something else for you to ponder on. Today First Minister Drakeford announced our new "freedom" in Wales, which I won't go into in detail because I think most of you are in England or Scotland. Now then, this advice included that we should stay "local" which, according to Drakeford, is around five miles. As I live less than five miles from my nearest border crossing into England, do you think I could drive across the border and then, because I would be in England, drive as far as I wished?. I don't want to go that far but just to our son's, some 15 mins into England.
Assume "social distancing" etc. would be observed.
By the way, I walked several miles further than five today but not into England. I stayed reasonably "local".
Cymru Am Byth.
 

Any replies which mention Cummings, or may be attributed to him in any way, shape or form, are not valid!.
 

Tying myslef in knots?  Really? My reasons for being angry have stayed the same throughout this discussion despite repeated attempts to tie me in knots, accuse me of not understanding and patronising me.

I would appreciate being shown which of my posts does any or all of these things to you.
 

[arthurk]

I do wonder if the imminent relaxation of lockdown in England is in effect an admission by the government that they have lost control.

Clearly some people have not been following lockdown rules, right from the start, and breaches seem to have become more frequent. The Cummings affair is likely to have exacerbated this.

At this point, one option might have been to double down on the restrictions, or at least prolong them, but as there aren't enough resources to enforce them (and possibly little political will to do so) this would probably result in even more widespread disobedience, and the government being even less respected. So instead, it occurs to me that the plan might be to give the public what they appear to want, in the expectation that when a second wave hits they'll be pleading for lockdown again.

(Or it might just be that they can't afford to have the economy shut down any longer.)

[Gaie]

Guy, I don't feel there is any need for you to apologise to me .  You have not confused me. 

Gaie

[Llwyd]

"This really is becoming one long yawn. Just how many circles can you all go around before you meet yourselves coming back or disappear somewhere you wouldn't wish to go?. "

Llwyd - please don'e worry yourself by reading this thread if it's making you go round and round.
Suggesting that the concerned people might vanish up their own a...ses (you were saying that, no? if I misinterpret you, please do correct me) is an insult which is not called for.



"Oh, and not let's forget, the Cummings' 4 year old is, apparently, autistic. Just saying - it doesn't seem to have had a mention here, or anywhere else for that matter."

This is a totally unsubstantiated rumour, posted by one person on Facebook, and has not in any way been verified.



As I say.

 Those who remain completely unmoved by a powerful player advising our Government in the crisis of a pandemic choosing not only to break the advice he helped create, but not feeling he owed any apology - indeed lying on a blog to make himself sound better - please do feel free to let the rest of us worry on your behalf.

A million people or thereabouts have signed a petition, and MPs have received c 180 corrected 270+ with many MPs receiving several hundred or moreemails on the subject each, so it's evidently not of any interest to many.


The great pleasure of a website like RC is that we can exchange views, sometimes forcefully, but with respect.

Telling me that my concern will let me circle up my bottom doesn't count as respect to me.

Nope, I'm not the one going around in circles, but lots of others are. As for the last remark, what can I say?. Your interpretation.
As for the matter of the Cummings' child being autistic, I stand corrected and I am grateful to you for clearing that matter up.
 

[Gadget]

Arthurk your reply #227 seems to tally with Andrew Rawnsley, when he writes:

The government has yet to face what could be the most deadly consequence of this episode: what it means for control of the epidemic. How easy will ministers find it to persuade the public to “do the right thing” when these same ministers have spent the past week defending Mr Cummings for doing the wrong thing? The government is moving deeper into the perilous phase of releasing lockdown measures when it cannot be entirely sure that it truly has the disease suppressed and before a test-and-trace regime has been adequately established.

Voicing the anxieties of the scientific advisers, Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief among them, has warned that “we still have a significant burden of infection” and the UK remains in a “fragile state”. Despite that serious caution, Mr Johnson is rapidly moving towards a substantial dismantling of restrictions. He now does so under a dark cloud of suspicion that his decision-making is no long being driven by the best scientific advice but by a desire to get his rule-breaking adviser out of the headlines. Should there be a reignition of the epidemic, should we face the much-dreaded second wave, the government will find it much harder to convince the country that it acted in good faith and did all in its power to ensure maximum public compliance. This will be even more the case if people break the rules with the excuse that “I’m just following my instincts” or “I’m only doing a Cummings”.

Boris Johnson was persuaded that it would look weak to give up his senior aide. The main source of that advice was, no doubt, Mr Cummings himself. Or, it occurs to me, the prime minister may be paralysed by the terror that a sacked Cummings would vengefully spill many rancid secrets. Whichever is the case, it looks both pathetic and dangerous to cling to one unelected adviser at such a severe cost to the government’s authority, the cabinet’s credibility, control of the epidemic, the national interest and even people’s lives. That will not be readily forgotten.

[arthurk]

I didn't crib - honest! (I've heard of Andrew Rawnsley, but I couldn't tell you who he writes for, or where or when that article appeared.)

[Gadget]

I didn't say you did, I was saying that you were both saying similar things and that I concurred 

Answer - today in The Observer-Guardian. He's been around a long time. I recall him on BBC (?) many years ago as a young lad 


Added - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Rawnsley

[LizzieL]

I do wonder if the imminent relaxation of lockdown in England is in effect an admission by the government that they have lost control.

Clearly some people have not been following lockdown rules, right from the start, and breaches seem to have become more frequent. The Cummings affair is likely to have exacerbated this.

At this point, one option might have been to double down on the restrictions, or at least prolong them, but as there aren't enough resources to enforce them (and possibly little political will to do so) this would probably result in even more widespread disobedience, and the government being even less respected. So instead, it occurs to me that the plan might be to give the public what they appear to want, in the expectation that when a second wave hits they'll be pleading for lockdown again.

(Or it might just be that they can't afford to have the economy shut down any longer.)

The economy would have a lot to do with it.
There is pressure now from the hospitality industry to reduce the 2 metre rule to 1 metre.

The number of new infections per day as measured by people who have had a positive test has hardly moved from around 2000 for the last 10 days or so. The Government scientific advisers say it is nearer 8000 per day. As we have been in supposed lockdown for 10 weeks, how and where and from whom are all these people catching it?