Does this make sense to anyone?

NannyOggie in our pub you stay in your seat, no table hopping, no standing, hand sanitizer on entry, at order point, pay point and collection point. Tables of 6 or less, if you don’t give your details, you’re not served. Local environmental health and PCSO’s are spot checking

I think in pubs people are supposed to stay in the group that they went in with and not mix with others but not sure that is happening. I think gov ministers are so out of touch with the real world that they have no idea what is actually going on.

Hi, I’ve only just joined this morning and I wonder if someone could answer a question please?
I know I can’t visit my 6 month old grandson because we now have tighter restrictions in Lanarkshire.....we cannot go into another persons home!!! My question is, can my grandson come to my house for babysitting if I pick him up from their car on my drive?

I understand what you’re saying Tempest. I would be happy to stand aside for a younger person, and I’m 60. I have thought that we are perhaps so focused on saving everybody, we’ve forgotten the natural order of things, and are putting our young people to detriment. It’s perhaps no wonder so many of them are rebelling.

To clarify my comment is for Tempest.

Jesus.. I'd hate to be your mother! ?

There does seem to be a vast amount of guidance coming out that is not related to science, but just what someone thinks might be a good idea. Who decided that it was okay to sit in a pub or restaurant for an entire evening, with faces uncovered, in some cases having so much to drink that social distancing goes way out of the window, but if I attend our local vast cathedral for a socially distanced 45 minutes, then I have to wear a mask, and struggle to remove and replace it whilst walking up to take a socially distanced wafer.

Since churches were allowed to reopen (the buildings should never have been shut, not a rule, just CoE decision) we have not been allowed any singing. Now research shows that people singing do not give out any more viral load than those talking, why did they implement that ban without any evidence?

As soon as the service is over I can walk into the small cathedral cafe, remove my mask and sit with friends at 5' long tables for as long as I like, laughing loudly if I wish.

Really no common sense government action that’s all we need and we aren’t getting this so that’s why the virus is spreading only my opinion though How come some gyms are not enforcing masks ???

Just let Darwins Law apply in those cases..in their areas..herd immunity...

I get the point Tempest is making but the tricky part is giving up on one's whole life while continuing to be alive and in fear of this hideous infection.

I believe that the infection clusters, now, are mostly among under 60s because older people are still hiding away.

So what needs to be assessed, is how risky this is for them and whether they can continue with a new-normal life without having to have sudden lockdowns in different places.

If that gets established, older people can then make their own judgements about what risks to take.

Yes of course SOME young ones are acting 'stupid& selfish' but not ALL of them! Stop tarring everyone with the same bloody brush. Also, not all younger ones feel safe 'going about normal lives' just same as older ones.

And no, its NOT just young people taking it to old ones.

It is ok to say that the younger generation need to get on with their lives and be able to go out and about but they need to follow the rules and many of them don't. I see everyday young people getting on the bus at the stop opposite my house, with no mask and not keeping to the social distance rule. Why should we, the older generation be kept at home because they can't stick to the rules. Many of these younger people rely on the older generation for jobs and health care and also support from the bank of nan and grandad and child
care. So Tempest I find your post deeply offensive that you are suggesting we just write off the older generation and that we are not contributing to society. We have earned our retirement.

It's puzzled me, too.
Pubs would have been way down on my list; those serving meals and ones with beer gardens could have made a more cautious start with the reopening.

I don't get this either!
I can understand that cafes and restaurants can remain open as people can be distanced and they are out to eat. But the difference with pubs unless everyone is distanced outside which is fine, but many in towns and cities don't have outside space, so people are going to be close to each other inside. They are out to have a drink and socialise and they will be letting their guard down, 5ye more alcohol drunk the more the risk.

I rather agree with Tempest about the very old retired people continuing to stay at home, if not exactly shielding, while allowing the young and economically active to get on with their lives.
We know that the risk of catching the virus in our area is low, but the consequence of catching it would be dire for me and my DH (combined ages 160). We are being careful, socialising outdoors with one or two others at a time, and we have seen our ACs and GCs mainly outside and no hugs.
Volunteering and other hobbies can't happen. Our life is restricted now, but I would not wish that younger people's lives should be so, for our benefit. We are "war babies" and have had a good life.

Tempest if myself and DH stepped aside we would be putting young people with families out of their jobs.

Unfortunately there is not a one size fits all solution to the current situation.

I feel that to put the younger generation against the elder generation is in no way helpful.

Here in Leicester, we are still in partial lock down, meaning that we are not supposed to visit our families even to sit in the garden. However, we could meet them in a pub or restaurant. Seems illogical. I think the person was right who said that you could only meet in the presence of a cash register.

I don't understand why Leicester had to remain in lock down but other places with high infection rates, like Oldham, have avoided it. Seems a bit unfair.

GrannyGravey13
I am in my 60s very healthy and as I mentioned earlier I have many relatives who have lived to be 104. Not vulnerable at all but have followed government guidelines. I also live in a very affluent area of London surrounded by young professional families all very respectful but growing very fearful of their jobs, their children's schools, exam results, university entrances etc etc. Looking after the elderly or doing what is best for the elderly is very fast going down in their list of priorities. I believe strongly that as an elderly member of this society we should be stepping aside and doing all we can to make the life of younger people easier and with more hope for them.

About as mad as the allowed to have up to 8 in your house from 3 different households including your own but you must all socially distance 2 mtrs apart. This applies in Scotland where everyone we know lives in castles big enough to facilitate this!

Marieeliz

Sorry to have to say this but the areas being targeted are Asian areas they don't think it means them.

What's an Asian area? Many of the parts of Manchester with the highest infection rates, including Trafford, have a very low number of "Asian" residents.

Tempest If you are on the shielded list or vulnerable due to advanced years then surely it is the individual’s responsibility for their own welfare?

I am definitely in the open up the economy category as we own our own business and apart from the first four days of lockdown have been open throughout.

I cannot agree with your comments regarding the younger generations beginning to resent their elders from what I have experience of they are respectful and helpful to those who have been in need since Covid-19.

mcem

My daughter is manager of 2 local restaurants and is scrupulously observing all guidelines. Many older regulars have congratulated and thanked her.

However she was horrified to overhear the conversation of 4 young women, discussing a friend who had been contacted while in quarantine after her holiday.
She was then tested positive but as she felt fine and couldn't afford to miss work she carried on working and told no-one!
How can we cope with this level of selfish stupidity?

That's why there needs to be a two-way process in place. People who have tested positive and those who have been in contact with them must be forced to self-isolate. The other side of that is that they must not lose out financially, if they can't work and, if necessary, isolation accommodation must be provided.

I think there's going to be an even bigger problem with Wilmslow Road when the students living in Fallowfield (and elsewhere) return. There are over 90,000 students in Manchester and Salford from all parts of the world. It's unrealistic to think they'll all self-isolate and be sensible.

Marieeliz, I live in Greater Manchester, which has a very diverse population, not all Asian at all. My local area did have a spike of cases but definitely not linked to ethnicity - please don't believe all you read in newspapers! Yes, there were problems on Wilmslow Rd ( the Curry Mile) on two occasions, it is rammed every time Eid is celebrated, but the problem seems to be that most new cases are being spread between family groups, with a few instances of work related cases.

Hence why we are banned from meeting other households indoors or outside but can go to eat inside a pub or restaurant with our own household only or with six different households outside. This makes sense to me but will only work if everyone follows the rules - unlike my friends neighbours ( aged late twenties) who had a party for about thirty people last night from 5pm to 11pm under a gazebo then moved indoors until 5.30am!

I understand that Birmingham is also facing similar measures.

Although there has been a spike in new cases ( going down now in my area) there has not been a rise in hospital admissions or deaths.