Galway COVID-19, local news and discussion

ben.schlomo

LostDuck wrote: »

But have we lost the whole solidarity across society that we're all in this together? Following the same restrictions.

Golfgate obviously didn't help and house parties have been happening but surprised to see prominent local businesses appearing to be openly ignoring the restrictions now too.

Loads of places are flouting the guidelines, and have been all along. More people in shops than there should have been, two metre distance not being maintained in restaurants/bars and the current governmental/political incompetence is also fuelling it. It's a personal decision at the end of the day. If ye were happy to organise an event for 50 people and the hotel say it's fine then there's no issue.

Mrs OBumble

ben.schlomo wrote: »

If ye were happy to organise an event for 50 people and the hotel say it's fine then there's no issue.

Personally I'd be factoring in the ventilation and spacing / privacy in the venue, and also the risk profile of the participants.

A one size fits sll rule doesn't really work, unless it's at the level applied in late March, which is absolutely nit appropriate now.

inisboffin

So the number doesn't apply to restaurants ONCE they can maintain the social distancing and safety, and you are gathering in smaller groups, depending on the size of the premises. Given that the number depends on the restaurant space, ventilation etc. In THEORY you are supposed to have a max of 6 per table as a group, but can have multiple groups. In practice it seems, restaurants are ignoring this, some pushing tables together.
Golfgate was stupid for many reasons, but was definitely guilty of breaking the number per table, and the overall max size of the group if you break it down.

LostDuck

inisboffin wrote: »

So the number doesn't apply to restaurants ONCE they can maintain the social distancing and safety, and you are gathering in smaller groups, depending on the size of the premises.

But the adivce is "events, parties or gatherings of more than 6 people indoors or 15 people outdoors are not allowed in these settings" - surely a booking of 18 people across 3 tables in an event or gathering over 6?

ben.schlomo

LostDuck wrote: »

But the adivce is "events, parties or gatherings of more than 6 people indoors or 15 people outdoors are not allowed in these settings" - surely a booking of 18 people across 3 tables in an event or gathering over 6?

Sure cancel the booking so, put your mind at ease.

LostDuck

We have now cancelled the booking (and lost the deposit), because that's what's been advised. We're just bewildered now how others can go ahead with similar bookings. Are we the fools for doing our small part?

_Whimsical_

LostDuck wrote: »

We have now cancelled the booking (and lost the deposit), because that's what's been advised. We're just bewildered now how others can go ahead with similar bookings. Are we the fools for doing our small part?

You're never a fool for doing the right thing despite what others might do.

You're doing it for yourself and for all of the rest of us too. As someone who is medically vulnerable at the moment I really appreciate the sacrifices people are making.

Fitz*

I actually haven't heard of any big houseparties tbh. Or seen many on social media. Some groups of 4/5 people but that's it. None of these big 20 people ones that are being talked about.

Maybe I'm getting old.

Mrs OBumble

Fitz* wrote: »

I actually haven't heard of any big houseparties tbh. Or seen many on social media. Some groups of 4/5 people but that's it. None of these big 20 people ones that are being talked about.

Maybe I'm getting old.

Some inner city apartments definitely have had wayyy more than that, and frequently.

I've been to one in the suburbs with 10 people.

gordongekko

LostDuck wrote: »

We have now cancelled the booking (and lost the deposit), because that's what's been advised. We're just bewildered now how others can go ahead with similar bookings. Are we the fools for doing our small part?

Yes you are foolish if you just did it to do "our small part" . Government policy has never been laid clearer than what happened in clifden. Gatherings of more than 6 are fine , social distancing is not required, 14 days quarantine is not required. It's clear now that once you feel safe fire ahead.

Gadgetman496

156 confirmed cases, 2 deaths

55 in Dublin, 36 in Kildare, 12 in Tipperary, 9 in Limerick, 7 in Kilkenny, 6 in Waterford and the remaining 31 cases are in Carlow, Clare, Cork, Donegal, Galway, Kerry, Laois, Louth, Meath, Monaghan, Offaly, Roscommon, Westmeath, Wexford and Wicklow.

Wompa1

gordongekko wrote: »

Yes you are foolish if you just did it to do "our small part" . Government policy has never been laid clearer than what happened in clifden. Gatherings of more than 6 are fine , social distancing is not required, 14 days quarantine is not required. It's clear now that once you feel safe fire ahead.

If everyone acts like the most selfish in society, we won't have a society much longer. Poster is not foolish at all. The other sh1ts are selfish. Team work makes the dream work. Unfortunately, we have a lot of dead weight to carry with us.

at1withmyself

gordongekko wrote: »

Yes you are foolish if you just did it to do "our small part" . Government policy has never been laid clearer than what happened in clifden. Gatherings of more than 6 are fine , social distancing is not required, 14 days quarantine is not required. It's clear now that once you feel safe fire ahead.

No they are not being foolish. What happened in clifden was ridiculous and thankfully people are loosing jobs over it. That doesn't mean we should all give up. Fair play to the OP for cancelling, I'm certainly not going to relax on the guidelines.

at1withmyself

LostDuck wrote: »

We have now cancelled the booking (and lost the deposit), because that's what's been advised. We're just bewildered now how others can go ahead with similar bookings. Are we the fools for doing our small part?

Name the venue, they should have returned the deposit!

LostDuck

at1withmyself wrote: »

Name the venue, they should have returned the deposit!

They didn't because they say we can go ahead with the current restrictions.

Got the impression they were working off either Failte Ireland or Irish Hotels Federation advice. I see FI only updated their restaurant advice yesterday evening from the updates on 18th and IHF are awaiting clarifications on Monday... seems they're all dragging their feet with updates through a chain of organisations to get one more weekend of bookings through.

We're hoping restrictions will be accepted by all after the weekend and we'll get back to them for the €150 deposit. I'll name if they still withhold the deposit.

inisboffin

LostDuck wrote: »

They didn't because they say we can go ahead with the current restrictions.

Got the impression they were working off either Failte Ireland or Irish Hotels Federation advice. I see FI only updated their restaurant advice yesterday evening from the updates on 18th and IHF are awaiting clarifications on Monday... seems they're all dragging their feet with updates through a chain of organisations to get one more weekend of bookings through.

We're hoping restrictions will be accepted by all after the weekend and we'll get back to them for the €150 deposit. I'll name if they still withhold the deposit.

As others have said, you do what you need to do in terms of feeling safe. There will *always* be others (including government leaders) flouting the rules, but at the end of the day it's doing what's safe. That being said let's not be under any illusions that by following 'the rules' that you are 'doing your bit'. If you think a €9 sambo and marriage vows somehow change the way the virus works, then lord help us all.
Common sense. That's why theatres and more 'organised' places like restaurants have different rules. It is no different (particularly in Ireland) whether you know the people at the other two tables or they are strangers. If they are separate tables they are separate tables. Pushing them together is breaking the rules, but you are booking three tables with 18 people.

at1withmyself

inisboffin wrote: »

That being said let's not be under any illusions that by following 'the rules' that you are 'doing your bit'. If you think a €9 sambo and marriage vows somehow change the way the virus works, then lord help us all.

What an absolute idiotic post, of course each person following the guidelines is doing their bit.

Also it's nothing to do with the cost of the 'sambo', the idea being that seated customers interact less then standing customers and just because some are too stupid to understand that, does not mean that it doesn't help reduce the spread of the virus.

inisboffin

at1withmyself wrote: »

What an absolute idiotic post, of course each person following the guidelines is doing their bit.

Also it's nothing to do with the cost of the 'sambo', the idea being that seated customers interact less then standing customers and just because some are too stupid to understand that, does not mean that it doesn't help reduce the spread of the virus.

You seem extremely confident that doing ones bit is the same as being safe? Is this confidence based on 6 people or 15? Doing ones bit allows one to go to a wedding but not to a family barbecue with less people. Now that seems pretty idiotic to me.

And ‘seated’ drinking is no different to seated eating, so there goes that theory.
Tell yourself whatever you need to get you through your day, but that doesn’t mean it’s common sense.

inisboffin

inisboffin wrote: »

You seem extremely confident that doing ones bit is the same as being safe? Is this confidence based on 6 people or 15? Doing ones bit allows one to go to a wedding but not to a family barbecue with less people. Now that seems pretty idiotic to me.

And ‘seated’ drinking is no different to seated eating, so there goes that theory.
Tell yourself whatever you need to get you through your day, but that doesn’t mean it’s common sense.

Doing ones bit would also include staying at home rather than going out at all as we can all see the stupidly mixed regulations. Big numbers again yesterday restaurants need to be closed again as none are willing to make any effort to keep the rules and are doing as they please.

As a guide everyone should take the strictest regulation and apply that across the board.

jh79

inisboffin wrote: »

You seem extremely confident that doing ones bit is the same as being safe? Is this confidence based on 6 people or 15? Doing ones bit allows one to go to a wedding but not to a family barbecue with less people. Now that seems pretty idiotic to me.

And ‘seated’ drinking is no different to seated eating, so there goes that theory.
Tell yourself whatever you need to get you through your day, but that doesn’t mean it’s common sense.

'Seated' drinking with a 10euro meal is to prevent pub crawls. When the Koreans relaxed restrictions one guy managed to infect 29 people after going to bars and nightclubs.

jh79

jh79 wrote: »

'Seated' drinking with a 10euro meal is to prevent pub crawls. When the Koreans relaxed restrictions one guy managed to infect 29 people after going to bars and nightclubs.

I actually think it’s encouraging pub crawls to some extent as I know some people who are booking 2 or 3 places one after the other and moving on to the next booking after the time is up.

Mrs OBumble

Fernando Muscular Sibilant wrote: »

restaurants need to be closed again

Restaurants have never been closed: all were allowed to offer takeaway throughout, and its essential that some do as some people have no other option.

jh79

Fernando Muscular Sibilant wrote: »

I actually think it’s encouraging pub crawls to some extent as I know some people who are booking 2 or 3 places one after the other and moving on to the next booking after the time is up.

There will always be a few but most i'd hope would think the extra money on food they don't really want would be a waste.

inisboffin

jh79 wrote: »

There will always be a few but most i'd hope would think the extra money on food they don't really want would be a waste.

That’s the thing. Even here we can’t agree on the reason for the 9 euro meal.
Is it to keep people seated? No then just make people sit for any purchase.
Is it to prevent pub crawls? Those with money can go to any pub and order something, nobody is forcing them to eat it.
Is it for ‘soakage’ to stop people getting hammered and get messy? Possibly, but see above. And why €9? A toastie in some places costs a fiver.
Some pubs agree with this and you can just go in and order a 7up without any meal.
Is it to create extra revenue during ‘table time’ at a venue? This is a more credible theory to prevent a tourist sitting over a glass of Guinness for an hour.
Whatever way you look at it we are all finding ways to justify something.

Explain the wedding rule to me then though? Why can weddings be a rule exception if it’s traditionally one of the biggest ‘get hammered’ Events in Ireland, yet a gig by a singer in a socially distanced venue is not allowed. Tell me how those rules are helping?
Common sense It has to be, as it seems like the country is note and more divided by the day!

jh79

inisboffin wrote: »

That’s the thing. Even here we can’t agree on the reason for the 9 euro meal.
Is it to keep people seated? No then just make people sit for any purchase.
Is it to prevent pub crawls? Those with money can go to any pub and order something, nobody is forcing them to eat it.
Is it for ‘soakage’ to stop people getting hammered and get messy? Possibly, but see above. And why €9? A toastie in some places costs a fiver.
Some pubs agree with this and you can just go in and order a 7up without any meal.
Is it to create extra revenue during ‘table time’ at a venue? This is a more credible theory to prevent a tourist sitting over a glass of Guinness for an hour.
Whatever way you look at it we are all finding ways to justify something.

Explain the wedding rule to me then though? Why can weddings be a rule exception if it’s traditionally one of the biggest ‘get hammered’ Events in Ireland, yet a gig by a singer in a socially distanced venue is not allowed. Tell me how those rules are helping?
Common sense It has to be, as it seems like the country is note and more divided by the day!

I think the 9 euro was due to an existing law that made it easier for the government to enact it quickly.

The benefits are mixture of all the things already mentioned.

My take on the wedding is that with reduced numbers it's essentially just 2 families coming together while a gig would have numerous households who wouldn't normally mix coming together. The R number from a cluster at a wedding would be lower than that at a gig.

LostDuck

inisboffin wrote: »

That’s the thing. Even here we can’t agree on the reason for the 9 euro meal.
Is it to keep people seated? No then just make people sit for any purchase.
Is it to prevent pub crawls? Those with money can go to any pub and order something, nobody is forcing them to eat it.

I always read it as being the lower end of a standard restaurant main course. The pubs that are open are meant to be operating as restaurants. It's to prevent the "6 pints and 6 bags of Taytos" rounds.

But there will always be those who will go on a pub crawl picking up two slices of pizza as their restaurant meal at each one. Give them an inch...

So you're right in that you can if you want be very irresponsible within the limits of the restrictions.

inisboffin

jh79 wrote: »

I think the 9 euro was due to an existing law that made it easier for the government to enact it quickly.

The benefits are mixture of all the things already mentioned.

My take on the wedding is that with reduced numbers it's essentially just 2 families coming together while a gig would have numerous households who wouldn't normally mix coming together. The R number from a cluster at a wedding would be lower than that at a gig.

Jaysus you must have fierce large families if it's 25 per!

You do know that being blood relatives live in different 'households', that people invite friends to weddings (many don't even talk to their families', and people also go to concerts as a household. You would be way more likely to interact with other households at a wedding where people are connecting than a socially distance gig, where people are there for the music, not each other.

Re the 9 Euro, now we have two additional theories to add to the mix!

Makes no sense to me. An indoor seated gig, managed by professionals who know exactly how to do this, or at least just as well as restaurants is now cancelled (take Lisa Hannigan's gigs for example).
Say what you want it is an incredibly inconsistent set of 'rules' which the government themselves don't even adhere to :mad:

_Whimsical_

inisboffin wrote: »

Say what you want it is an incredibly inconsistent set of 'rules' which the government themselves don't even adhere to :mad:

A comparison between weddings and gigs just doesn't wash. You could go to a gig every night of the weeks, you won't do the same with a wedding. Wedding guests will be pods of people that generally mix anyway as families, gig attendees will not. Weddings are once in a lifetime for a couple - gigs are not.

I don't really agree with you on the rules, only a lockdown can be entirely coherent as rules go. What we currently have is a set of rules that bends to accommodate what are justifiably important things - that lets us try and protect being able to share special once in a life time events with family like weddings and funerals, tries to protect *some* level of employment in the service sector, tries to let kids gain an education and parents competently work from home. It may not seem fair or completely consistent but life and pandemics are not fair. All we can do now is accept that we must prioritise the things that are of most benefit to the majority and that we must all make sacrifices.

It doesn't matter what others do, fair is over now, it doesn't matter that politicians made stupid choices, it just matters that we do our best with what we have for ourselves and for everyone else.

inisboffin

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

A comparison between weddings and gigs just doesn't wash. You could go to a gig every night of the weeks, you won't do the same with a wedding. Wedding guests will be pods of people that generally mix anyway as families, gig attendees will not. Weddings are once in a lifetime for a couple - gigs are not.

I don't really agree with you on the rules, only a lockdown can be entirely coherent as rules go. What we currently have is a set of rules that bends to accommodate what are justifiably important things - that lets us try and protect being able to share special once in a life time events with family like weddings and funerals, tries to protect *some* level of employment in the service sector, tries to let kids gain an education and parents competently work from home. It may not seem fair or completely consistent but life and pandemics are not fair. All we can do now is accept that we must prioritise the things that are of most benefit to the majority and that we must all make sacrifices.

It doesn't matter what others do, fair is over now, it doesn't matter that politicians made stupid choices, it just matters that we do our best with what we have for ourselves and for everyone else.

I really just think we are all trying to find patterns of sense in these decisions!

I know of 3 weddings who did the vows and decided they wanted a proper party where people would hug etc, and want to wait until next year for the party. But you prove my point - these households WILL be interacting, there will be people coming to a wedding from all parts of the country sometimes, and hugging, shaking hands, not distancing.

I'm talking about well distanced concerts, and they should have to meet criteria, but if they do, then no reason to stop them.

You make the point about a special day and I get that, but it only takes one encounter to catch a virus, so that's not relevant.
At a mellow gig (vs at a Sex Pistols concert ) People come, stay separate with their family or friends, don't really mingle (particularly now) and go home or to where they are staying that night, so I stand by my analogy.
I'm sure you get that a gig provides jobs too. I cited Lisa Hannigan's gig. The area lost a huge amount of money in hotels, food etc in the area because of this cancellation.

I do agree with you that we need to do our best, and I have been using common sense from the start. The issue is that not all our 'common sense' is the same

_Whimsical_

inisboffin wrote: »

I really just think we are all trying to find patterns of sense in these decisions!

I know of 3 weddings who did the vows and decided they wanted a proper party where people would hug etc, and want to wait until next year for the party. But you prove my point - these households WILL be interacting, there will be people coming to a wedding from all parts of the country sometimes, and hugging, shaking hands, not distancing.

Well on that point I think maybe you're imagining more mixing than might take place.
Two of my friends have married this summer with 50 or less guests. One had her parents ,4 siblings and their partners and their 4 children. Then she had 2 aunts and their husbands. Including herself & husband that's 20 people. All people who call to her mothers house every few days or weeks. All people with a vested interest in everyone there staying well. Those 20 people have been their social circle for the past few months. Similar on her husbands side.

Neither of the couples I knew invited any friends and were very conscious of their parents and relations who were immunocompromised so were extremely careful, knew no one would rock up feeling a little under the weather but still able to party etc.

You just wouldn't be able to rely on that in the same manner at a gig. You only need one bored lonely person to arrive with a bit of a headache/sore throat because they think they're grand. The idea of passing something to family concentrates the mind more than randomers at a gig.