Opening of "No-Food" pubs pushed out again

weldoninhio · 18-09-2020 10:08AM

robbiezero wrote: »

Same in mine. Was also allowed by them pre-pandemic.

It’s grand. The chipper doesn’t charge delivery to the Pub either.

MOH · 18-09-2020 10:56AM

The Nal wrote: »

As soon as no food pubs were announced, pubs could have become a food pub. And its easily done.

No, it's not

The Nal wrote: »

Depends how well you get on with the local gardai.

Why would you need to get on well with the local gardai if it's so easily done?

The Nal · 18-09-2020 11:08AM

MOH wrote: »

No, it's not

Tis, mate of mine owns a pub and did it.

MOH wrote: »

Why would you need to get on well with the local gardai if it's so easily done?

Because its a grey area and this is Ireland. Some will allow a bag of chips on a pub table and some will start asking questions.

Richard Hillman · 18-09-2020 11:28AM

There have been 5 outbreaks attributed to Pub-Restaurants. Five. Don't tell me this isn't an anti-alcohol thing.

Open the Pubs · 18-09-2020 11:40AM

The Nal wrote: »

Toners are advertising that theyre showing the Leinster match on Saturday. Sports, booze, pizza. Obviously with social distancing etc capacity is hugely reduced but they'll be busy.

Isn't there talk now the food pubs and restaurants in Dublin are being closed today by Government?

The Nal · 18-09-2020 11:41AM

Open the Pubs wrote: »

Isn't there talk now the food pubs and restaurants in Dublin are being closed today by Government?

Yeah, outdoor areas only allowed.

hetuzozaho · 18-09-2020 11:48AM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

There have been 5 outbreaks attributed to Pub-Restaurants. Five. Don't tell me this isn't an anti-alcohol thing.

That's just an issue with the data. Not proof that it's not spreading in pub restaurants

Open the Pubs · 18-09-2020 11:55AM

hetuzozaho wrote: »

That's just an issue with the data. Not proof that it's not spreading in pub restaurants

There is no evidence of this, the onus is absolutely not on pubs/restaurants to prove they are they 'not' spreading the virus. Those who accuse them must show evidence, they can't do this.

hetuzozaho · 18-09-2020 12:03PM

Open the Pubs wrote: »

There is no evidence of this, the onus is absolutely not on pubs/restaurants to prove they are they 'not' spreading the virus. Those who accuse them must show evidence, they can't do this.

I never said the onus was on them.

ShooterSF · 18-09-2020 12:08PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

In my local you make the order from the chipper yourself, so it is you ordering.

But then is your local serving food? I'm pretty sure that was the requirement. Do you have to produce a receipt over 9 euro each to order drinks? Seems dodgy tbh

mountgomery burns · 18-09-2020 12:49PM

ShooterSF wrote: »

But then is your local serving food? I'm pretty sure that was the requirement. Do you have to produce a receipt over 9 euro each to order drinks? Seems dodgy tbh

But it is ultimately allowed. It's not ideal but sure that's what months of closure drives you too.
There's nothing in the guidelines about food having to be prepared on site.

There was a more sensible approach to adopt from the outset but they neglected that. Now they are in a position where they are opening them while the reported cases are reaching their highest levels since April end. How daft will they look if cases escalate even further with outbreaks established from pubs? I doubt people will see it as vindication of the continued closure when reported cases were some days in single digits.

It's a tightrope they are walking, but they started the blade on the rope back in mid summer.

cadaliac · 18-09-2020 01:39PM

ShooterSF wrote: »

But then is your local serving food? I'm pretty sure that was the requirement. Do you have to produce a receipt over 9 euro each to order drinks? Seems dodgy tbh

I guess this isn't being prosecuted as it isn't the crux of having food while drinking.
Yes, it is a technicality but people are still eating while drinking and thus achieving the goal.
Therefore why split hairs?

MOH · 18-09-2020 02:43PM

Open the Pubs wrote: »

Isn't there talk now the food pubs and restaurants in Dublin are being closed today by Government?

Level 3 of the so-called "plan" has "additional restrictions for indoor dining", while level 4 has no indoor dining, takeaway only or outdoor dining for a max of 15 people. At which point you'd think a lot of places might decide they're better off closing the doors and furloughing staff onto the covid payment.

From the sounds of things they're going to put restaurants at level 4, while pubs will remain somewhere beyond level 5 (where they'd at least be able to sell takeaway drink), while Dublin as a whole is officially placed at level 3.875.

(On a totally unrelated note, does anyone know what PR company the government said they'd hired to manage the plan rollout? )

The Nal · 18-09-2020 02:50PM

MOH wrote: »

(On a totally unrelated note, does anyone know what PR company the government said they'd hired to manage the plan rollout? )

I don't know their name but this guy is the CEO

mountgomery burns · 18-09-2020 04:00PM

The Nal wrote: »

I don't know their name but this guy is the CEO

Multi Billion dollar US firm, I don't think I'd blame them for this to be honest.

More likely it is the inept delivery of those they are providing the service too. I mean ultimately, the government devised this plan that they couldn't adhere to for even a few hours.

It was Teneo by the way that were advising them on it.

The White Wolf · 18-09-2020 05:09PM

Hmmmm, where is that clown that told me wet pubs adapting to the food requirements wouldn't cause an a dilemma for the government. They outsmarted the government and they've typically responded with a bit of political heavy-handedness

Feel very sorry for the people that are going to lose their jobs. This government will have a lot to answer for in time.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 18-09-2020 05:59PM

The White Wolf wrote: »

Feel very sorry for the people that are going to lose their jobs. This government will have a lot to answer for in time.

No they won't, they'll just blame NEPHT.

MOH · 18-09-2020 11:51PM

The White Wolf wrote: »

Hmmmm, where is that clown that told me wet pubs adapting to the food requirements wouldn't cause an a dilemma for the government. They outsmarted the government and they've typically responded with a bit of political heavy-handedness

Feel very sorry for the people that are going to lose their jobs. This government will have a lot to answer for in time.

It only struck me earlier that in one way the requirement for pubs to maintain food receipts might have been a clever way of trying to shut that down.

Normally pubs selling food would have a raft of health and hygiene requirements. I still find it difficult to believe, but a lot of people seem to think that people bringing/ordering in their own food somehow exempts the pubs from any of this.

But if that was true, then the requirement for pubs to keep records of food served would leave such pubs in a quandary: if the customer orders/brings the food themselves then the pub can't show any evidence that they served the customer food; but if the pub orders the food and supplies it to the customer, then it's a lot harder to distance themselves from the hygiene regs.

Although that would require a level of joined up thinking and enforcement that's highly unlikely to exist.

freak scence · 19-09-2020 12:02AM

ShooterSF wrote: »

But then is your local serving food? I'm pretty sure that was the requirement. Do you have to produce a receipt over 9 euro each to order drinks? Seems dodgy tbh

who gives a f uck

copeyhagen · 19-09-2020 12:43AM

freak scence wrote: »

who gives a f uck

this stinks of covid related infections.

/s

joeguevara · 19-09-2020 02:04AM

MOH wrote: »

It only struck me earlier that in one way the requirement for pubs to maintain food receipts might have been a clever way of trying to shut that down.

Normally pubs selling food would have a raft of health and hygiene requirements. I still find it difficult to believe, but a lot of people seem to think that people bringing/ordering in their own food somehow exempts the pubs from any of this.

But if that was true, then the requirement for pubs to keep records of food served would leave such pubs in a quandary: if the customer orders/brings the food themselves then the pub can't show any evidence that they served the customer food; but if the pub orders the food and supplies it to the customer, then it's a lot harder to distance themselves from the hygiene regs.

Although that would require a level of joined up thinking and enforcement that's highly unlikely to exist.

It seems to be constantly misunderstood what happened when pubs that could serve a substantial meal could reopen. There was three different categories of food serving pubs. Firstly the ones that always served food. These would have a restaurant certificate which is renewed in the district court at the same time as their liquor licence. If food preparation is on site they would require planning permission and regular visits from Environmental Health Officer. The second category is pubs that didn't serve food who started. Out of nowhere Leo announced an exemption from holding a restaurant certificate, planning for a kitchen or food preparation area. It is unclear whether they were a priority for EHO, but out of three pubs I know the owners, who started preparing food on site, none of them have been inspected. I remember at the time I did a search for the legislation which Leo promised would be enacted to allow the exemption from not having a restaurant certificate but could not find it. The third category for pubs who get delivered in is exactly the same as category 2 as they are serving food on site. In normal situations they would still require a certificate and would be required to ensure that there was no food safety risk. As food should be eaten when delivered, and not stored on site this is relatively straightforward. Should ensure where it is prepared complies with food safety requirements.

So there are exemption from normal circumstances but doesn't exempt from ensuring it is safe for consumption. In reality it was bizarre that safety for the public was overlooked in order to shoe horn pubs as restaurants.

The White Wolf · 19-09-2020 04:45AM

MOH wrote: »

It only struck me earlier that in one way the requirement for pubs to maintain food receipts might have been a clever way of trying to shut that down.

Normally pubs selling food would have a raft of health and hygiene requirements. I still find it difficult to believe, but a lot of people seem to think that people bringing/ordering in their own food somehow exempts the pubs from any of this.

But if that was true, then the requirement for pubs to keep records of food served would leave such pubs in a quandary: if the customer orders/brings the food themselves then the pub can't show any evidence that they served the customer food; but if the pub orders the food and supplies it to the customer, then it's a lot harder to distance themselves from the hygiene regs.

Although that would require a level of joined up thinking and enforcement that's highly unlikely to exist.

My local invested a lot in order to reopen; new kitchen, the hiring of two lounge staff, two chefs and a general restructuring of the place to ensure the rules were being satisfied....and yes there was receipts for food. TBH they probably went beyond what was practical in order to serve the community, all under the false assurances from the government.

Yet it still wasn't enough and they'll likely never open again now.

As I said earlier some fool on here that was posting regularly about any pub adapting would be fine has gone missing all of a sudden, I wonder why.

joeguevara · 19-09-2020 11:21AM

The White Wolf wrote: »

My local invested a lot in order to reopen; new kitchen, the hiring of two lounge staff, two chefs and a general restructuring of the place to ensure the rules were being satisfied....and yes there was receipts for food. TBH they probably went beyond what was practical in order to serve the community, all under the false assurances from the government.

Yet it still wasn't enough and they'll likely never open again now.

As I said earlier some fool on here that was posting regularly about any pub adapting would be fine has gone missing all of a sudden, I wonder why.

In all fairness, after all of that investment, if 3 weeks means they will never open again, they should have had a less ambitious investment in order to serve food. It’s crazy for any pub that doesn’t have a food over to blow that in the middle of the highest unemployment rate we have had in decades.

Opening a food offering is one of the riskiest things in the best of times. Hiring two chefs and a new kitchen is bizarre.

The White Wolf · 19-09-2020 11:29AM

joeguevara wrote: »

In all fairness, after all of that investment, if 3 weeks means they will never open again, they should have had a less ambitious investment in order to serve food. It’s crazy for any pub that doesn’t have a food over to blow that in the middle of the highest unemployment rate we have had in decades.

Opening a food offering is one of the riskiest things in the best of times. Hiring two chefs and a new kitchen is bizarre.

New kitchen is not all that bizarre for a traditionally "wet" pub with aspirations. Two chefs alternating isn't bizarre either if you think one should be on 7 days a week.

IAMAMORON · 19-09-2020 11:43AM

I have given up on going for a pint now until Christmas.

I saw the Schadenfruede in shít for brainses eye in his speech at tea time yesterday.

He will never be forgiven for this either. He is the king of the ban, I cannot stand him and no longer will. Throw him off the back of the boat and tell no one. It is his turn.

gmisk · 19-09-2020 11:44AM

Hunky Monster wrote: »

No they won't, they'll just blame NEPHT.

Ah sure as long as they aren't blaming NPHET...

ShooterSF · 19-09-2020 05:49PM

freak scence wrote: »

who gives a f uck

As someone who finally gets to go back to work next week with pubs reopening, I do. It annoys me to see other places dodging the rules and possibly setting the industry back. We are supposed to be showing we can self regulate and follow the rules. So many pubs in the country crying out to let them open and let them show that they can be responsible and we have that chance Monday.

freak scence · 19-09-2020 07:49PM

ShooterSF wrote: »

As someone who finally gets to go back to work next week with pubs reopening, I do. It annoys me to see other places dodging the rules and possibly setting the industry back. We are supposed to be showing we can self regulate and follow the rules. So many pubs in the country crying out to let them open and let them show that they can be responsible and we have that chance Monday.

got laid off yesterday so dry up

John O.Groats · 19-09-2020 08:22PM

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I have given up on going for a pint now until Christmas.

I saw the Schadenfruede in shít for brainses eye in his speech at tea time yesterday.

He will never be forgiven for this either. He is the king of the ban, I cannot stand him and no longer will. Throw him off the back of the boat and tell no one. It is his turn.

Judging by this ranting gibberish I would say you have been indulging today already whether in a pub or elsewhere.

bloopy · 19-09-2020 09:16PM

joeguevara wrote: »

In all fairness, after all of that investment, if 3 weeks means they will never open again, they should have had a less ambitious investment in order to serve food. It’s crazy for any pub that doesn’t have a food over to blow that in the middle of the highest unemployment rate we have had in decades.

Opening a food offering is one of the riskiest things in the best of times. Hiring two chefs and a new kitchen is bizarre.

Yea. **** that idiot, right?

Opening of "No-Food" pubs pushed out again

Comments