Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

OwenM wrote: »

So what do you base your statement about the vast majority on?

The actual polls published amongst other various data, not the imaginary ones the medija are supressing.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Will there be that much of a time lag though? If we're penciled in to relax things to a similar extent a couple of weeks later I doubt it'll be a massive issue.

There is no guarantee we are opening up a few weeks behind our northern friends.


The mood music is against any easing on 5 april with Nolan from NPHET tossing out 20 weeks like he was ordering a coffee. Then yesterday comparing our current position with Halloween.


How anyone in NPHET can compare Halloween with now is beyond comprehension.


We have vaccines now, we have vaccinated HCWS and residents in most health care settings and the majority of our over 85s.

It's almost funny to hear Glynn start to peddle the 'we were only advising' line.

And sure poor Leo and Meehole had no choice but to follow the advice of the single-issue quango they established.

Wouldn't it have been terrible to have a quango that included mental-health experts, sociologists, business reps and child development advocates?

That might spit out a whole raft of different opinions that would require Leo and Meehole to have to make a decision.

Much better to have Dr Tony and 39 nodding dogs who can just tell, I mean advise, the lads to lockdown the country for months.

Leo and Meehole will just have to follow the advice then - sure what choice did they have?

Expect to hear this little 'pass the parcel' excuse in the coming years as we spend millions making a few barristers very rich by establishing a tribunal to look into how we became one of the most indebted countries in the world.

Boggles wrote: »

Yes lad.

They also enforce things like road traffic legislation.

You know drink and driving and such.

They are not doing that to be meanies, they are doing it to protect the health and well being of the public.

How this is news, is very bizarre.

Baby steps but we're getting there. Drink driving legislation is for safety not for stopping the spread of a disease.

facehugger99 wrote: »

It's almost funny to hear Glynn start to peddle the 'we were only advising' line.

And sure poor Leo and Meehole had no choice but to follow the advice of the single-issue quango they established.

Wouldn't it have been terrible to have a quango that included mental-health experts, sociologists, business reps and child development advocates?

That might spit out a whole raft of different opinions that would require Leo and Meehole to have to make a decision.

Much better to have Dr Tony and 39 nodding dogs who can just tell, I mean advise, the lads to lockdown the country for months.

Leo and Meehole will just have to follow the advice then - sure what choice did they have?

Expect to hear this little 'pass the parcel' excuse in the coming years as we spend millions making a few barristers very rich by establishing a tribunal to look into how we became one of the most indebted countries in the world.

Still with the name calling of politicians. Nice.

How about a bit of reality?

Maybe you'd prefer the Brazilian model of pretending there's no pandemic and no need of restrictions?

As of Sunday, 21 Brazilian states and the Federal District had an ICU occupancy rate of over 80%. Of those, 14 were on the verge of collapsing with an occupation above 90%.

In the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul, ICUs are so overloaded that the largest public hospital treating Covid-19 cases in state capital Porto Alegre said Sunday it was forced to close its doors to new patients.

"The hospital's ICU Covid ward already serves at 132% occupancy," hospital management at Porto Alegre Hospital das Clinicas said in a statement.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/15/world/brazil-variant-icu-crisis-sao-paulo-intl-latam/index.html

SAO PAULO (AP) — Brazil’s state health secretaries on Monday called for lockdowns and curfews in many parts of the country because hospitals are running short of intensive care unit beds as COVID-19 daily kills more than 1,000 people nationwide.

https://apnews.com/article/brazil-coronavirus-pandemic-634da373dd37972cb4398ef28c77dd49


As for Ireland being indebted - you'll find that long predated Covid.

Shame the country is actually doing well things considering...

Ireland’s economy grew by 3.4% last year despite Covid-19 restrictions on the back of record growth in the export sector or that Ireland’s was the only EU economy to grow last year as multinationals rode out Covid.

It nearly seems like a deliberate attempt to add fuel to the fire after the events in Clapham Common, but stunningly, Boris has pushed for legislation that gives police the right to end any peaceful protests.

And here is the almost incredulous flimsy reasoning that can be used in order to end a peaceful protest

The bill proposes new conditions which would enable police to end the demonstration of a single person if the "noise generated by the person carrying on the protest may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation which are carried on in the vicinity of the protest." This, in theory, could mean someone protesting outside the headquarters of a private company could be moved along if their protest disrupts the activity of that private company.

The bill also suggests, in somewhat vague language, that demonstrations and protests should not "intentionally" or "recklessly" cause "public nuisance." That, the bill states, might include an act that "obstructs the public or a section of the public in the exercise or enjoyment of a right that may be exercised or enjoyed by the public at large."

Cressida Dick, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, is quoted as saying that ever since the Extinction Rebellion climate change protests in London, police forces have needed "change to powers and to legislation that would enable the police to deal better with protests" that "are not primarily violent or seriously disorderly," but "had an avowed intent to bring policing to its knees and the city to a halt."

Couldn't make this up, I'm seriously shocked. The conditions are so ambiguous that it's clear nobody could do anything to fully ensure their protest would be safe from police disruption .Could the Brits really stand for this going through after experiencing what that would mean first hand last week at the vigil?
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/16/uk/uk-crime-bill-sarah-everard-protests-clampdown-intl-gbr/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=link&utm_source=twCNN&utm_content=2021-03-16T11%3A45%3A09

Kiith wrote: »

Fan of COVID restrictions or not, this should be one thing everyone can agree is extremely dangerous if true.

Totally, because it doesn't even seem specifically tailored to help with any COVID related issues or look very temporary, and the Met Commissioner's disturbing comments that justify the laws based on issues experienced by officers during the climate protests of 2020 rather than any disorder related to COVID protests.

dalyboy wrote: »

Yip. The minute the north reopens I’ll have a tank of fuel in the car and off we go. First stop is the quays shopping centre in Newry. Then beers in a pub. A game of golf. A pleasant night in a hotel with a pool. A game of tennis next day etc etc.

Only 40 mins up the road from where I am.

Priority action will be to de-program RTÉ and newstalk from my car radio though.
Don’t want the presence of them extremists with me on my journey.

I'd say a lot of people will be doing exactly the same, especially if the North has opened up by the summer. I live right on the border so it suits me grand.

I just hope they don't start requiring people to be vaccinated in order to get into certain places, because judging by the speed of our rollout down here I'll be lucky to be done by 2023 :pac: Although their Health Minister did seem to rule this out, so hopefully not.

In any commercial setting, one has to do cost benefit analysis, Anywhere I can find the Irish Government one, asking for a friend?

bb1234567 wrote: »

It's not a 'good' idea, you'd hope people would have the sense not to during a pandemic, but a law banning any peaceful protests is definitely a worse idea. Especially as we saw in the summer that distanced/masked protests for BLM did not lead to any significant outbreaks, but even that kind of event will no longer be permitted.

The Tories trying to make protest illegal hardly shocks you does it? It has féck all to with Covid by the way.

I suppose in recent times they could go to the European courts to check on the legality of their legislation.

But sure rule brittania.

gozunda wrote: »

How exactly are any protests peaceful or otherwise a good idea in the midst of a pandemic?

If it's a Black lives matter protest there doesn't seem to be an issue.
In fact our ministers have given these their blessings.

gozunda wrote: »

How exactly are any protests peaceful or otherwise a good idea in the midst of a pandemic?

Look at the bigger picture. Pandemic will end. Protests need to be an option forever. I'm not even anti-lockdown as such (restrictions are needed unfortunately), I don't think it's a "good idea" to be gathering at the moment, nor have I attended any such, but for fucck sake, would you not engage your brain a bit? The virus is not the only thing happening in the world.

gozunda wrote: »

How exactly are any protests peaceful or otherwise a good idea in the midst of a pandemic?

Making authoritarian laws which stick around using a pandemic as an excuse is what people are discussing - do try to keep up.