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

Any restrictions which are being maintained just in case need to be lifted immediately. Not next week. Not in a new months. Now. Limiting the otherwise legal activities of citizens is an extremely serious matter. As Simon Coveney tweeted in relation to the Israel Palestine conflict the other day, "The right to peaceful freedom of assembly is non-negotiable." You got that right, sunshine.

suicide_circus wrote: »

Any restrictions which are being maintained just in case need to be lifted immediately. Not next week. Not in a new months. Now. Limiting the otherwise legal activities of citizens is an extremely serious matter. As Simon Coveney tweeted in relation to the Israel Palestine conflict the other day, "The right to peaceful freedom of assembly is non-negotiable." You got that right, sunshine.

Not sure you got the analogy quite right on two sides firing live rounds at each other, but at least you are honest in that you believe everything should be opened up right away and fcuk the consequences.

Good username btw.;)

Deleted User wrote: »

But maybe to extend the analogy - whats the death rate on 120kph motorways vs 80kph r roads

The death rate on motorways is very small, similar to Covid for people not already very ill

Deleted User wrote: »

An analogy: I believe driving faster than 120kph on a motor in good driving conditions is safe. I also believe that having a defined speed limit is correct. Therefore while I dont agree that someone driving at 135kph should be done for speeding, issuing penalties for speeding is not disproportionate, even if the limit for motorway driving is too low in my opinion.

You are comparing two very different types of restriction — road laws allow you to drive but set a certain parameter for what you can do on the road within realms which society and the law consider safe / reasonable (granted of course that this is subjective, but you’re still allowed to drive regardless and the laws are not so stringent that you are effectively forced to use an alternative mode of transport).

The Covid restrictions, insofar as Pubs / restaurants are currently concerned, are not just “speed limits” but rather “driving bans”. A speed limit still lets you drive, a driving ban does not — you are forced to find other means of transport (like pubs / restaurants having to switch to other means of sale, like delivery or takeaway). This causes great inconvenience, particularly if the “other means of transport” isn’t as effective for you — or so utterly ineffective that you can’t really travel at all on a day to day basis.

What I’m saying is that there should be a “speed limit” for pubs and restaurants (social distancing and capacity restrictions etc etc), which like your analogy is open to debate on the level of limit — but that a driving ban for them is not proportionate.

niallo27 wrote: »

Any idea of what these targets are.

70-80% first dose by the end of June. 82% being the specific target.

Leo whittling yesterday about everyone being able to register in June, take that with the usual Leo pinch of Salt. It will largely depend on vaccine availability and what certain cohorts can take.

5th of July is the date penciled in for further reopening.

Indoor hospitality.
Spectators.
Indoor team sports and training.
Return to onsite work
Non Essential International travel.

It's also note worthy that testing should dramatically decrease as the criteria for vaccinated people getting tested has radically changed.

August / September when we start to plan for the elephant in the room. Under 18s.

Boggles wrote: »

70-80% first dose by the end of June. 82% being the specific target.

Leo whittling yesterday about everyone being able to register in June, take that with the usual Leo pinch of Salt. It will largely depend on vaccine availability and what certain cohorts can take.

5th of July is the date penciled in for further reopening.

Indoor hospitality.
Spectators.
Indoor team sports and training.
Return to onsite work
Non Essential International travel.

It's also note worthy that testing should dramatically decrease as the criteria for vaccinated people getting tested has radically changed.

August / September when we start to plan for the elephant in the room. Under 18s.

Some good news on the elephant in the room yesterday. The FDA has approved the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for those aged 12 and older.

charlie14 wrote: »

I didn`t have a problem with you asking either. I just found it curious that the other poster had dug his heels in on answering what "the science" he kept referring too was, and you didn`t have the same problem with that.

It isn`t the first time, and it most likely will not be the last, when some here see a poster who has the same beliefs as themselves attempting to avoid a question pile in an effort to distract.
A fair point I believe in that when I did mention the country for all those who appeared so interested just a day before, some either seemingly missed it, yet when informed, like all the rest suddenly had no interest .

To be clear, I don't agree with the other posters assertions either!

Boggles wrote: »

70-80% first dose by the end of June. 82% being the specific target.

Leo whittling yesterday about everyone being able to register in June, take that with the usual Leo pinch of Salt. It will largely depend on vaccine availability and what certain cohorts can take.

5th of July is the date penciled in for further reopening.

Indoor hospitality.
Spectators.
Indoor team sports and training.
Return to onsite work
Non Essential International travel.

It's also note worthy that testing should dramatically decrease as the criteria for vaccinated people getting tested has radically changed.

August / September when we start to plan for the elephant in the room. Under 18s.

Are these actual dates or just dates you think, these dates will put us a few weeks behind the UK even though they have already done the risk assessment.

ArthurDayne wrote: »

So why not stay at Level 5 until vaccines are administered? Like you’re saying you are happy to sit on the infection rate — but you don’t seem to oppose any of the things that have been reopened recently and you don’t seem to oppose the phased reopening. I’d remind you that people are still dying of Covid — so if you want to minimise it while we roll out vaccines — then I don’t see why you aren’t implacably opposed to the lifting of any restrictions at this point in time.

I believe your question was "Do you agree with him that pubs and restaurants could be opened safely now?" not "everything"

Ok you've now taken down the goalposts and ran off over the horizon with them. But OK so the goalposts are now in another country - so you ask now - why not keep everything closed?

I guess because not everything is black and white Arthur. We have been able to sit on the infection rate and open up a number of less risky activities. And we're not the only ones - this is something which other countries have also achieved. As to which activities are "safe". Within parameters - thats already a known. Don’t tell me that this is news to you?

So we know the risk carried by certain activities with regard to the spread of infection. Some activities carry a low risk - some are considerably higher that includes restaurants and pubs . And yes I know all businesses need to open as soon as is possible - but with outdoor opening and takeaway - many do have avenues for an income stream and supports in the short term.

And as you already know - minimise does not imply no infections btw (which is a near impossibility imho) - atm it means sitting on the rate of infection whilst we roll out the biggest vaccination programme in the history of the state.

You've said previously that your argument doesn't rest on opening everything up, but simply rests on finding the right balance.

So we apparently have found a balance between keeping the infection rate low and some opening up- in this interim stage whilst people are being vaccinated. But you're still not happy because for some reason it doesn't match your personal ideas of of being "proportionate and reasonable"?

I honestly thought you would be happier now that we have moved towards an albeit temporary "Living with Covid’ strategy that actually involves living with Covid and in that accepting a balance in keeping the infection rate down / restarting less risky economic and social activities and vaccinating as many as possible. But apparently not...

So now we know where we both stand. I think I'll leave you at it ..

niallo27 wrote: »

Are these actual dates or just dates you think, these dates will put us a few weeks behind the UK even though they have already done the risk assessment.

Well no, relative to rollout we are ahead of UK, they only opened retail with 32 million first dosed.

We had schools open before them, we are allowing more people visit each other with less restrictions.

4 weeks after the 7th according to NPHET, which brings us to the 5th of July.

Of course things could change but that is the advice that was laid out in the last letter from NPHET published by the department.

Again it's only advice it's up to the government to take it and make the decisions.

gozunda wrote: »

I believe your question was "Do you agree with him that pubs and restaurants could be opened safely now?" not "everything"

Ok you've now taken down the goalposts and ran off over the horizon with them. But OK so the goalposts are now in another country - so you ask now - why not keep everything closed?

I guess because not everything is black and white Arthur. We have been able to sit on the infection rate and open up a number of less risky activities. And we're not the only ones - this is something which other countries have also achieved. As to which activities are "safe". Within parameters - thats already a known. Don’t tell me that this is news to you?

So we know the risk carried by certain activities with regard to the spread of infection. Some activities carry a low risk - some are considerably higher that includes restaurants and pubs . And yes I know all businesses need to open as soon as is possible - but with outdoor opening and takeaway - many do have avenues for an income stream and supports in the short term.

And as you already know - minimise does not imply no infections btw (which is a near impossibility imho) - atm it means sitting on the rate of infection whilst we roll out the biggest vaccination programme in the history of the state.

You've said previously that your argument doesn't rest on opening everything up, but simply rests on finding the right balance.

So we apparently have found a balance between keeping the infection rate low and some opening up- in this interim stage whilst people are being vaccinated. But you're still not happy because for some reason it doesn't match your personal ideas of of being "proportionate and reasonable"?

I honestly thought you would be happier now that we have moved towards an albeit temporary "Living with Covid’ strategy that actually involves living with Covid and in that accepting a balance in keeping the infection rate down / restarting less risky economic and social activities and vaccinating as many as possible. But apparently not...

So now we know where we both stand. I think I'll leave you at it ..

Great, so could you explain to me the extent to which opening indoor dining and pubs will upset this “balance“? Or is this just going to be another dose of it-isn’t-rocket-science-that-closing-pubs-slows-transmission?

Let us be clear, we are not talking about lifting restrictions on restaurants and pubs — we are talking about setting the restrictions at a level that is commensurate to the risk. Social distancing, capacity limits, the ability of staff to police their premises, the threat of penalty or closure for violating restrictions — not to mention the fact that general Covid etiquette has now been painfully beaten into the national psyche — these things all remain extant.

The risk to me of opening these premises is that infections will probably increase to some extent and some further people probably will die (the same risk you are happy to take with the ending of distance limits, reopening of schools and retail etc etc). But that is not the scale of risk on which all-out shutdown of premises was predicated — so they should not remain closed — but the risk remains significant enough for restrictions such as social distancing measures within premises to remain in place.

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Great, so could you explain to me the extent to which opening indoor dining and pubs will upset this “balance“? Or is this just going to be another dose of it-isn’t-rocket-science-that-closing-pubs-slows-transmission?

I see we have returned from the expedition from far countries where 'everything' had to be opened up or closed - straight back into the open pub ...

Well Arthur I was referencing your own idea of a "balance" whereby you've said previously that your argument doesn't rest on opening everything up, but simply rests on finding the right balance.

And as detailed it is known that certain activities especially those indoors carry greater risk re. the spread of infection. So for the moment we are opening lower risk outdoor stuff first. With plans to open higher risk activities later as vaccination rates increase. Now I don't have the sliderule for you to show you that in explicit detail. But that's what I've taken from the roadmap discussion to date. And imho it makes sense. Will we get absolutely everything right? Most likley not. But that balance is holding. We know that with vaccination schedule being met these premises will open in the not to distant future. That is unless you're still unhappy with that of course?

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Let us be clear, we are not talking about lifting restrictions on restaurants and pubs — we are talking about setting the restrictions at a level that is commensurate to the risk. Social distancing, capacity limits, the ability of staff to police their premises, the threat of penalty or closure for violating restrictions — not to mention the fact that general Covid etiquette has now been painfully beaten into the national psyche — these things all remain extant. The risk to me of opening these premises is that infections will probably increase to some extent and some further people probably will die (the same risk you are happy to take with the ending of distance limits, reopening of schools and retail etc etc). But that is not the scale of risk on which all-out shutdown of premises was predicated — so they should not remain closed — but the risk remains significant enough for restrictions such as social distancing measures within premises to remain in place.

Well I believe that's the exact question you asked me in the previous comment so unless you're moving the goalposts yet again I guess better lets leave it at that

Boggles wrote: »

Have you ever actually been in an Irish pub Arthur?

Covid etiquette for me personally goes out the window around the 2.5 pint mark.

And whilst I agree we could have kept more open for longer if we were far more heavy handed and issued harsher penalties, neither the appetite nor the ability to do that was there.

All that is great on paper, but impossible in reality and even more impracticable to implement in the time frame of "open the pubs now".

Also at the end of the day we are dealing with a airborne virus, so unless you can make the pubs a vacuum people will get infected whatever the mitigation strategy is.




You should send that to cabinet in an email.

Granted it's vague in the extreme, but it is to the point.

It’s interesting that you mock that for being vague. Can you tell me the specific metrics the Cabinet is working off in our reopening? I mean — when they decided to exit Level 5 lockdown do you imagine this was done on the understanding that more people were likely to be infected and die of Covid than would have died if Level 5 had been maintained? Or would you have been the lone voice of reason, saying that this was too vague?

I’ll excuse the arrogance on the Irish pubs question, but you’re not comparing like for like when you talk about an Irish pub pre-Covid and during the pandemic — and well you know it. When pubs were last open, there weren’t people bunched up at bars, people weren’t darting from table to table, people weren’t dancing about or shifting randomers. The dynamic was completely different. Of course it can’t be policed with absolute perfection and of course there will be some who take the piss — but the amount of social contact in pubs was dramatically reduced far beyond the norm.