Coronavirus

[HighlandDougie]

... I don't have a yacht, so don't have that problem

.

Now I understand - is there a groan emoticon?

[vinteuil]

Now I understand - is there a groan emoticon?

... I think Bryn's coat on a hook is a pretty impressive riposte!

.

[Nick Armstrong]

Anyway, all it has done is produce a "tit-for-tat" response from the French Government

What are you referring to here, HD?

[Bryn]

... I think Bryn's coat on a hook is a pretty impressive riposte!

.

Not that I failed to chuckle.

[Serial_Apologist]

Following this morning's disgracefully unjustifed grilling of Dominic Ashworth for a direct answer to an impossible question, Andrew Marr should be hanging his shame now that Johnson and Javid have had to cave in on the social isolation business resulting from the out-of-control "ping app" - a case of hoisted on own petard if ever there was one. Jenrick was in comparison given a fairly easy ride when he deserved crucifying for evasiveness, playing it for time with his repetitious answers until time ran out. Another blatant example of BBC bias was the lunchtime interview of Tony Blair on Radio 4, in which every word of advice was greeted with either simpering agreement or friendly chuckle. Blair is wheeled out regularly for his "informed" advice. Amol Rajan is now a leading presenter on Toady with his monotone fast gabble. I hope the Glasgow Media Group is keeping a beady eye on all this - the BBC is just about becoming unlistenable and unwatchable when it comes to news and comment.

[Simon B]

Those with a "what does all this really mean?" mindset toward the data may wish to listen in to BBC R4 at 11:30 on Monday or via the iPlayer: A More or Less special with Tim Harford entitled "The Freedom Day Gamble". https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000y49w

[french frank]

Those with a "what does all this really mean?" mindset toward the data may wish to listen in to BBC R4 at 11:30 on Monday or via the iPlayer: A More or Less special with Tim Harford entitled "The Freedom Day Gamble". https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000y49w

Thanks, Simon. Not much sign of Freedom Day here early this morning, all passengers on a passing bus (without exception) still masked and spaced apart, so that may be a restriction not lifted. Similarly customers and staff at the Coop and staff in, and arriving at, the vets. Mask-wearing may become a significant 'badge' of identity.

[teamsaint]

Thanks, Simon. Not much sign of Freedom Day here early this morning, all passengers on a passing bus (without exception) still masked and spaced apart, so that may be a restriction not lifted. Similarly customers and staff at the Coop and staff in, and arriving at, the vets. Mask-wearing may become a significant 'badge' of identity.

I intend to wear mine where and when I think it is appropriate and useful.
The idea of it as a badge of identity, which I think it is already, is rather depressing.

“Freedom Day” with the push towards digital ID in full swing ( and completely against the recommendations of the parliamentary committe when they looked at vaccine passports) is a bit of a misnomer. Well , a lot of one in fact.

[teamsaint]

Anecdotally, the pingdemic really is in full flow. Everybody I speak to seems to be affected, or have contacts affected..

[french frank]

The idea of it as a badge of identity, which I think it is already, is rather depressing.

If we were sitting in a pub garden, unmasked of course, I'd love to investigate why you find that depressing.

As for the concept of 'freedom' I've been thinking about this and decided that we are all prisoners, slaves even, of the times in which we live. It becomes more obvious as people become more judgmental about the past. Another subject, no doubt, but philosophically it interests me …

[teamsaint]

If we were sitting in a pub garden, unmasked of course, I'd love to investigate why you find that depressing.

As for the concept of 'freedom' I've been thinking about this and decided that we are all prisoners, slaves even, of the times in which we live. It becomes more obvious as people become more judgmental about the past. Another subject, no doubt, but philosophically it interests me …

I have to get back to work, ( sorry would rather chat !,) but on your second point, I agree. We are all subject to a lot of constraints in ( our current) society, many of which we have had for a long time, not all of which are sensible or fair. But it seems to me that the direction of travel is the vital thing here.

The idea of a badge of identity thoughI think tends towards being unhelpful and rather unnecessarily binary . Speak later !!

[french frank]

We are all subject to a lot of constraints in ( our current) society, many of which we have had for a long time, not all of which are sensible or fair. But it seems to me that the direction of travel is the vital thing here.

I was thinking more that we are enclosed by the limitations of current knowledge and experience, by prevailing attitudes and opinions. We can't escape from our own time.

The idea of a badge of identity though I think tends towards being unhelpful and rather unnecessarily binary .

I don't say that it's helpful - just that it happens: people divide themselves into tribes, they categorise. Some people are 'like us', others are different and 'we' decide what matters. I confess: I felt a warm feeling towards a young man walking down the street this morning (needlessly, at that point) weaing a mask.

Speak later !!

[Andrew]

Big discussion at work today re: masks. I've just returned from an early shift (6am-4Pm) and passengers were mostly happy at the prospect of not wearing masks. Some were ecstatic at not having to wear them, although others were happy to continue-their choice-no problem with that.

The interesting point was the Airport's decision to make masks mandatory. When questioned, the Airport argued that the Airport is private land, and so they "may set our own standards", however, a counter argument (which might be relevant to any other places, venues and general get-togethers) is the ruling made many years ago, that referred to places to which the public have "substantive access." This is the background: Many years ago an airport vehicle was "clocked" by the Police without road third-party insurance. The driver claimed ignorance, as he just drove it. The operator defended the absence of insurance, claiming the Airport to be "private property" The challenge became a cause celebre and the resultant ruling was based on any area to which the public have "substantive access", and stated that rules that should apply would be those as in public areas.

So...... Will some bar-room lawyer argue that a supermarket is an area of "substantive access"....? An airport is different, since once you're airside I would argue you are NOT in an area to which the public have "substantive access",but I envisage a nightmare of arguments ahead!

[Bryn]

What is the legal definition of a nightclub? Ah, I now hear the late September restrictions extend beyond nightclubs. So, how crowded is "crowded" when it comes to entertainment venues?

[Simon B]

So...... Will some bar-room lawyer argue that a supermarket is an area of "substantive access"....? An airport is different, since once you're airside I would argue you are NOT in an area to which the public have "substantive access",but I envisage a nightmare of arguments ahead!

Isn't the catch with that argument that this precedent means that the rules that apply on private land which has "substantive (public) access" are at least as restrictive as those applying more widely? Then the matter of private bodies mandating Coronavirus restrictions is the logical inverse of the case from which that originated.

My assumption is that an airport, shop, train operating company etc can make you stand on one leg, don a fez and sing My Old Man's a Dustman in Bulgarian all while shampooing a cocker spaniel as a condition of entry if they want - providing it doesn't breach discrimination law etc. As you note - fertile territory for barrack room lawyers.