RimmyJimmer Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 5 minutes ago, Genie said: I think people are getting a bit silly with the extreme scenarios purely to poke holes in the rules. Exactly this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 1 minute ago, ml1dch said: Nope. The legislation in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland made no reference to the number of times. If I wanted to go out for six runs in one day this time last week, that was fully permitted by the rules. The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, section 6.2 (b) if you're interested. Ok, so you knew the answer to your question all along. This is the gap between government guidelines and what was written into law debate again. Nice one, you got me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post OutByEaster? Posted May 11, 2020 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted May 11, 2020 It must be any one person to meet at a time, as opposed to one specific person to meet as often as you like. If it's the latter, I'm off out to find the most attractive woman I can, sneakily engage her in conversation, remind her she's now met me and isn't legally allowed to meet anyone else then move to arrangements on where and when we'll meet each day until phase 2* begins. *Phase 2 of the government's plan obviously, I rarely make it to phase 2. 4 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Genie said: Ok, so you knew the answer to your question all along. This is the gap between government guidelines and what was written into law debate again. Well yes. If somebody starts an exchange with "it's perfectly clear, it's obviously x", and then proceeds to give an incorrect understanding then it rather proves the point of people saying that it's not clear. No? Edited May 11, 2020 by ml1dch 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Stevo985 Posted May 11, 2020 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted May 11, 2020 12 minutes ago, RimmyJimmer said: Exactly this. A lot of the situations are really not extreme. The most common one is whether You can meet one parent or both parents in the park, or in their garden. And there doesn’t seem to be a clear answer. that’s hardly an extreme situation. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 It's about as clear as a bad day in Port Talbot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: A lot of the situations are really not extreme. The most common one is whether You can meet one parent or both parents in the park, or in their garden. And there doesn’t seem to be a clear answer. that’s hardly an extreme situation. Yes, that’s a fair one... but sooner or later someone will ask about adopted parents, or parents that can’t get to a park but can get to a nature reserve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted May 11, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 11, 2020 6 minutes ago, Genie said: Yes, that’s a fair one... but sooner or later someone will ask about adopted parents, or parents that can’t get to a park but can get to a nature reserve And if you can see that, why can’t the government? If they can be this sloppy about a pandemic, what the merry **** would cause them to actually concentrate? 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 18 minutes ago, ml1dch said: Well yes. If somebody starts an exchange with "it's perfectly clear, it's obviously x", and then proceeds to give an incorrect understanding then it rather proves the point of people saying that it's not clear. No? The government doesn’t need to legislate everything though does it? Some people are willing to follow government guidance without a need for legislation to back it up. Such people may well have been exercising once per day and may now consider exercising multiple times. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 How to solve a problem like Corona Government strategy on getting us out of ... everything. I’ve not read it yet (60 pages) so can’t quote from it, but linking for general info. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: And if you can see that, why can’t the government? If they can be this sloppy about a pandemic, what the merry **** would cause them to actually concentrate? Because nobody can write down every permutation. People will still ask why they can’t see their aunt who raised them like a mother after she was killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 Just now, Genie said: Because nobody can write down every permutation. People will still ask why they can’t see their aunt who raised them like a mother after she was killed. I reckon, given a 6 figure salary, The Treasury, the civil service, and slightly reduced use of VT, I need half an hour to knock out something better and more precise and more easily understood than the vague nonsense this bunch has cobbled together and not even proof read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 Page 31. Quote Since 23 March the Government has asked people to only leave the house for very limited purposes and this has been extraordinarily disruptive to people's lives. In particular this has affected the isolated and vulnerable, and those who live alone. As restrictions continue, the Government is considering a range of options to reduce the most harmful social effects to make the measures more sustainable. For example, the Government has asked SAGE to examine whether, when and how it can safely change the regulations to allow people to expand their household group to include one other household in the same exclusive group.29 The intention of this change would be to allow those who are isolated some more social contact, and to reduce the most harmful effects of the current social restrictions, while continuing to limit the risk of chains of transmission. It would also support some families to return to work by, for example, allowing two households to share childcare.30 This could be based on the New Zealand model of household "bubbles" where a single "bubble" is the people you live with.31 As in New Zealand, the rationale behind keeping household groups small is to limit the number of social contacts people have and, in particular, to limit the risk of interhousehold transmissions.32 In addition, the Government is also examining how to enable people to gather in slightly larger groups to better facilitate small weddings. Over the coming weeks, the Government will engage on the nature and timing of the measures in this step, in order to consider the widest possible array of views on how best to balance the health, economic and social effects. They'#ll think about the timing of it over the coming weeks. Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: I reckon, given a 6 figure salary, The Treasury, the civil service, and slightly reduced use of VT, I need half an hour to knock out something better and more precise and more easily understood than the vague nonsense this bunch has cobbled together and not even proof read. How does the 6 figure salary help you write the document? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, chrisp65 said: Can you go to Snowdon if you wanted to? You can but I won't let you through the front door. Edit: For clarity, you is plural you not singular you (as in ChrisP). Edited May 11, 2020 by snowychap 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 58 minutes ago, Genie said: Previously it was limited to once per day. No, it wasn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 1 minute ago, snowychap said: No, it wasn't. Christ, not again. Government guidance was to limit exercise to once per day as per the linked gov site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 11 minutes ago, Genie said: Because nobody can write down every permutation. In law? You can't be serious. You're trolling right. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Genie said: How does the 6 figure salary help you write the document? If I was earning a 6 figure salary as the Prime Minister of a country during a pandemic, I’d give my day job quite a lot of my attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 10 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Page 31. They'#ll think about the timing of it over the coming weeks. Christ. Surely there's have to be some sort of centralised register of these nominated +1s? Once nominated, are we permanently shackled to the other household? Can we get a divorce or annulment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts