Relaxation of restrictions

salmocab

Hmmzis wrote: »

Some of that can be mitigated by proper PPE and training. Wearing a mask, gloves and goggles shouldn't be that outlandish in a building site.

Some certainly can but I’d think the grade of gloves required on site for cuts etc wouldn’t line up with the disposable type needed. Honestly I don’t see a practical way to keep distancing on sites. Some things can be mitigated but not everything.

VonLuck

robinph wrote: »

No, but you could run a closed site and nobody gets in or out for a month at a time.

Do some variation of two weeks in isolation, two weeks in the site doing whatever needs doing and not worrying about social isolation as they are in a closed site, go home for two weeks, two weeks in isolation, two weeks on site, etc. Pay them double for the duration.

If it needs doing then there are ways they can make it happen. I'm sure there isn't any social isolation going on on oil rigs or in the space station or in the antarctic bases. They are closed sites and they have full control over who gets in or out under their terms. Can do the same for a big building site if need be.

Well what's the argument for doing it for construction sites and not any other business which is technically "closed"?

Also, it may sound okay in theory, but you still have architects, engineers, one off sub-contractors, inspectors etc. visiting multiple sites and increasing the risk of spread. Hard to control.

Aidric

TheCitizen wrote: »

A vaccine for this won't be short of funding

Idbatterim wrote: »

surely the funding it bit, will be less than a drop in the ocean, given the insane daily cost this is having?

That's the crux, there is a huge commercial vs public play here. Pharm makes a huge R&D investment in developing a vaccine but are they going to sell to the government at cost and make no margin?

Blueshoe

Am I seeing people trying to find an excuse to get the builders back to work while the pen pushing folk stay home. Many working from home but many also doing SFA and getting 300 a week for it?

What's the reasoning behind it

Jurgen Klopp

Aidric wrote: »

That's the crux, there is a huge commercial vs public play here. Pharm makes a huge R&D investment in developing a vaccine but are they going to sell to the government at cost and make no margin?

Johnson and Johnson have already committed to selling at cost. They are ramping up production of their vaccine which they know may not be approved just to get ahead of it if it is

However all the money in the world won't help magic away that they'll need at least 12 months for human testing and observations plus I'd another 6 for adequate production and deployment could even be up to 24 months and that assuming we hit the ground running with an effective one

I think some vaccine was allowed skip animal trials straight to human volunteers in the US 2 weeks ago

So I think as the HSE consultant said we will have to accept an attrition rate while we limp on as much as it upsets me. But unfortunately that's reality

efanton

Aidric wrote: »

That's the crux, there is a huge commercial vs public play here. Pharm makes a huge R&D investment in developing a vaccine but are they going to sell to the government at cost and make no margin?

Why not? They are not being asked to lose money.

Those that are working in their business continue to earn a wage, they lose nothing, and they are not paying the running costs of a business while making no income.

Lots of business owners at the moment would would give their eye teeth to be in that position.

robinph

VonLuck wrote: »

Well what's the argument for doing it for construction sites and not any other business which is technically "closed"?

Also, it may sound okay in theory, but you still have architects, engineers, one off sub-contractors, inspectors etc. visiting multiple sites and increasing the risk of spread. Hard to control.

Because the argument was made that social distancing isn't possible on construction sites, so I gave a potential way round that.

If other people would normally be making one off visits to a site currently, then they just need to figure out a new way of working. Either things are done remotely, or not done until the site is finished, or one of their profession stays on site and feeds back details to others off site about things that need doing. Yes it's complicated, yes it's completely different to how things operate now.

But if the alternatives otherwise are nothing gets built for another 2 years, or all construction workers get sick, then what other solutions would you have?

If anything is to happen, in any industry and business, for the next couple of years then things need to be re-thought as to how it happens under the new way of life... or everyone just sits on their backside watching netflix for two years.

robinph

Blueshoe wrote: »

Am I seeing people trying to find an excuse to get the builders back to work while the pen pushing folk stay home. Many working from home but many also doing SFA and getting 300 a week for it?

What's the reasoning behind it

No, it's not an argument for construction to get back to work whilst office job workers do nothing. It's suggestions for how jobs that cannot be done from home get to happen. If all someone is doing is pushing a pen around then they can do that at home their employer just needs to figure out how to set things up for their type of job.

Jurgen Klopp

The problem that was had with the construction sites were a lot saying they were doing social distancing when they weren't.

A serious amount of sites here and in the North were reported. Lads working close together. The pencil pushers in the port a cabin keeping the sanitising gel for themselves and only wheeling it out when inspector came etc

Only one port a loo with no disinfectant nevermind plumbing etc

Idbatterim

Blueshoe wrote: »

Am I seeing people trying to find an excuse to get the builders back to work while the pen pushing folk stay home. Many working from home but many also doing SFA and getting 300 a week for it?

What's the reasoning behind it

E350 a week. but if they have worked, that makes them stand out from tens of thousands of others here, who cream off way more than E350 a week from the state and have never lifted a finger in their life!

All of this nonsense about reversing pension age to 65 etc can be knocked on the head, they can knock the annual 300,000,000 welfare bonus on the head too :rolleyes:

Gael23

Say they do another 2 weeks of these restrictions, what then. I imagine that will be the limit of public cooperation

titan18

Gael23 wrote: »

Say they do another 2 weeks of these restrictions, what then. I imagine that will be the limit of public cooperation

Start fining people like other countries imo. If people don't want to cooperate, punish them imo

Aidric

Jurgen Klopp wrote: »

Johnson and Johnson have already committed to selling at cost. They are ramping up production of their vaccine which they know may not be approved just to get ahead of it if it is

However all the money in the world won't help magic away that they'll need at least 12 months for human testing and observations plus I'd another 6 for adequate production and deployment could even be up to 24 months and that assuming we hit the ground running with an effective one

I think some vaccine was allowed skip animal trials straight to human volunteers in the US 2 weeks ago

So I think as the HSE consultant said we will have to accept an attrition rate while we limp on as much as it upsets me. But unfortunately that's reality

Indeed you're right. J&H have made a commitment on a non profit basis in partnership with the government.

The timeline is a problem that cannot be wished away.

terrydel

housemouse wrote: »

I've already done far more work than you in this thread. I am now here just to remind you that you failed to understand what was said.

There are some other people here who might actually add to the discussion. Let's give them a chance to speak now.

You've added nothing and still refuse to explain how the governments decisions are 'poor and panicked' with facts to back up this statement, and an alternative that would be better and reasons as to why. Until you do that, I'll continue to laugh at you and your sociopathic tendencies.
Surprise me and actually put some substance around your judgements, there's a good boy.

TheCitizen

Gael23 wrote: »

Say they do another 2 weeks of these restrictions, what then. I imagine that will be the limit of public cooperation

The public will continue to co operate. Only an idiot wouldn't.

terrydel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You really shouldn't waste your time, all that poster wants is an echo chamber of his own views.

Considering you say that to everyone who has an alternative view to you, the only echo here is eminating from your irony free zone

iamwhoiam

TheCitizen wrote: »

The public will continue to co operate. Only an idiot wouldn't.

I agree , but a good idea would be to show how it’s helping . Show the public how hospitals are coping only because we stayed indoors . Show how bad things could be if we didn’t etc
They need to get the public onside

Plumbthedepths

titan18 wrote: »

Start fining people like other countries imo. If people don't want to cooperate, punish them imo

The French police have fined almost 500,000. You would have thought the message would have got through after the first few thousand. Guess people feel 'the reward is worth the risk'.

VonLuck

robinph wrote: »

Because the argument was made that social distancing isn't possible on construction sites, so I gave a potential way round that.

Sorry, I missed the original context of your post.

robinph wrote: »

If other people would normally be making one off visits to a site currently, then they just need to figure out a new way of working. Either things are done remotely, or not done until the site is finished, or one of their profession stays on site and feeds back details to others off site about things that need doing. Yes it's complicated, yes it's completely different to how things operate now.

Very difficult to implement.

You really can't wait until the end as things get covered up every day and impossible to inspect later.

Remote inspections could easily miss something important. And I'm pretty sure the builder operating the camera isn't going to direct you to potential issues!

Someone operating on site full time may be possible, but may only be practical for large sites. Also you would have to think about who's going to foot the bill in the end.

robinph wrote: »

But if the alternatives otherwise are nothing gets built for another 2 years, or all construction workers get sick, then what other solutions would you have?

If anything is to happen, in any industry and business, for the next couple of years then things need to be re-thought as to how it happens under the new way of life... or everyone just sits on their backside watching netflix for two years.

Well I made a point earlier where I believe that government measures will be relaxed in the next month and some people will go back to work, construction workers included. On site measures will be mandatory e.g. taking temperatures, social distancing etc. and perhaps random visits by a government inspector to ensure the measures are implemented. Once cases begin to rise again, sites will close for a period, then reopen again.

I don't see how else both construction can continue somewhat and that the virus is kept under control.

Pretzill

I am only browsing these mega threads lately - but I've noticed a trend after the figures for the day come out so do the "I wonder when restrictions will be lifted--people won't put up with it much longer--the economy can't take it" comments.

We are a small country, things could get a lot worse, a lot more quickly - I am amazed we are keeping the health service going with this pandemic at the moment and I don't say that lightly after 210 deaths - But it could get so much worse and for a country this size we could be facing horrendous fatalities if we don't abide by what are a set of not too hard restrictions.

Later on, the trumpettes will come to whine about how badly things are going on the other side of the Atlantic - but we're here and for the moment we need to see the bigger picture.

terrydel

TheCitizen wrote: »

Reasoned and researched he says:pac:

This is what you said in post 1924; "The lockdown policy is driven by fear and panic.".

Do you think politicians across Europe and elsewhere lockdown or impose restrictions on their countries economies due to "fear and panic"? Do you think they arrive at these difficult decisions easily? They have taken advice from the experts and have acted on that.

Your post is anything but reasoned and researched, to repeat; it's utter utter bollocks.

That's giving it undue credit

Logan Roy

Pretzill wrote: »

I am only browsing these mega threads lately - but I've noticed a trend after the figures for the day come out so do the "I wonder when restrictions will be lifted--people won't put up with it much longer--the economy can't take it" comments.

We are a small country, things could get a lot worse, a lot more quickly - I am amazed we are keeping the health service going with this pandemic at the moment and I don't say that lightly after 210 deaths - But it could get so much worse and for a country this size we could be facing horrendous fatalities if we don't abide by what are a set of not too hard restrictions.

Later on, the trumpettes will come to whine about how badly things are going on the other side of the Atlantic - but we're here and for the moment we need to see the bigger picture.

Most people aren't concerned about "how hard" the restrictions are. The fear is long term damage they will do to the economy/jobs/people's mental health etc. Yeah it's fairly f**king ****e not being able to do the things we usually enjoy doing and seeing our families but those inconveniences will pass. The question is what will be waiting for us on the other side?

Aidric

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You cannot lockdown a population untill a vaccine is found its amazing that actually has to be said. You will see the alternatives in the coming weeks.

What are the credible alternatives?

TheCitizen

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I agree , but a good idea would be to show how it’s helping . Show the public how hospitals are coping only because we stayed indoors . Show how bad things could be if we didn’t etc
They need to get the public onside

They'd be accused of promoting "panic and fear" by the usual gobshítes around here for example if they did that.

I think the vast majority of the public are onside and only utter idiots will cause any bother (as opposed to the snowflakers and bellyachers on this thread) while we collectively face this.

Big weekend coming up, bank holiday weekend, hopefully we'll collectively show a bit of discipline and a bit of strength and adhere to what is asked of us.

terrydel

Idbatterim wrote: »

E350 a week. but if they have worked, that makes them stand out from tens of thousands of others here, who cream off way more than E350 a week from the state and have never lifted a finger in their life!

All of this nonsense about reversing pension age to 65 etc can be knocked on the head, they can knock the annual 300,000,000 welfare bonus on the head too :rolleyes:

Seriously, how do you get away with these constant bigoted remarks you make? Are you shagging a mod or something? It's almost impressive.

Plumbthedepths

Aidric wrote: »

What are the credible alternatives?

If you can't see that a lockdown until a vaccine is found is not possible I don't think you would accept any alternative I or others would suggest as credible.

KrustyUCC

Pretzill wrote: »

I am only browsing these mega threads lately - but I've noticed a trend after the figures for the day come out so do the "I wonder when restrictions will be lifted--people won't put up with it much longer--the economy can't take it" comments.

We are a small country, things could get a lot worse, a lot more quickly - I am amazed we are keeping the health service going with this pandemic at the moment and I don't say that lightly after 210 deaths - But it could get so much worse and for a country this size we could be facing horrendous fatalities if we don't abide by what are a set of not too hard restrictions.

Later on, the trumpettes will come to whine about how badly things are going on the other side of the Atlantic - but we're here and for the moment we need to see the bigger picture.

The further this goes on the more damaging these 'set of not too hard restrictions' will become

They might be easy for you but they are not for a hell of a lot of people

Not seeing family, friends, those in relationships not being able to see each other

There is good public support for the measures overall at the moment but of course people want the restrictions gone asap

It's a tough balancing act

Up to Easter Sunday is 39 days of restrictions since Leo's speech

Add two more weeks and that will be 54 days with no finishing line in sight

User142

Nothing screams privileged more than thinking these guidelines aren't too hard.

Aidric

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

If you can't see that a lockdown until a vaccine is found is not possible I don't think you would accept any alternative I or others would suggest as credible.

Try anyway. I've outlined my concerns from a public health perspective. What are your alternatives to alleviate those concerns?

Tell me how

User142 wrote: »

Nothing screams privileged more than thinking these guidelines aren't too hard.

What?

If anything, I would have thought that those struggling to stay at home with access to so much entertainment and communication resources is a strong indication of being privileged to ordinarily have freedom to do things which some people on this planet can only dream about.