Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
The removal of the statue is not the point at all.
It is the manner in which it was removed. It was removed illegally and by mob rule.
If there is such a groundswell of opinion to have it removed, then it should be relatively easy to remove through the proper channels.
Like the way we did brexit. Not by injuring policemen. Not by setting EU flags alight, not by violent demonstations. Not by marching on the embassies of Germany or any other European institution.
By the ballot box. Time and time again, until they got the message.
Yup. Before yesterday it is a fair bet 95% of the British population would never have heard of Colston. I see it is a grade 2 Listed statue and so obviously must be retrieved. After that it should be re-erected albeit with an appropriate new plaque. Then the people of Bristol should have their democratic say as to whether they wish it to remain there.
•It was illegal for women to protest in 1911 seeking the vote •It was illegal for youths to resist laws making them join Hitler Youth •It was illegal for Rosa Parks to sit on that seat •It was illegal for gay men to have sex •It was illegal to steal Trevalyan’s corn
Point of technicality, Rosa Parks was sat in the 'coloured seat' as the law at the time required her to do so..
Did the Law require her to to surrender her seat to a white passenger ?
Not sure, but it certainly wasn't illegal for her to 'sit on that seat'. And I am arguing from a narrow technical perspective as I stated in my counterpoint to yours.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I won't 'like' that because it might be misconstrued.
But that is a great post.
And I am really sorry for your daughter in this horrible situation.
I can only imagine how frustrating it must be.
If I can make a small suggestion - thought it is wonderful to have beer on tap, I would do a bottle bar in the immediate term.
The import supply chain is up shit creek. Every week Daughter orders a case of Carling, Peroni, Kronenbourg, Fosters and Moretti. She can only reliably get Peroni and the majority of the time the rest don’t come. Supply is intermittent and cannot be relied on.
Not to make light of your daughter's plight, but every cloud..
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
You may not be able to distinguish between tearing down a statue of somebody and intimidating children from a school named after that person, but fortunately it appears that the protesters can.
Well they can for the moment. Who knows what they might target in the future? It seems they have your blessing, whatever they do.
There is no good-faith reading of my comment that would lead you to the conclusion of your last sentence. Which leads me to ask: why are you arguing in bad faith? Are you finding it difficult to argue your case and maintain intellectual honesty at the same time? Don't worry, I would too.
The principle is not Colston's statue, it is the way things are done in our country.
You want the statue removed? Fine, get campaigning. Write to your MP and councillors. Get a majority locally and/or nationally so that whoever wants the statue to remain cannot stand in your way. You believe you have a strong case, a consensus should be easy. Campaign and vote again and again and again until enough people are convinced of your cause whatever the opposition
YOU know, like many of us did for brexit. Sorry, but there are no short cuts matey. Want something changed? get in line. like the rest of us.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
It could always be renamed? One does wonder why the Powers-That-Be in Bristol seem hell-bent on protecting the "good" name of a known slaver?
Bristol was the epicentre of the British slave trade. It grew rich off the back of it to a greater extent than any other city (maybe London got more of the money, but London had plenty of other lines of business). As I understand it, Colston's money helped to whitewash that history in the nineteenth century, paying for civic works of various kinds that improved Bristol while disguising the origins of the city's prosperity. I imagine there are plenty of people who would rather not face up to that aspect of the city's past. I don't really understand that mindset myself, but many people seem to find it difficult to simultaneously love their hometown or country and be critical of it at the same time.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
It has been the Government line for months pubs will reopen from July so ample time to start preparing. Can open from 22nd June is also not the same as must open from then.
Thanks to the furlough scheme this government has pursued pub workers will also have a job to go back to
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
The clue is in the words... "there are press reports".
Philip Thompson, who is miles to the right of me and I never thought I would agree with, is actually espousing a logical moral attitude. The crucial point is that defying a law because you think it wrong is the moral thing to do as long as you don't try to escape the penalty. Think of Quakers refusing to fight. They accept the penalty. The people who threw the statue in Bristol harbour need to step up and argue their case in court.
The irony is that if convicted, the penalty is likely to include the cost of re-erecting the statue.
Which means they will be paying to put up a statue of a slaver...
I am comfortable with that. Throw the book at the young hooligans.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
The reaction of some people on this site to the extremely basic, common-sense proposition that "legal" is not synonymous with "moral" is pretty eye-opening.
Of course it isn't. Morality is variable. Some cultures believe it moral to kill criminals and chop their hands off. The law is the same for everyone, which is why we have rule of law in this country.
But the law is also the same for everyone in countries that kill criminals and chop their hands off.
So I don't quite see your point here.
The point being that within the UK there are differences between what people accept as moral. Some believe adultery is immoral and should be punishable, is it ok for them to do so under this new regime of "do what you feel is right" others believe ownership of propety is theft or taxation is morally wrong, how do we deal with that?
It's a completely insane idea.
It is obviously an insane idea to replace the law with each individual's idea of morality. But nobody is as far as I can see suggesting this.
And I'm not getting your point about the UK being in any sense unusual in having a population that is not in full agreement as to what is moral and what is not.
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
In shock news, years ago slavery was widespread across the world. We know African's were involved in providing bodies for the slave trade and that Arabs had plenty. And most people's relatives from back in the day were all involved in some pretty heinous stuff, wars, raping, pillaging. History is complicated.
It's estimated the barbary pirates sold up to a million Europeans into slavery. Mostly from countries in the Med but with outing to Ireland and Britain too. The entire population of Baltimore in Co. Cork was taken off in one raid.
Somebody rightly pointed out yesterday that Viking raiders carried off young Irish, Scots and Welsh women as slaves. Took them to Iceland.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
You may not be able to distinguish between tearing down a statue of somebody and intimidating children from a school named after that person, but fortunately it appears that the protesters can.
Well they can for the moment. Who knows what they might target in the future? It seems they have your blessing, whatever they do.
There is no good-faith reading of my comment that would lead you to the conclusion of your last sentence. Which leads me to ask: why are you arguing in bad faith? Are you finding it difficult to argue your case and maintain intellectual honesty at the same time? Don't worry, I would too.
The principle is not Colston's statue, it is the way things are done in our country.
You want the statue removed? Fine, get campaigning. Write to your MP and councillors. Get a majority locally and/or nationally so that whoever wants the statue to remain cannot stand in your way. You believe you have a strong case, a consensus should be easy. Campaign and vote again and again and again until enough people are convinced of your cause whatever the opposition
YOU know, like many of us did for brexit. Sorry, but there are no short cuts matey. Want something changed? get in line. like the rest of us.
A substantial proportion of the left has more or less come to believe that they are so correct that there is little point to the processes of democracy any more. And to those saying nobody will argue to put the statue back - when the modern left has shown itself so unrelentingly eager to purge those who stand up to them, ruining them professionally and personally, who will dare put their head over the parapet?
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
The point is that the government haven't the first clue how anything works. Not a helpful look when in the midst of a pandemic thats about to evolve into a crushing economic depression. Will a few pubs find a way to process the half advice and guidance? Sure - does that mean its remotely good enough from the government? No...
•It was illegal for women to protest in 1911 seeking the vote •It was illegal for youths to resist laws making them join Hitler Youth •It was illegal for Rosa Parks to sit on that seat •It was illegal for gay men to have sex •It was illegal to steal Trevalyan’s corn
It was illegal to resist desegregation of schools. It was illegal to refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple. It was illegal to refuse service at a B&B to a gay couple.
What cultural monuments that I cherish will the far-right now feel justified in pulling down?
I'm a supporter of non-violent direct action, but in my memory of nvda training the argument was often that criminal damage, or breach of the peace could be defended in court on the basis of preventing a greater crime.
It might be right to take down some statues, erase history and be able to feel better about our past and its continuity to the present, but I don't see the greater crime that justifies criminal damage in the way that defence was used for many nvda protests in the past - particularly in the middle of a pandemic.
Anyone living in Bristol needs to seriously reflect on how they are benefitting from the legacy of slavery. Maybe they should consider leaving and levelling the place.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong.
Not specifically on Cyclefree Junior's travails, but the govt seems to think that solutions are simplistic ON/OFF decisions. "Pubs can open on this date" misses the point that the supply lines for pubs take WEEKS to get going. If they were announcing that Brewers etc can start on this date and pubs (say) 4 weeks later then there is a schedule that is realistic.
Are you aware that if a pilot stops flying then they become non-current? This means they are not allowed to fly. Now think of the thousands of pilots who have been sitting on their backsides for months. They all have to undergo revalidation training or else govts have to agree that the currency regulations can be dropped, but you just cannot say "Next Tuesday planes can fly again". If the regulations are dropped then insurers need to agree because accidents will increase. And who will be flying where? Holidays have been cancelled.
We just cannot say "Lockdown is over, back to normal tomorrow" and that is what the government seems to miss. Industry and business is complex chain of events that must happen in a sequence without disruption. And that BTW is also the worry of businesses about Brexit.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
Interesting honesty.
I would be asking them what costs directly related to your holiday had been incurred.
And I suspect trying to keep the money won't really work out as most people will just ask their credit card to refund it.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
You may not be able to distinguish between tearing down a statue of somebody and intimidating children from a school named after that person, but fortunately it appears that the protesters can.
Well they can for the moment. Who knows what they might target in the future? It seems they have your blessing, whatever they do.
There is no good-faith reading of my comment that would lead you to the conclusion of your last sentence. Which leads me to ask: why are you arguing in bad faith? Are you finding it difficult to argue your case and maintain intellectual honesty at the same time? Don't worry, I would too.
The principle is not Colston's statue, it is the way things are done in our country.
You want the statue removed? Fine, get campaigning. Write to your MP and councillors. Get a majority locally and/or nationally so that whoever wants the statue to remain cannot stand in your way. You believe you have a strong case, a consensus should be easy. Campaign and vote again and again and again until enough people are convinced of your cause whatever the opposition
YOU know, like many of us did for brexit. Sorry, but there are no short cuts matey. Want something changed? get in line. like the rest of us.
A substantial proportion of the left has more or less come to believe that they are so correct that there is little point to the processes of democracy any more. And to those saying nobody will argue to put the statue back - when the modern left has shown itself so unrelentingly eager to purge those who stand up to them, ruining them professionally and personally, who will dare put their head over the parapet?
Indeed. They believe they are 100% correct, yet they are also 100% unable to win elections. This does not compute with them, so they lash out in rage and violence because that's all the impotent poppets have left. Plus a good dose of witch-hunting against anyone who dares to hold heretical opinions...
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
The clue is in the words... "there are press reports".
As opposed to any official guidance.
There is lots of guidance about how public facing businesses are to operate. You see it in operation every time you go to a food shop. It will be individual businesses to work out how they can cope with that guidance. So, some will use their carparks for more outdoor tables, some will try to work IT solutions such as ordering at the table, some will use a multi queue system like the pizza restaurant my daughter went to yesterday. There are going to be almost as many solutions as there are establishments but there will be some, particularly older, city based pubs, where no solution is going to work. They are likely to remain closed, possibly for years.
Philip Thompson, who is miles to the right of me and I never thought I would agree with, is actually espousing a logical moral attitude. The crucial point is that defying a law because you think it wrong is the moral thing to do as long as you don't try to escape the penalty. Think of Quakers refusing to fight. They accept the penalty. The people who threw the statue in Bristol harbour need to step up and argue their case in court.
The irony is that if convicted, the penalty is likely to include the cost of re-erecting the statue.
Which means they will be paying to put up a statue of a slaver...
I am comfortable with that. Throw the book at the young hooligans.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
I'm pretty sure that my Welsh miner ancestors didn't have the best of lives working for the 18th/19thC coal owners.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
Why are you expecting anything more or better from this Government beyond making it up as they go along.
Remember this is the government elected because Boris and co said don't trust the experts
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
Interesting honesty.
I would be asking them what costs directly related to your holiday had been incurred.
And I suspect trying to keep the money won't really work out as most people will just ask their credit card to refund it.
Oh I'm sure but as I said to the guy, I want to work with them and hope at some point to go on holiday with them. I will happily be flexible if they can be flexible also, and they were so I will not go nuclear.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
It has been the Government line for months pubs will reopen from July so ample time to start preparing. Can open from 22nd June is also not the same as must open from then.
Thanks to the furlough scheme this government has pursued pub workers will also have a job to go back to
Come back to me when you are in the real world.
It is 50/50 at best whether pubs will be able to reopen at all since no-one knows under what legal conditions they will be operating.
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
Interesting honesty.
Cash flow makes or breaks a business. Profit/Loss means nothing, it is cashflow that kills.
I wonder how many pilots are out of currency and need simulator training?
Quite a lot. They've tried to keep as many current as possible by sharing PPE and repatriation flights, but that's not much help to pilots flying shorter routes.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
A comment which deserves to be a thread header.
(btw, I have VM'd you.)
You said it!
PS Daughter has just commented: “Oh Mum, now you’re going to ignore me all day while you write it!”
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
In shock news, years ago slavery was widespread across the world. We know African's were involved in providing bodies for the slave trade and that Arabs had plenty. And most people's relatives from back in the day were all involved in some pretty heinous stuff, wars, raping, pillaging. History is complicated.
It's estimated the barbary pirates sold up to a million Europeans into slavery. Mostly from countries in the Med but with outing to Ireland and Britain too. The entire population of Baltimore in Co. Cork was taken off in one raid.
Somebody rightly pointed out yesterday that Viking raiders carried off young Irish, Scots and Welsh women as slaves. Took them to Iceland.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I won't 'like' that because it might be misconstrued.
But that is a great post.
And I am really sorry for your daughter in this horrible situation.
I can only imagine how frustrating it must be.
If I can make a small suggestion - thought it is wonderful to have beer on tap, I would do a bottle bar in the immediate term.
The import supply chain is up shit creek. Every week Daughter orders a case of Carling, Peroni, Kronenbourg, Fosters and Moretti. She can only reliably get Peroni and the majority of the time the rest don’t come. Supply is intermittent and cannot be relied on.
Not to make light of your daughter's plight, but every cloud..
Carling definitely isn't imported, and I don't think Fosters is either? I've a sneaking suspicion that even Kronenburg is about as French as a Yorkshire pudding but I'm not sure on that one.
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
In shock news, years ago slavery was widespread across the world. We know African's were involved in providing bodies for the slave trade and that Arabs had plenty. And most people's relatives from back in the day were all involved in some pretty heinous stuff, wars, raping, pillaging. History is complicated.
It's estimated the barbary pirates sold up to a million Europeans into slavery. Mostly from countries in the Med but with outing to Ireland and Britain too. The entire population of Baltimore in Co. Cork was taken off in one raid.
One of the great curiosities of the whole period is that the peak of the Barbary corsairs slave trading Europeans, overlapped with the establishment of the Atlantic triangular trade. It seems that we were appalled by the one at the same time as being enriched by the other.
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
The point is that the government haven't the first clue how anything works. Not a helpful look when in the midst of a pandemic thats about to evolve into a crushing economic depression. Will a few pubs find a way to process the half advice and guidance? Sure - does that mean its remotely good enough from the government? No...
It really isn't their job to know how everything works or to solve everybody's problems for them. If you look at the guidance that is currently available for 8 different sectors of the economy rule number 1 is to think about how you meet the objectives. That is the job of every business at all times, even in a pandemic.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
This is hardly a cry for freedom, it's an attempt to erase history, we're allowing a year zero style philosophy to take root and it shouldn't be allowed.
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Stark effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
There is a difference between announcing pubs can open from a particular date, to announcing that pubs must or will open from a particular date.
If pubs have an ample supply of products (and some rely on bottles more than draught for instance) and are eager and capable of opening why shouldn't they? If others take longer to do things then they can take longer, the furlough scheme isn't ending for another four months so taking time to reopen properly then being ready and able to do so as soon as you are ready yourself seems logical.
I'm not sure what else you propose. I have been agreeing with you that beer gardens should be open already, but you seem irritated at the proposed opening from date being brought forwards if businesses think its safe to open and they're ready to do so?
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
Interesting honesty.
Cash flow makes or breaks a business. Profit/Loss means nothing, it is cashflow that kills.
Absolutely. I think people have got to be sensible in these cases. It's not like "The Man" trying to screw my over. Everyone is trying to manage their way through this. I'm happy to work with them if I can.
Philip Thompson, who is miles to the right of me and I never thought I would agree with, is actually espousing a logical moral attitude. The crucial point is that defying a law because you think it wrong is the moral thing to do as long as you don't try to escape the penalty. Think of Quakers refusing to fight. They accept the penalty. The people who threw the statue in Bristol harbour need to step up and argue their case in court.
The irony is that if convicted, the penalty is likely to include the cost of re-erecting the statue.
Which means they will be paying to put up a statue of a slaver...
I am comfortable with that. Throw the book at the young hooligans.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
I'm pretty sure that my Welsh miner ancestors didn't have the best of lives working for the 18th/19thC coal owners.
Very true, and I have the same collier ancestors as you. Maybe we are related?
However we do not have the right to pull down Cardiff Castle or Castell Coch because the Earl of Bute made his fortune from exploitation. Do we?
Philip Thompson, who is miles to the right of me and I never thought I would agree with, is actually espousing a logical moral attitude. The crucial point is that defying a law because you think it wrong is the moral thing to do as long as you don't try to escape the penalty. Think of Quakers refusing to fight. They accept the penalty. The people who threw the statue in Bristol harbour need to step up and argue their case in court.
The irony is that if convicted, the penalty is likely to include the cost of re-erecting the statue.
Which means they will be paying to put up a statue of a slaver...
I am comfortable with that. Throw the book at the young hooligans.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
The Duke of Sutherland’s statue above Golspie stands on a gigantic plinth, of Soviet proportions, otherwise it would have been destroyed long ago.
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
The point is that the government haven't the first clue how anything works. Not a helpful look when in the midst of a pandemic thats about to evolve into a crushing economic depression. Will a few pubs find a way to process the half advice and guidance? Sure - does that mean its remotely good enough from the government? No...
Sounds like a lot of assumptions.
Incidentally, talked to the landlords of a couple of local pubs, via local community forum.
They have their lines clean (pushing cleaning solution though every so often) and the non perishables stocked up. One place is selling take away over the garden wall. The issue of how the restock with beer is going to happen is much talk about. One chap said he is assuming that he is opening with PImms....
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
Why are you expecting anything more or better from this Government beyond making it up as they go along.
Remember this is the government elected because Boris and co said don't trust the experts
All Governments are making it up as they go along. We live in unprecedented times. I remember Cyclefree being equally (probably more) concerned about her daughter's business before furlough was announced (with justification). The Government then caught up with the issue and it was (at least partially) sorted. I expect the same to happen here.
I wonder how many pilots are out of currency and need simulator training?
Quite a lot. They've tried to keep as many current as possible by sharing PPE and repatriation flights, but that's not much help to pilots flying shorter routes.
Yes. A friend is a pilot on the charter side (the commercial side has offloaded many, many) and he is wanging around the globe repositioning staff and so forth.
He just spent some time in Barbados and had the Hilton to themselves but had to beg the staff for food as no one wanted them there.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
This is exactly what happened with schools.
It will be a Good Thing when schools re-open to everyone. But the approach the government took- announcing a convenient date, publishing garbled guidance, not bothering to check the science (the scientists risk-assessed lots of models but not the one the government pushed)- doesn't help beyond the initial headline.
(Oh, and if you try and open a primary school with half-size classes, it eats up the capacity to do home schooling for the year groups still at home.)
As a result, lots of schools and councils gave up on the June 1 reopening as a bad job, and attendance is pretty patchy in schools that have opened up for full year groups.
But if you have a government whose main belief is populism and main talent is writing headlines, what can you expect?
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
This is hardly a cry for freedom, it's an attempt to erase history, we're allowing a year zero style philosophy to take root and it shouldn't be allowed.
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Doppler effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
Yes I was surprised at the number of Pbers of supposed soft left persuasion who allowed themselves to become over excited over the weekend by the acts of wanton lawlessness.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
It is not a deadline, it is a starting gun. When people choose to start running will, however, be up to them. If your daughter needs until 4th July that's when she should open.
On the science I agree that we are giving less weight to overly cautious scientific advice and counterbalancing that against the damage to the economy. I agree that involves an element of risk. There is no alternative to this. We will be bankrupt as a nation if we don't and public services will collapse.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
This is hardly a cry for freedom, it's an attempt to erase history, we're allowing a year zero style philosophy to take root and it shouldn't be allowed.
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Doppler effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
Gandhi was a racist, Marx was an antisemite. Funny how the likes of Owen Jones were horrified at the vandalism of Marx grave and asked people to donate to a fund to fix it, but cheering on the mob with this one.
I doubt many of the greatest scientists would pass the woke test, better started removing them from history as well.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I won't 'like' that because it might be misconstrued.
But that is a great post.
And I am really sorry for your daughter in this horrible situation.
I can only imagine how frustrating it must be.
If I can make a small suggestion - thought it is wonderful to have beer on tap, I would do a bottle bar in the immediate term.
The import supply chain is up shit creek. Every week Daughter orders a case of Carling, Peroni, Kronenbourg, Fosters and Moretti. She can only reliably get Peroni and the majority of the time the rest don’t come. Supply is intermittent and cannot be relied on.
Not to make light of your daughter's plight, but every cloud..
Carling definitely isn't imported, and I don't think Fosters is either? I've a sneaking suspicion that even Kronenburg is about as French as a Yorkshire pudding but I'm not sure on that one.
Kronenbourg have a UK brewery, so it almost certainly supplies the UK market. I did think of including them in my snark but held back as I have managed to drink the occasional pint without heaving.
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
It will be achievable by those who have been given a heads up in advance in private because they are mates of the PM - like Tim Wetherspoon, perhaps?
Do you think this is an acceptable way to run a country? Insiders being favoured and being able to make money because of their insider status with others left out in the cold?
Try reading some of the comments from those in this sector and you will get a sense of the level of fury and frustration.These are people’s businesses, jobs, lives and futures which are being mucked around with by people who don’t have a clue. They don’t need defending. They need to to be told to get a fucking grip and stop behaving like bloody amateurs.
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
Is that in the same manner Jeffersons' descendants were fairly recently dismayed to learn that they had some cousins whose ancestors were slaves ?
One wonders whether it was the fact that they were slaves or that their lily white ancestors had participated in some (likely non consensual) sexual activity with their black ancestors was the more shocking to them.
The Jeffersons were shocked and appalled by the suggestion about their illustrious ancestor, and insisted that he did not have sexual relations with that woman*... Until the DNA evidence.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
It is not a deadline, it is a starting gun. When people choose to start running will, however, be up to them. If your daughter needs until 4th July that's when she should open.
On the science I agree that we are giving less weight to overly cautious scientific advice and counterbalancing that against the damage to the economy. I agree that involves an element of risk. There is no alternative to this. We will be bankrupt as a nation if we don't and public services will collapse.
Indeed I believe Cyclefree wrote a couple of persuasive thread headers on how we needed to accept risk.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
This is hardly a cry for freedom, it's an attempt to erase history, we're allowing a year zero style philosophy to take root and it shouldn't be allowed.
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Stark effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
This is hardly a cry for freedom, it's an attempt to erase history, we're allowing a year zero style philosophy to take root and it shouldn't be allowed.
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Doppler effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
Gandhi was a racist, Marx was an antisemite. Funny how the likes of Owen Jones were horrified at the vandalism of Marx grave and asked people to donate to a fund to fix it, but cheering on the mob with this one.
Owen Jones failing to care about the antisemitism of a bearded, far-left folk hero?
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong.
Not specifically on Cyclefree Junior's travails, but the govt seems to think that solutions are simplistic ON/OFF decisions. "Pubs can open on this date" misses the point that the supply lines for pubs take WEEKS to get going. If they were announcing that Brewers etc can start on this date and pubs (say) 4 weeks later then there is a schedule that is realistic.
Are you aware that if a pilot stops flying then they become non-current? This means they are not allowed to fly. Now think of the thousands of pilots who have been sitting on their backsides for months. They all have to undergo revalidation training or else govts have to agree that the currency regulations can be dropped, but you just cannot say "Next Tuesday planes can fly again". If the regulations are dropped then insurers need to agree because accidents will increase. And who will be flying where? Holidays have been cancelled.
We just cannot say "Lockdown is over, back to normal tomorrow" and that is what the government seems to miss. Industry and business is complex chain of events that must happen in a sequence without disruption. And that BTW is also the worry of businesses about Brexit.
No one is saying that, least of all the government. What they are saying is that right now it is illegal for a pub to operate. Come 20th June it will no longer be so provided the pub has worked out how to protect its staff and customers. So those businesses once again have a choice. There is so much to criticise this government's handling of this pandemic for and I have but this is bordering on silly.
This lie is even more blatant than the "outside agitators" line they're using in the US.
It really doesn't matter if they're green with purple polka dots. They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
And if people are prepared to put their values above the law and face up to the law then good for them.
The law is not the be all and end all.
Unfortunately, you're far too stubborn and obstinate to see the sewer you've crawled into (even though you're intelligent enough to recognise some the points are valid, and secretly fear you might not have called this wholly right).
Once you adopt a position you refuse to move off it regardless of how the argument subsequently develops. That's a sign of weakness of character by the way, not strength.
I have lost respect for you.
My position is the same now as it always has been: People should do what they consider to be right.
Nothings changed. How is that a sewer? I fundamentally believe in individuals making their own free choices.
What if people have conflicting views of what is right? How should they be resolved?
Everyone should make their own decisions on what they think is right. You do what you consider is right, I do what I consider to be right.
The law is how we try to compel people to do what we want them to do, but if people really think the law is wrong and are prepared to face up to the consequences of breaking the law then so be it.
That's a completely insane view point.
People should be free to carry out extra judicial punishments of they feel the law is wrong?!
Once again I feel vindicated leaving the Tory party. It didn't feel right being in the same party as you and HYFUD. I hope @Casino_Royale and @DavidL are beginning to see the party is no longer for people like us.
I don't normally agree with Philip - and I don't 100% agree with him here either - but I think he is just saying that where a person acts in a way that is unlawful but is iho morally correct he will be supportive of that person and the illegal act in question.
He is not saying the law should be set aside and the "culprit" not prosecuted. Since this would clearly be a recipe for anarchy.
Have I got that right, Philip?
Basically. Not 100% but yes that's the essence of it.
Some people put the law above right or wrong and make following the law a right in itself. I view right or wrong as being more important than the law.
In Dungeons and Dragons there's a good way of defining this debate, there are two axes of Good, Neutral or Evil on the good or evil spectrum . . . and on law and order there is Chaotic, Neutral or Lawful. Leaving 9 different combinations you can end up with. You can be Lawful Evil or any other combination.
On that basis I would class my philosophy as Chaotic Good. The right thing to do matters more than the law. In Superhero lore the most famous distinction between Lawful Good and Chaotic Good is Superman (Lawful Good) versus Batman (Chaotic Good).
"Chaotic good" as a position needs testing against an adverse situation, like the "chaotic good" moralist with a knife who has decided that the world will be even better in the absence of Philip Thompson and intends to act on it. I say "The law is the law. Stop him. protect Philip Thompson."
Well one would not want to lose Philip.
But tbf I do not think what he is saying here is particularly incendiary.
He feels the people who pulled down the statue were acting in a morally impeccable fashion and he fully supports them in doing it even though it was against the law.
He is NOT saying the relevant law should be adjusted so it comes into line with his personal view - e.g. to exempt statues of scarred old slavers from protection from vandalism - or that it should not be enforced in this case.
I think various people are misunderstanding Philip on this one.
Oh lord, please don't let Philip be misunderstood.
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
In shock news, years ago slavery was widespread across the world. We know African's were involved in providing bodies for the slave trade and that Arabs had plenty. And most people's relatives from back in the day were all involved in some pretty heinous stuff, wars, raping, pillaging. History is complicated.
It's estimated the barbary pirates sold up to a million Europeans into slavery. Mostly from countries in the Med but with outing to Ireland and Britain too. The entire population of Baltimore in Co. Cork was taken off in one raid.
One of the great curiosities of the whole period is that the peak of the Barbary corsairs slave trading Europeans, overlapped with the establishment of the Atlantic triangular trade. It seems that we were appalled by the one at the same time as being enriched by the other.
Probably we didn't care that much about the Barbary Trade as that largely affected Southern Europeans. Until the early nineteenth century, typically we ransomed captives, rather than fighting the pirates.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
This is hardly a cry for freedom, it's an attempt to erase history, we're allowing a year zero style philosophy to take root and it shouldn't be allowed.
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Stark effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
It seems odd that our school students are taught of Rosa Parkes, and Martain Luther King, but not our own civil rights movement. Its almost as if racism is a problem over there and not over here
Philip Thompson, who is miles to the right of me and I never thought I would agree with, is actually espousing a logical moral attitude. The crucial point is that defying a law because you think it wrong is the moral thing to do as long as you don't try to escape the penalty. Think of Quakers refusing to fight. They accept the penalty. The people who threw the statue in Bristol harbour need to step up and argue their case in court.
The irony is that if convicted, the penalty is likely to include the cost of re-erecting the statue.
Which means they will be paying to put up a statue of a slaver...
I am comfortable with that. Throw the book at the young hooligans.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
The Duke of Sutherland’s statue above Golspie stands on a gigantic plinth, of Soviet proportions, otherwise it would have been destroyed long ago.
Most of history's great men (and some women) were at least very ruthless, and sometimes sociopathic butchers.
Anyone with dual nationality who chooses to live in the UK needs to seriously reflect on their role in propagating the UK's systemic racism, and their profiting from the historical legacy of bad guys.
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
It will be achievable by those who have been given a heads up in advance in private because they are mates of the PM - like Tim Wetherspoon, perhaps?
Do you think this is an acceptable way to run a country? Insiders being favoured and being able to make money because of their insider status with others left out in the cold?
Try reading some of the comments from those in this sector and you will get a sense of the level of fury and frustration.These are people’s businesses, jobs, lives and futures which are being mucked around with by people who don’t have a clue. They don’t need defending. They need to to be told to get a fucking grip and stop behaving like bloody amateurs.
Even if it were true that Tim Weatherspoon had a heads up (as opposed to simply listening to Boris over the last fortnight) he would still have to decide whether or not to take the risk of opening in light of all the factors you have mentioned including the risk that the numbers go up sharply again because idiots were protesting against the Minneapolis police in the UK. I suspect some of his establishments will be better placed for that than others.
To put this into context, almost everyone lauded the UK's adherence to rule of law when Gina Miller beat the government in the Supreme Court and forced parliamentary approval of A50. It was a prime example of how the rights of everyone were equal, even in the face of 17m voters and overwhelming government pressure a decision was made that was at the time seen a huge setback for the government and 17m voters. Even though o disagreed with the decision it actually was a moment that made me happy to live in this country, a nation that respects rule of law to an extent that the government are bound by it as much as everyone else.
It's one of the reasons I quit the party when Boris decided Dom's decision making process was more important than these rules.
Historian Kate Williams is defending on Twitter the pulling down of Colston's statue saying there had been debate over the statue for ages and it had got nowhere so direct action was justified. There is also a Colston Concert Hall in Bristol and the debate over changing the name hasn't had a result so far so would it be justified to burn the building down? Please note I am not supporting this action. I am just saying that it could be justified by the same line of thought.
There is also a very famous Colston's school
Should the pupils and staff be singled out for intimidation?
That would obviously be harming people. People making these ridiculous arguments seem to be admitting to being massive racists. Otherwise how is anyone harmed by the removal of this statue?
"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people"
There are plenty of more positive examples of the aftermath of pulling down statues.
This is hardly a cry for freedom, it's an attempt to erase history, we're allowing a year zero style philosophy to take root and it shouldn't be allowed.
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Stark effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
“This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great.”
Thank you for making it clear which (ahem) “great” nation you are referring to.
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
Interesting honesty.
I would be asking them what costs directly related to your holiday had been incurred.
And I suspect trying to keep the money won't really work out as most people will just ask their credit card to refund it.
Oh I'm sure but as I said to the guy, I want to work with them and hope at some point to go on holiday with them. I will happily be flexible if they can be flexible also, and they were so I will not go nuclear.
Which has some interesting stuff on this issue. One point is that a credit note is likely to be worth rather little if the company goes bust (as it must be more likely to do in the circumstances than it was when you booked). An actual refund is cash in the hand now, and a credit card refund as good ...
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
It will be achievable by those who have been given a heads up in advance in private because they are mates of the PM - like Tim Wetherspoon, perhaps?
Do you think this is an acceptable way to run a country? Insiders being favoured and being able to make money because of their insider status with others left out in the cold?
Try reading some of the comments from those in this sector and you will get a sense of the level of fury and frustration.These are people’s businesses, jobs, lives and futures which are being mucked around with by people who don’t have a clue. They don’t need defending. They need to to be told to get a fucking grip and stop behaving like bloody amateurs.
What makes you think that Tim has extra information than your daughter will get later?
The advice that's been given to the public is all available in the public domain already. People have a choice how to interpret that and follow that to the best of their business.
And there's nothing in law to prevent your daughter from starting to clean her lines now in preparation is there?
Tricky test for Starmer - but this sounds like a pretty good line to take. I saw the Bristol mayor on tv last night, thought he did a decent job setting out his views on the topic.
Philip Thompson, who is miles to the right of me and I never thought I would agree with, is actually espousing a logical moral attitude. The crucial point is that defying a law because you think it wrong is the moral thing to do as long as you don't try to escape the penalty. Think of Quakers refusing to fight. They accept the penalty. The people who threw the statue in Bristol harbour need to step up and argue their case in court.
The irony is that if convicted, the penalty is likely to include the cost of re-erecting the statue.
Which means they will be paying to put up a statue of a slaver...
I am comfortable with that. Throw the book at the young hooligans.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
The Duke of Sutherland’s statue above Golspie stands on a gigantic plinth, of Soviet proportions, otherwise it would have been destroyed long ago.
Most of history's great men (and some women) were at least very ruthless, and sometimes sociopathic butchers.
The Mannie above Golspie has inspired a Colston-like debate - many favour leaving him there as a reminder.
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
It is not a deadline, it is a starting gun. When people choose to start running will, however, be up to them. If your daughter needs until 4th July that's when she should open.
On the science I agree that we are giving less weight to overly cautious scientific advice and counterbalancing that against the damage to the economy. I agree that involves an element of risk. There is no alternative to this. We will be bankrupt as a nation if we don't and public services will collapse.
Indeed I believe Cyclefree wrote a couple of persuasive thread headers on how we needed to accept risk.
She did but this is personal and I have great sympathy for anyone in her daughter's position. It must be absolutely hellish seeing your savings, your dreams and your aspirations totally out of your control and subject to the vagaries of a government who give little confidence that they know what they are doing.
It seems odd that our school students are taught of Rosa Parkes, and Martain Luther King, but not our own civil rights movement. Its almost as if racism is a problem over there and not over here
Off topic but an example of why this government does not know its arse from its elbow:-
1. There are press reports about pubs being allowed to open from 22nd June. 2. For this to happen - apart from the changes in the regulations needed and guidance about HSE - pubs need to:- - Get rid of the old barrels which need to be got rid of in a proper manner. The beer is not just flushed down the drain. - All the lines cleaned and prepared and tested. - Gas canisters ordered for gas-assisted ale and lagers etc. These are usually ordered - at least in rural areas - on a fortnightly basis. - Beer ordered. That assumes that small breweries are actually brewing now. They are not back to work yet so there would be no products for anyone to sell. - The beer settled, racked and prepared, ready for serving. That takes a bare minimum of 6 days - if you want good beer. - Heineken has already announced that its first deliveries will be made in the week beginning 22nd June. Here deliveries will not be before 26 June.
How can pubs possibly order stuff now without knowing whether they will legally or practically be able to open on a date vaguely being canvassed in public by idiot politicians without any practical knowledge of what actually is involved in running a small business? It is absolutely absurd.
Realistically. - because it would take an absolute minimum of 2 weeks - the earliest anything can sensibly open is 4 July.
And how are eating and drinking places supposed to operate without loos? Does no-one in government have any understanding of human physiology?
Daughter is incandescent with fury. No certainty. No clue. No guidance. No ability to plan. The changes to the furlough scheme are unclear and there is a deadline of this Wednesday which will impact on what can be done re staff come July.
And to top it all, there is the fear that this is being rushed through for PR reasons, infections will go up again and they could be shut down again - and with no recourse to insurance. Again. And having lost - again - any money spent on stock.
We have fuckwits in charge. Absolute fuckwits.
Neither I nor daughter are normally ones for violence but if we had Boris or one of his morons in front of us now they would get such a bollocking their ears would be ringing from now until Xmas 2024.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
There is a difference between announcing pubs can open from a particular date, to announcing that pubs must or will open from a particular date.
If pubs have an ample supply of products (and some rely on bottles more than draught for instance) and are eager and capable of opening why shouldn't they? If others take longer to do things then they can take longer, the furlough scheme isn't ending for another four months so taking time to reopen properly then being ready and able to do so as soon as you are ready yourself seems logical.
I'm not sure what else you propose. I have been agreeing with you that beer gardens should be open already, but you seem irritated at the proposed opening from date being brought forwards if businesses think its safe to open and they're ready to do so?
The point is that they have not 'announced' a date at all. While floating the possibility of its being next month.
Tricky test for Starmer - but this sounds like a pretty good line to take. I saw the Bristol mayor on tv last night, thought he did a decent job setting out his views on the topic.
A better question would be what has Marvin Rees been doing for 4 years if this statue offended him so much and that the comprise was a new plaque to explain the context. He is the elected mayor, the council is dominated by Maomentumers, but they couldn't organize a new plaque in years.
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
Interesting honesty.
I would be asking them what costs directly related to your holiday had been incurred.
And I suspect trying to keep the money won't really work out as most people will just ask their credit card to refund it.
Oh I'm sure but as I said to the guy, I want to work with them and hope at some point to go on holiday with them. I will happily be flexible if they can be flexible also, and they were so I will not go nuclear.
Which has some interesting stuff on this issue. One point is that a credit note is likely to be worth rather little if the company goes bust (as it must be more likely to do in the circumstances than it was when you booked). An actual refund is cash in the hand now, and a credit card refund as good ...
This lie is even more blatant than the "outside agitators" line they're using in the US.
It really doesn't matter if they're green with purple polka dots. They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
And if people are prepared to put their values above the law and face up to the law then good for them.
The law is not the be all and end all.
Unfortunately, you're far too stubborn and obstinate to see the sewer you've crawled into (even though you're intelligent enough to recognise some the points are valid, and secretly fear you might not have called this wholly right).
Once you adopt a position you refuse to move off it regardless of how the argument subsequently develops. That's a sign of weakness of character by the way, not strength.
I have lost respect for you.
My position is the same now as it always has been: People should do what they consider to be right.
Nothings changed. How is that a sewer? I fundamentally believe in individuals making their own free choices.
What if people have conflicting views of what is right? How should they be resolved?
Everyone should make their own decisions on what they think is right. You do what you consider is right, I do what I consider to be right.
The law is how we try to compel people to do what we want them to do, but if people really think the law is wrong and are prepared to face up to the consequences of breaking the law then so be it.
That's a completely insane view point.
People should be free to carry out extra judicial punishments of they feel the law is wrong?!
Once again I feel vindicated leaving the Tory party. It didn't feel right being in the same party as you and HYFUD. I hope @Casino_Royale and @DavidL are beginning to see the party is no longer for people like us.
I don't normally agree with Philip - and I don't 100% agree with him here either - but I think he is just saying that where a person acts in a way that is unlawful but is iho morally correct he will be supportive of that person and the illegal act in question.
He is not saying the law should be set aside and the "culprit" not prosecuted. Since this would clearly be a recipe for anarchy.
Have I got that right, Philip?
Basically. Not 100% but yes that's the essence of it.
Some people put the law above right or wrong and make following the law a right in itself. I view right or wrong as being more important than the law.
In Dungeons and Dragons there's a good way of defining this debate, there are two axes of Good, Neutral or Evil on the good or evil spectrum . . . and on law and order there is Chaotic, Neutral or Lawful. Leaving 9 different combinations you can end up with. You can be Lawful Evil or any other combination.
On that basis I would class my philosophy as Chaotic Good. The right thing to do matters more than the law. In Superhero lore the most famous distinction between Lawful Good and Chaotic Good is Superman (Lawful Good) versus Batman (Chaotic Good).
"Chaotic good" as a position needs testing against an adverse situation, like the "chaotic good" moralist with a knife who has decided that the world will be even better in the absence of Philip Thompson and intends to act on it. I say "The law is the law. Stop him. protect Philip Thompson."
Well one would not want to lose Philip.
But tbf I do not think what he is saying here is particularly incendiary.
He feels the people who pulled down the statue were acting in a morally impeccable fashion and he fully supports them in doing it even though it was against the law.
He is NOT saying the relevant law should be adjusted so it comes into line with his personal view - e.g. to exempt statues of scarred old slavers from protection from vandalism - or that it should not be enforced in this case.
I think various people are misunderstanding Philip on this one.
Oh lord, please don't let Philip be misunderstood.
And if in my morally impeccable view taxes as immoral then should I stop paying?
Tbh if a statue that burnishes the reputation of a slavery profiteer is being presented as 'a symbol of power', it rather makes my fingers itch for the steel cable and sledgehammer.
Lilico. Wrong about everything. All the time. For ever.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong.
Not specifically on Cyclefree Junior's travails, but the govt seems to think that solutions are simplistic ON/OFF decisions. "Pubs can open on this date" misses the point that the supply lines for pubs take WEEKS to get going. If they were announcing that Brewers etc can start on this date and pubs (say) 4 weeks later then there is a schedule that is realistic.
Are you aware that if a pilot stops flying then they become non-current? This means they are not allowed to fly. Now think of the thousands of pilots who have been sitting on their backsides for months. They all have to undergo revalidation training or else govts have to agree that the currency regulations can be dropped, but you just cannot say "Next Tuesday planes can fly again". If the regulations are dropped then insurers need to agree because accidents will increase. And who will be flying where? Holidays have been cancelled.
We just cannot say "Lockdown is over, back to normal tomorrow" and that is what the government seems to miss. Industry and business is complex chain of events that must happen in a sequence without disruption. And that BTW is also the worry of businesses about Brexit.
No one is saying that, least of all the government. What they are saying is that right now it is illegal for a pub to operate. Come 20th June it will no longer be so provided the pub has worked out how to protect its staff and customers. So those businesses once again have a choice. There is so much to criticise this government's handling of this pandemic for and I have but this is bordering on silly.
There is no point on making it legal for them to operate if they cannot do so. That is just flag waving.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
There is a difference between announcing pubs can open from a particular date, to announcing that pubs must or will open from a particular date.
If pubs have an ample supply of products (and some rely on bottles more than draught for instance) and are eager and capable of opening why shouldn't they? If others take longer to do things then they can take longer, the furlough scheme isn't ending for another four months so taking time to reopen properly then being ready and able to do so as soon as you are ready yourself seems logical.
I'm not sure what else you propose. I have been agreeing with you that beer gardens should be open already, but you seem irritated at the proposed opening from date being brought forwards if businesses think its safe to open and they're ready to do so?
It is the uncertainty which is the problem.
Guidance: great. Is it legally enforceable or not?
The changes in the furlough scheme raise a lot of questions and answers come there none, so far anyway.
The government has closed down a sector. It behoves it - when it comes to reopening - to plan for that reopening in a sensible way and to provide sensible timetable and clear information about the laws and rules which will apply and their status. They are not doing this. It is all over the place and this is making a difficult situation very much worse than it otherwise need be.
How hard is this for people to understand? We don’t - with the greatest of respect - need jury speeches about reopening of the economy to stop public services collapsing. I get this. We all do.
What we do need are practical well though through steps and advice.
It seems odd that our school students are taught of Rosa Parkes, and Martain Luther King, but not our own civil rights movement. Its almost as if racism is a problem over there and not over here
They are in Bristol. I know that because I used to teach them about it.
However, why stop at Stephenson? He was the public face, but not the instigator. A statue of the four organisers, Roy Hackett, Owen Henry, Audley Evans and Prince Brown, plus Stephenson, with all of them slightly larger than Colston, facing him, staring him down.
Now THAT would be two fingers to Bristol's slaving past - literally confronting it head on.
This lie is even more blatant than the "outside agitators" line they're using in the US.
It really doesn't matter if they're green with purple polka dots. They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
And if people are prepared to put their values above the law and face up to the law then good for them.
The law is not the be all and end all.
Unfortunately, you're far too stubborn and obstinate to see the sewer you've crawled into (even though you're intelligent enough to recognise some the points are valid, and secretly fear you might not have called this wholly right).
Once you adopt a position you refuse to move off it regardless of how the argument subsequently develops. That's a sign of weakness of character by the way, not strength.
I have lost respect for you.
My position is the same now as it always has been: People should do what they consider to be right.
Nothings changed. How is that a sewer? I fundamentally believe in individuals making their own free choices.
What if people have conflicting views of what is right? How should they be resolved?
Everyone should make their own decisions on what they think is right. You do what you consider is right, I do what I consider to be right.
The law is how we try to compel people to do what we want them to do, but if people really think the law is wrong and are prepared to face up to the consequences of breaking the law then so be it.
That's a completely insane view point.
People should be free to carry out extra judicial punishments of they feel the law is wrong?!
Once again I feel vindicated leaving the Tory party. It didn't feel right being in the same party as you and HYFUD. I hope @Casino_Royale and @DavidL are beginning to see the party is no longer for people like us.
I don't normally agree with Philip - and I don't 100% agree with him here either - but I think he is just saying that where a person acts in a way that is unlawful but is iho morally correct he will be supportive of that person and the illegal act in question.
He is not saying the law should be set aside and the "culprit" not prosecuted. Since this would clearly be a recipe for anarchy.
Have I got that right, Philip?
Basically. Not 100% but yes that's the essence of it.
Some people put the law above right or wrong and make following the law a right in itself. I view right or wrong as being more important than the law.
In Dungeons and Dragons there's a good way of defining this debate, there are two axes of Good, Neutral or Evil on the good or evil spectrum . . . and on law and order there is Chaotic, Neutral or Lawful. Leaving 9 different combinations you can end up with. You can be Lawful Evil or any other combination.
On that basis I would class my philosophy as Chaotic Good. The right thing to do matters more than the law. In Superhero lore the most famous distinction between Lawful Good and Chaotic Good is Superman (Lawful Good) versus Batman (Chaotic Good).
"Chaotic good" as a position needs testing against an adverse situation, like the "chaotic good" moralist with a knife who has decided that the world will be even better in the absence of Philip Thompson and intends to act on it. I say "The law is the law. Stop him. protect Philip Thompson."
Well one would not want to lose Philip.
But tbf I do not think what he is saying here is particularly incendiary.
He feels the people who pulled down the statue were acting in a morally impeccable fashion and he fully supports them in doing it even though it was against the law.
He is NOT saying the relevant law should be adjusted so it comes into line with his personal view - e.g. to exempt statues of scarred old slavers from protection from vandalism - or that it should not be enforced in this case.
I think various people are misunderstanding Philip on this one.
Oh lord, please don't let Philip be misunderstood.
And if in my morally impeccable view taxes as immoral then should I stop paying?
If, as I've said all along, you're prepared to face the consequences of that decision.
That is exactly what people did in the poll tax protests.
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
In shock news, years ago slavery was widespread across the world. We know African's were involved in providing bodies for the slave trade and that Arabs had plenty. And most people's relatives from back in the day were all involved in some pretty heinous stuff, wars, raping, pillaging. History is complicated.
It's estimated the barbary pirates sold up to a million Europeans into slavery. Mostly from countries in the Med but with outing to Ireland and Britain too. The entire population of Baltimore in Co. Cork was taken off in one raid.
One of the great curiosities of the whole period is that the peak of the Barbary corsairs slave trading Europeans, overlapped with the establishment of the Atlantic triangular trade. It seems that we were appalled by the one at the same time as being enriched by the other.
Probably we didn't care that much about the Barbary Trade as that largely affected Southern Europeans. Until the early nineteenth century, typically we ransomed captives, rather than fighting the pirates.
It was more that the Barbary trade was protected by being part of the Ottoman Empire.
When, at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, with a large navy to hand, and not much for it to do.....
To put this into context, almost everyone lauded the UK's adherence to rule of law when Gina Miller beat the government in the Supreme Court and forced parliamentary approval of A50. It was a prime example of how the rights of everyone were equal, even in the face of 17m voters and overwhelming government pressure a decision was made that was at the time seen a huge setback for the government and 17m voters. Even though o disagreed with the decision it actually was a moment that made me happy to live in this country, a nation that respects rule of law to an extent that the government are bound by it as much as everyone else.
It's one of the reasons I quit the party when Boris decided Dom's decision making process was more important than these rules.
Did Brexiteers riot in front of the supreme court or tear down any statues of judges? Or injure any policemen? even though we had won that referendum fair and square against all the odds?
@Cyclefree rightly details the reality of how the pub trade operates. What the government are saying is simply unachievable. But this shouldn't be surprised considering that so many of the other things they say are laughable.
Politics isn't just a snappy spin line. If you win elections off the back of your spin line you actually have to deliver, and that means knowing how things work. I know that BluestBlue will be here to tell us how the polls are still up for the Tories (by the MoE snigger) but that doesn't matter in the real world. Once again these are people's lives being screwed up.
It will be achievable for some. Should they be denied the possibility because it is more difficult for others?
The point is that the government haven't the first clue how anything works. Not a helpful look when in the midst of a pandemic thats about to evolve into a crushing economic depression. Will a few pubs find a way to process the half advice and guidance? Sure - does that mean its remotely good enough from the government? No...
Sounds like a lot of assumptions.
Incidentally, talked to the landlords of a couple of local pubs, via local community forum.
They have their lines clean (pushing cleaning solution though every so often) and the non perishables stocked up. One place is selling take away over the garden wall. The issue of how the restock with beer is going to happen is much talk about. One chap said he is assuming that he is opening with PImms....
I think we have seen the direction of travel from the government with the schools argument. Initially it was "Hero teachers" then it was "workshy teachers" because the arbitrary date set for restart was not going to happen. It'll be the same for pubs and any other sector where the government make a fact-free announcement for headlines which then falls apart when practicality kicks in.
LAZY LANDLORDS WOULD RATHER TAKE YOUR MONEY THAN POUR YOU A PINT - that sort of thing we can expect from the Mail complete with commentariat suggesting that the Cycle Free not being open is proof that the Furlough scheme should be quickly wound up
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
Is that in the same manner Jeffersons' descendants were fairly recently dismayed to learn that they had some cousins whose ancestors were slaves ?
One wonders whether it was the fact that they were slaves or that their lily white ancestors had participated in some (likely non consensual) sexual activity with their black ancestors was the more shocking to them.
The Jeffersons were shocked and appalled by the suggestion about their illustrious ancestor, and insisted that he did not have sexual relations with that woman*... Until the DNA evidence.
Question - Is there a single British aristocratic family that wasn't tangentially involved in the slave trade ?
There isn’t a single British family that wasn’t at some point in some way involved in slavery.
How many of them have kept the profits from it to the present day is another question.
One of the striking things from the BBC programme Who do you think you are ? was just how widespread slavery was. Many of the black celebs expecting to find their ancestors as liberated slaves were shocked when it turned out they were slave owners instead.
In shock news, years ago slavery was widespread across the world. We know African's were involved in providing bodies for the slave trade and that Arabs had plenty. And most people's relatives from back in the day were all involved in some pretty heinous stuff, wars, raping, pillaging. History is complicated.
It's estimated the barbary pirates sold up to a million Europeans into slavery. Mostly from countries in the Med but with outing to Ireland and Britain too. The entire population of Baltimore in Co. Cork was taken off in one raid.
One of the great curiosities of the whole period is that the peak of the Barbary corsairs slave trading Europeans, overlapped with the establishment of the Atlantic triangular trade. It seems that we were appalled by the one at the same time as being enriched by the other.
Probably we didn't care that much about the Barbary Trade as that largely affected Southern Europeans.
Yes, but also the West Country. Indeed there lies my own connection to Slavery, and a Jamaican born ancestor.
In the Seventeenth Century, Lady Jane Mico set up a trust to ransom and rehabilitate British slaves from North Africa. The money was well invested, and little was spent on the original purpose, but in 1834 the Trust set up several training schools for teachers in the West Indies, and set up 400 schools for freed slaves. Deemed a reasonable extension of the original Trust.
Of these only one remains, but Mico College, Kingston is still an eminent training college. My Great Grandfather was born there, as his father was one of the original faculty. A rather more positive bit of philanthropy.
Consider the concert hall in Bristol, Colston Hall. It was built with money from the profits of the slave trade. Most people are ignorant of that fact.
You could rename it the Wilberforce Hall, and then the small number who found out who Wilberforce was would be able to feel warm and fuzzy about being in a place named after the slave trade abolitionist - and so even more people would be ignorant of the fact that the hall was built with the profits of the slave trade.
Rename it the Colston Slave Trade Profits Hall until we've worked out how to repair the damage we helped to create and then we can rename it again once we've done so.
Likewise the statue. A daily reminder that the wealth of this country was built on slavery and that we therefore have a responsibility to make up for that might be a good thing.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong.
Not specifically on Cyclefree Junior's travails, but the govt seems to think that solutions are simplistic ON/OFF decisions. "Pubs can open on this date" misses the point that the supply lines for pubs take WEEKS to get going. If they were announcing that Brewers etc can start on this date and pubs (say) 4 weeks later then there is a schedule that is realistic.
Are you aware that if a pilot stops flying then they become non-current? This means they are not allowed to fly. Now think of the thousands of pilots who have been sitting on their backsides for months. They all have to undergo revalidation training or else govts have to agree that the currency regulations can be dropped, but you just cannot say "Next Tuesday planes can fly again". If the regulations are dropped then insurers need to agree because accidents will increase. And who will be flying where? Holidays have been cancelled.
We just cannot say "Lockdown is over, back to normal tomorrow" and that is what the government seems to miss. Industry and business is complex chain of events that must happen in a sequence without disruption. And that BTW is also the worry of businesses about Brexit.
My old shipmate the B744 driver is still getting his sim sessions to stay current. And his multiple overlapping STDs have cleared up due to lack of longhaul action with BA's geriatric cabin crew.
To put this into context, almost everyone lauded the UK's adherence to rule of law when Gina Miller beat the government in the Supreme Court and forced parliamentary approval of A50. It was a prime example of how the rights of everyone were equal, even in the face of 17m voters and overwhelming government pressure a decision was made that was at the time seen a huge setback for the government and 17m voters. Even though o disagreed with the decision it actually was a moment that made me happy to live in this country, a nation that respects rule of law to an extent that the government are bound by it as much as everyone else.
It's one of the reasons I quit the party when Boris decided Dom's decision making process was more important than these rules.
Did Brexiteers riot in front of the supreme court or tear down any statues of judges? Or injure any policemen? even though we had won that referendum fair and square against all the odds?
Nope. Back to the ballot box.
In fairness, the big Remain protests were also peaceful. That is how protest and how democracy should be. The big anti-war against the Iraq war was too.
I am sorry but I am not sure I am understanding what you think the government is doing wrong. If this comes to pass pubs will have the option of opening. Some will, some won't, depending upon their situation, access to outdoor space etc. No one is obliged to open on 20th June or indeed 4th July but they are free to do so. Of course some businesses will find it difficult to work out if they can actually trade at a profit with the current restrictions and there is uncertainty about what those restrictions are going to be. But these problems will arise however and whenever we come out of lockdown. Being in a business at a time of a pandemic is problematical. Of course there is a risk of a second wave. The government can do nothing about that risk which we all hope doesn't come to pass. Are you really suggesting that the taxpayer should continue to fund these businesses remaining closed indefinitely just in case? There is no magic solution. There is no magic bullet. We need to open up our economy as quickly as we can whilst watching that R number carefully. That is what the government seems to be doing.
You are missing the point. This isn’t about profitability. The government has no understanding of the logistics involved. You do not announce a date that is simply unachievable. You make announcements and give certainty so that businesses can make plans - about ordering / staff / insurance / training etc etc. You tell people what is actually legally required so people know what they have to do and can get ready in time.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
There is a difference between announcing pubs can open from a particular date, to announcing that pubs must or will open from a particular date.
If pubs have an ample supply of products (and some rely on bottles more than draught for instance) and are eager and capable of opening why shouldn't they? If others take longer to do things then they can take longer, the furlough scheme isn't ending for another four months so taking time to reopen properly then being ready and able to do so as soon as you are ready yourself seems logical.
I'm not sure what else you propose. I have been agreeing with you that beer gardens should be open already, but you seem irritated at the proposed opening from date being brought forwards if businesses think its safe to open and they're ready to do so?
It is the uncertainty which is the problem.
Guidance: great. Is it legally enforceable or not?
The changes in the furlough scheme raise a lot of questions and answers come there none, so far anyway.
The government has closed down a sector. It behoves it - when it comes to reopening - to plan for that reopening in a sensible way and to provide sensible timetable and clear information about the laws and rules which will apply and their status. They are not doing this. It is all over the place and this is making a difficult situation very much worse than it otherwise need be.
How hard is this for people to understand? We don’t - with the greatest of respect - need jury speeches about reopening of the economy to stop public services collapsing. I get this. We all do.
What we do need are practical well though through steps and advice.
I agree with you 100% on the difficulties and pressures the industry faces. I agree its ridiculous that beer gardens weren't already permitted to be open. I agreed with you on licencing for off trade and said I thought that should be liberalised so all licensed premises could immediately trade off as well without seeking permission.
But I'm not sure I agree here. I don't think you need well thought through steps and advice. I think businesses frankly need to do some of the thinking for themselves. The situation in your daughters property she will know better and understand better than anyone in Whitehall will. She needs to be permitted to use her common sense and do within reason whatever she thinks is right as the solution.
Philip Thompson, who is miles to the right of me and I never thought I would agree with, is actually espousing a logical moral attitude. The crucial point is that defying a law because you think it wrong is the moral thing to do as long as you don't try to escape the penalty. Think of Quakers refusing to fight. They accept the penalty. The people who threw the statue in Bristol harbour need to step up and argue their case in court.
The irony is that if convicted, the penalty is likely to include the cost of re-erecting the statue.
Which means they will be paying to put up a statue of a slaver...
I am comfortable with that. Throw the book at the young hooligans.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
I'm pretty sure that my Welsh miner ancestors didn't have the best of lives working for the 18th/19thC coal owners.
Very true, and I have the same collier ancestors as you. Maybe we are related?
However we do not have the right to pull down Cardiff Castle or Castell Coch because the Earl of Bute made his fortune from exploitation. Do we?
In Scotland the miners used to be slaves! Technically, serfs. There's a neck collar in the Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh marked something like 'Property of the Duke of Glentumblers' or whoever it was.
The lairds liberated them oh, about 1790 or whatever it was. Turns out that the real reason was not lairdly benevolence, but the fact that this depressed the status of mining so much that free men were reluctant to come and work in mines - meaning that the owners were stuck with the number of serfs they startted off with, never mind if the demand grew. It was themselves they were liberating, to take on and dump labour as they wished.
Comments
You want the statue removed? Fine, get campaigning. Write to your MP and councillors. Get a majority locally and/or nationally so that whoever wants the statue to remain cannot stand in your way. You believe you have a strong case, a consensus should be easy. Campaign and vote again and again and again until enough people are convinced of your cause whatever the opposition
YOU know, like many of us did for brexit. Sorry, but there are no short cuts matey. Want something changed? get in line. like the rest of us.
Thanks to the furlough scheme this government has pursued pub workers will also have a job to go back to
As opposed to any official guidance.
The artefact should be restored and placed somewhere more appropriate and Edward Colston contextualised as a historical villain as well a Bristolian philanthropist. History should not have the unpopular bits airbrushed out.
Another fear I have for Bristol would be further acts of vandalism by the Council in renaming some of the unusual historic street names. By all means rename Colston Square to George Floyd Piazza, but not the ones named after some historic pubs.
I am also fearful for Cecil Rhodes in Oxford, and here in Wales, Drakeford had to deal with a stupid question from LBC at lunchtime, tacitly inviting nutjobs to pull down the statue of Thomas Picton in Cardiff.
He'll probably put it in his manifesto.
So stop rioting and start voting, if it means that much to you.
Minneapolis' Third Precinct served as 'playground' for renegade cops
https://m.startribune.com/third-precinct-served-as-playground-for-renegade-cops/571076562/
And I'm not getting your point about the UK being in any sense unusual in having a population that is not in full agreement as to what is moral and what is not.
This applies pretty much everywhere.
I had booked a holiday for end-July and paid a deposit only. Called the company today. If the holiday is cancelled they will issue a credit note, and not give a refund. This is against the law, they agreed, but they simply can't afford to refund people.
Interesting honesty.
Put him on the plinth.
It was illegal to refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple.
It was illegal to refuse service at a B&B to a gay couple.
What cultural monuments that I cherish will the far-right now feel justified in pulling down?
I'm a supporter of non-violent direct action, but in my memory of nvda training the argument was often that criminal damage, or breach of the peace could be defended in court on the basis of preventing a greater crime.
It might be right to take down some statues, erase history and be able to feel better about our past and its continuity to the present, but I don't see the greater crime that justifies criminal damage in the way that defence was used for many nvda protests in the past - particularly in the middle of a pandemic.
Are you aware that if a pilot stops flying then they become non-current? This means they are not allowed to fly. Now think of the thousands of pilots who have been sitting on their backsides for months. They all have to undergo revalidation training or else govts have to agree that the currency regulations can be dropped, but you just cannot say "Next Tuesday planes can fly again". If the regulations are dropped then insurers need to agree because accidents will increase. And who will be flying where? Holidays have been cancelled.
We just cannot say "Lockdown is over, back to normal tomorrow" and that is what the government seems to miss. Industry and business is complex chain of events that must happen in a sequence without disruption. And that BTW is also the worry of businesses about Brexit.
And as for your last point, that is laughable: the government seems to have junked the science. It is just making stuff up as it goes along.
And I suspect trying to keep the money won't really work out as most people will just ask their credit card to refund it.
SNP 51% (+1)
Conservatives 21% (-5)
Labour 19% (+2)
Liberal Democrats 6% (+1)
Greens 2% (n/c)
Seats projection:
SNP 58 (+10)
Labour 1 (n/c)
Conservatives 0 (-6)
Liberal Democrats 0 (-4)
(Scot Goes Pop / Panelbase poll, 1st-5th June 2020)
Remember this is the government elected because Boris and co said don't trust the experts
It is 50/50 at best whether pubs will be able to reopen at all since no-one knows under what legal conditions they will be operating.
https://twitter.com/MeanwhileScotia/status/1269966669188825090?s=20
This is a great nation, built on both good and evil things it has done in its 1200 years of existence since Alfred the Great. Attempting to erase either of those to appease our modern sensibilities is just wrong. How long until these same anarchists are asking for the statue of Gandhi to be taken down? Or Churchill? How long until they're asking for Gandhi's teachings to be removed from the curriculum? Or do we stop teaching the Stark effect because Johannes Stark was a Nazi?
This is a road I'd hoped the UK would never go down and that so many are applauding the disregard for rule of law is both disheartening and worrying. When the mob takes over, it's people like me (and you) that are lined up and shot.
If pubs have an ample supply of products (and some rely on bottles more than draught for instance) and are eager and capable of opening why shouldn't they? If others take longer to do things then they can take longer, the furlough scheme isn't ending for another four months so taking time to reopen properly then being ready and able to do so as soon as you are ready yourself seems logical.
I'm not sure what else you propose. I have been agreeing with you that beer gardens should be open already, but you seem irritated at the proposed opening from date being brought forwards if businesses think its safe to open and they're ready to do so?
However we do not have the right to pull down Cardiff Castle or Castell Coch because the Earl of Bute made his fortune from exploitation. Do we?
Incidentally, talked to the landlords of a couple of local pubs, via local community forum.
They have their lines clean (pushing cleaning solution though every so often) and the non perishables stocked up. One place is selling take away over the garden wall. The issue of how the restock with beer is going to happen is much talk about. One chap said he is assuming that he is opening with PImms....
He just spent some time in Barbados and had the Hilton to themselves but had to beg the staff for food as no one wanted them there.
It will be a Good Thing when schools re-open to everyone. But the approach the government took- announcing a convenient date, publishing garbled guidance, not bothering to check the science (the scientists risk-assessed lots of models but not the one the government pushed)- doesn't help beyond the initial headline.
(Oh, and if you try and open a primary school with half-size classes, it eats up the capacity to do home schooling for the year groups still at home.)
As a result, lots of schools and councils gave up on the June 1 reopening as a bad job, and attendance is pretty patchy in schools that have opened up for full year groups.
But if you have a government whose main belief is populism and main talent is writing headlines, what can you expect?
On the science I agree that we are giving less weight to overly cautious scientific advice and counterbalancing that against the damage to the economy. I agree that involves an element of risk. There is no alternative to this. We will be bankrupt as a nation if we don't and public services will collapse.
I doubt many of the greatest scientists would pass the woke test, better started removing them from history as well.
Do you think this is an acceptable way to run a country? Insiders being favoured and being able to make money because of their insider status with others left out in the cold?
Try reading some of the comments from those in this sector and you will get a sense of the level of fury and frustration.These are people’s businesses, jobs, lives and futures which are being mucked around with by people who don’t have a clue. They don’t need defending. They need to to be told to get a fucking grip and stop behaving like bloody amateurs.
Nah, that could never happen...
But tbf I do not think what he is saying here is particularly incendiary.
He feels the people who pulled down the statue were acting in a morally impeccable fashion and he fully supports them in doing it even though it was against the law.
He is NOT saying the relevant law should be adjusted so it comes into line with his personal view - e.g. to exempt statues of scarred old slavers from protection from vandalism - or that it should not be enforced in this case.
I think various people are misunderstanding Philip on this one.
Oh lord, please don't let Philip be misunderstood.
Are they special teabags?
It seems odd that our school students are taught of Rosa Parkes, and Martain Luther King, but not our own civil rights movement. Its almost as if racism is a problem over there and not over here
https://www.blackhistorymonth.org.uk/article/section/bhm-heroes/the-bristol-bus-boycott-of-1963/
Or by the Spanish metric, 0.75 of a person.
It's one of the reasons I quit the party when Boris decided Dom's decision making process was more important than these rules.
Thank you for making it clear which (ahem) “great” nation you are referring to.
The advice that's been given to the public is all available in the public domain already. People have a choice how to interpret that and follow that to the best of their business.
And there's nothing in law to prevent your daughter from starting to clean her lines now in preparation is there?
While floating the possibility of its being next month.
Quite a superpower. But he is a weirdo.
Guidance: great. Is it legally enforceable or not?
The changes in the furlough scheme raise a lot of questions and answers come there none, so far anyway.
The government has closed down a sector. It behoves it - when it comes to reopening - to plan for that reopening in a sensible way and to provide sensible timetable and clear information about the laws and rules which will apply and their status. They are not doing this. It is all over the place and this is making a difficult situation very much worse than it otherwise need be.
How hard is this for people to understand? We don’t - with the greatest of respect - need jury speeches about reopening of the economy to stop public services collapsing. I get this. We all do.
What we do need are practical well though through steps and advice.
However, why stop at Stephenson? He was the public face, but not the instigator. A statue of the four organisers, Roy Hackett, Owen Henry, Audley Evans and Prince Brown, plus Stephenson, with all of them slightly larger than Colston, facing him, staring him down.
Now THAT would be two fingers to Bristol's slaving past - literally confronting it head on.
That is exactly what people did in the poll tax protests.
When, at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, with a large navy to hand, and not much for it to do.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Algiers_(1816)
Nope. Back to the ballot box.
LAZY LANDLORDS WOULD RATHER TAKE YOUR MONEY THAN POUR YOU A PINT - that sort of thing we can expect from the Mail complete with commentariat suggesting that the Cycle Free not being open is proof that the Furlough scheme should be quickly wound up
But why would you think a rapist would necessarily have any more regard for the chid than the mother anyway ?
In the Seventeenth Century, Lady Jane Mico set up a trust to ransom and rehabilitate British slaves from North Africa. The money was well invested, and little was spent on the original purpose, but in 1834 the Trust set up several training schools for teachers in the West Indies, and set up 400 schools for freed slaves. Deemed a reasonable extension of the original Trust.
Of these only one remains, but Mico College, Kingston is still an eminent training college. My Great Grandfather was born there, as his father was one of the original faculty. A rather more positive bit of philanthropy.
http://thomasfowellbuxton.org.uk/tfb/blog/2014/07/26/the-mico-trust/
You could rename it the Wilberforce Hall, and then the small number who found out who Wilberforce was would be able to feel warm and fuzzy about being in a place named after the slave trade abolitionist - and so even more people would be ignorant of the fact that the hall was built with the profits of the slave trade.
Rename it the Colston Slave Trade Profits Hall until we've worked out how to repair the damage we helped to create and then we can rename it again once we've done so.
Likewise the statue. A daily reminder that the wealth of this country was built on slavery and that we therefore have a responsibility to make up for that might be a good thing.
But I'm not sure I agree here. I don't think you need well thought through steps and advice. I think businesses frankly need to do some of the thinking for themselves. The situation in your daughters property she will know better and understand better than anyone in Whitehall will. She needs to be permitted to use her common sense and do within reason whatever she thinks is right as the solution.
The lairds liberated them oh, about 1790 or whatever it was. Turns out that the real reason was not lairdly benevolence, but the fact that this depressed the status of mining so much that free men were reluctant to come and work in mines - meaning that the owners were stuck with the number of serfs they startted off with, never mind if the demand grew. It was themselves they were liberating, to take on and dump labour as they wished.