Jump to content

Tiers, Lockdowns & Vaccinations


cheezemonkhai

Recommended Posts

Do you think these new tiers are reasonable?

 

You have parts of the country like London in Tier2, with the mayor trying to argue parts should be tier1. 
Then you have various parts of the rest of the country with hugely lower infection rates or that have never been a significant problem also in tier2.

 

In tier two you can go into a pub but can’t have a guest in your house. It’s also ok to get hot, sweaty, bothered and panting in a gym in tiers 2 and 3, but again not have a guest to the house.

 

It looks particularly broken , like a slightly toned down national lockdown and displays what looks like favouritism to London?

 

Am I just getting exhausted of lockdown or is it not just me?

 

Edited by cheezemonkhai
Title update
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the definition of the tiers is OK, they needed to be tightened because the old definitions still allowed cases to increase in all areas.

 

What I think is wrong is grouping large areas together, for example Kent is in Tier 3 because of a local problem in the Swale district, and Devon is in Tier 2 because of high cases in Exeter, Torbay & Plymouth.

 

IMHO the decision of which tier a location should be in should be based on data for the DISTRICT council not the COUNTY council (or equivalents).

Edited by PetrolDave
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I don't have too much of an issue with it other than it probably needs to have a finer grained geography as PetrolDave has suggested.  At the minute at seems too coarse to have it by region or county given the differences across these.

 

However, I think what does need further explanation is what drives the level the areas are put in to.  It clearly isn't just infection rate and includes hospital bed / ICU availability and the like so it would be good if that can be added to the regular updates and info that is being distributed by Govt and the press.

 

My guess is that the latter is where London benefits and why it is in a lower Tier than other areas - they may have a higher infection rate but also probably have a much higher NHS capacity due to the number of hospitals and facilities etc. that is less occupied at present and hence can cope with a greater influx of patients.

 

Either way it is what it is and we won't have any influence over changing it - so just crack on with it...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Wino said:

So if I go to the pub for lunch next Friday with a couple of workmates, we'll be OK as long as we sit outside... 

Sales of winter coats should be strong at the moment, as well as outdoor heaters! 

 

Just had that conversation with a local pub owner.

Six outside, you can mix as per the rules, inside is one household only per group.

 

The granularity is shocking and whilst I know there is nothing you can do about it, they really need to explain their algorithms.

Where I live has apparently been grouped in T2, because of out proximity to the bristol commuter belt (They are T3) but we have never exceeded a low volume of cases.

 

I think my biggest gripe is probably a lack of any sensible explanation of what data was used.

Not helped by having Mayor K suggest parts of London should be in Tier 1 and the rest in Tier 2 to save it's economy, which is frankly a slap in everyone elses faces.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, cheezemonkhai said:

they really need to explain their algorithms.

 

 

Personally I don't think they have any algorithms - I actually think it's all being done via discussions around the numbers and subjective decisions based on data and SAGE advice.

 

That isn't saying it's a bad way of doing things - but it would explain some of the variances...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, skomaz said:

 

Personally I don't think they have any algorithms - I actually think it's all being done via discussions around the numbers and subjective decisions based on data and SAGE advice.

 

That isn't saying it's a bad way of doing things - but it would explain some of the variances...

It would, and I do agree it's not generally bad to do things by sensible discussion.

However remember that the south west got put into lockdown even though there was no reason to do it "in solidarity" with the rest of the country (Government's words).

 

Bristol was becoming a problem, but the rest of the SW is not bristol and most of that can be laid at the feet of the Mayor of Bristol.

 

Now on the other side, we are being told we are Tier2 after lockdown. So go in as no issue, lockdown and now it's worse?

You can see why people don't believe what they are told and frankly are starting to not care what the government say.

 

Yes you need to follow the rules, but if things are so bad you're in tier 3, then why can shops not open on a timeslot booking system, but gyms are fine?

It's the variation, inconsisency and other contradictions that have really p*ssed me off.

Edited by cheezemonkhai
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, cheezemonkhai said:

 if things are so bad you're in tier 3, then why can shops not open on a timslot booking system, but gyms are fine?

Reading the Government:

Quote

In all tiers, the following businesses and venues can remain open:

  • essential and non-essential retail, including indoor and outdoor markets

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, moley said:

Reading the Government:

 

Interesting, I clearly misread that or got confused by the 101 changes.

 

I have to question at that point, what's the point in Tier3, bar you qualify for mass testing and people can do even less, but please go and keep the businesses going?

Do I sniff a tier4 for "oh ****" on the cards?

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all pointless unless it's enforced.

And it's not, so it's pointless.

 

Like speeding the chances of getting caught are tiny, therfore the majority break the rules when it suits them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aspman said:

Like speeding the chances of getting caught are tiny, therfore the majority break the rules when it suits them.

And that's why thousands will continue to die unnecessarily, because of the selfish and thoughtless actions of others who simply don't seem to think about anyone other than themselves.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So put in charge of delivery of Vaccines for England is the Founder of Yougov and the one that claimed for the heating of his or his good ladies stables and gets some nice income from Oil Trading that was shown to be done legally.

Hopefully all contracts will be getting scrutinised before the government has them signed.  No MP's, advisers or Political Party should be benefiting financially.

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55115037

 

https://theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/11/mps-and-the-oil-industry-who-gave-what-to-whom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by e-Roottoot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/11/2020 at 15:06, e-Roottoot said:

 

Hopefully all contracts will be getting scrutinised before the government has them signed.  No MP's, advisers or Political Party should be benefiting financially.

 

 

Well there has to be a first time in history for a thing to happen.

 

In an infinite universe somewhere there is a paliament full of MPs not grubbing about for their own benefit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gadgetman said:

Waiting for MP voting list to be released and see if Bone was for or against tiers... 

Looks like a rebellion of 50+ tory MPs went against Johnson and a further 17 abstained. Reports are that he was pleading with MPs to back him in the division lobby. Hardly the actions of a PM in charge of his party. 
Tier restrictions could go on for months. Handy to quash any rebellion after 1/1/2021.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, e-Roottoot said:

Abstaining is an issue and one that i think is ridiculous.

 

If Labour are abstaining that is why they should never get into government.    

Agree if they are not able to make a simple yes or no decision then should be even put in charge of who fills the kettle or who boils the water.

  • Groan 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, e-Roottoot said:

Abstaining is an issue and one that i think is ridiculous.

 

If Labour are abstaining that is why they should never get into government.    

Johnson called Starmer 'invertebrate' for asking Labour to abstain which I thought was a bit rich coming from a man who said he'd lie in front of bulldozers (Heathrow runway) before abstaining on the vote. The man who said he'd 'die in a ditch'. The man who hid in a fridge. He's a fine one to talk. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Community Partner

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to BRISKODA. Please note the following important links Terms of Use. We have a comprehensive Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.