horatiotheturd 548 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 3 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: How long for? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-55785787 14 days and three negative tests. There is always going to be the odd curveball like above. We need to be realistic. Thats when your track and trace an isolation of contacts kicks in. Your example isn't relevant in the context of what I was suggesting anyway is it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TheTeapot 10,385 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 1 minute ago, horatiotheturd said: 14 days and three negative tests. There is always going to be the odd curveball like above. We need to be realistic. Thats when your track and trace an isolation of contacts kicks in. Your example isn't relevant in the context of what I was suggesting anyway is it? Its just an example, like the 1886 case we had here, of the 14 days perhaps not being long enough. How long do people need to stay in isolation for? How long is fair? To the individual and to society? It's not like these people are criminals who should be locked up. It's a question of freedom, liberty and responsibility. Like your tagging proposal, its an affront to decency. I know you want the borders open more, we're going to have to eventually, I'm just not sure you've really thought it through. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
finlo 4,876 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Gladys said: Was that the Tame Elf episode? No he popped his clogs a couple of years ago. 56 minutes ago, Gladys said: Edited January 24 by finlo 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
horatiotheturd 548 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 4 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Its just an example, like the 1886 case we had here, of the 14 days perhaps not being long enough. How long do people need to stay in isolation for? How long is fair? To the individual and to society? It's not like these people are criminals who should be locked up. It's a question of freedom, liberty and responsibility. Like your tagging proposal, its an affront to decency. I know you want the borders open more, we're going to have to eventually, I'm just not sure you've really thought it through. Have you thought through leaving them as they are. My post that you quoted said after all vulnerable vaccinated. I don't actually think that's necessary, but belive its what will happen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Boris Johnson 678 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 3 hours ago, Happier diner said: That's possible but irrelevant. The site rules are the site rules. The construction industry has promised to be covid safe, yes within hours of being allowed back the plonkers don't have the common sense to even look like they are even trying. Its all bullshit anyway. You can work in a sterile way in the right environment, hospital etc but saying that you can on a building site is BS. It is just a PR exercise, the wearing of face coverings on site, unfortunately some cant even do that. If you spend all day working on a scaffold with someone who has Covid you are going to catch it, end of. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
horatiotheturd 548 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 (edited) 23 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Its just an example, like the 1886 case we had here, of the 14 days perhaps not being long enough. How long do people need to stay in isolation for? How long is fair? To the individual and to society? It's not like these people are criminals who should be locked up. It's a question of freedom, liberty and responsibility. Like your tagging proposal, its an affront to decency. I know you want the borders open more, we're going to have to eventually, I'm just not sure you've really thought it through. The 1886 example is completely irrelevant for obvious reasons stated many times previously. I can't get my head around how so many people think the fact that that happened is in anyway relevant to conversations we have about moving forward. I actually think it contributes massively to the fear around travel because people think it can happen again. Really Howard needs to grow a pair and admit publicly that if he hadn't delayed until 23/12 we wouldn't have needed a locldown and take some responsibility for it, while clearly laying out to the public why the changes now in place mean that set of circumstances can't reoccur. Edited January 24 by horatiotheturd Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Happier diner 556 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 35 minutes ago, Boris Johnson said: Its all bullshit anyway. You can work in a sterile way in the right environment, hospital etc but saying that you can on a building site is BS. It is just a PR exercise, the wearing of face coverings on site, unfortunately some cant even do that. If you spend all day working on a scaffold with someone who has Covid you are going to catch it, end of. What I saw was 2 chaps walking side by side chatting. Not working. Perfectly possible to social distance. If they had been actually working I would gave agreed with you as it is difficult. However I would say the construction firms have convinced gov that they can comply, do if they cant they need to go home again. To add some balance. I walked the length of the prom this morning and the work practices were excellent. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dirty Buggane 200 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 (edited) Seems to me that Howard always mentions, The meeting of the council ministers every time before he comes out with some crap. Like the decision is not his he is just passing on the bad news. Forgive me if I am wrong is he not in charge of the council of ministers and what he decides is what we get for fuckup or worse Edited January 24 by Dirty Buggane words failed me 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Boris Johnson 678 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 I wish Howard would give someone else a go at the press briefings. Someone that can read out loud without sounding like it is the first time they have ever done it. Time and after time after time.................... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Newbie 93 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 1 hour ago, TheTeapot said: Its just an example, like the 1886 case we had here, of the 14 days perhaps not being long enough. How long do people need to stay in isolation for? How long is fair? It is worth pointing out that the New Zealand case was the first 'quarantine failure' in months in a country of 5 million people. The quarantine system here could be improved by some slight tweaks. 14 days and 3 negative tests is pretty secure, as is 21 days without tests for individuals isolating alone. If people have travelled together and are isolating together, perhaps they shouldn't be given the option of 21 days isolation without testing. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
piebaps 3,313 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 Yes NZ appear to be handling a very similar incident to "1886" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-55785787 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Happier diner 556 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 39 minutes ago, Boris Johnson said: I wish Howard would give someone else a go at the press briefings. Someone that can read out loud without sounding like it is the first time they have ever done it. Time and after time after time.................... Cregean? 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Happier diner 556 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 16 minutes ago, piebaps said: Yes NZ appear to be handling a very similar incident to "1886" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-55785787 No mention of genomic sequences 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
piebaps 3,313 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 1 minute ago, Happier diner said: Cregean? Here is Peter. Here is Jane. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
piebaps 3,313 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 Just now, Happier diner said: No mention of genomic sequences Sent to a lab in Australia probably 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.