Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Isn't it just a bit incredulous that the entire Island is arguing whether the Laxey swimmers were right or wrong and yet, despite the law, it could certainly be agreed that it was very probably a low risk activity.

I don't think the whole island is actually talking about it, and it is because it is the law, not despite it. No-one should be able to  cherry pick the regulations they agree with and abide with them and ignore the others.

Is our government stupid -yes. Are some of the curbs unrealistic and not warranted -yes. Can some of our curbed or illegal activities be deemed to be low or even no risk - possibly and yes.

Should posters stop digging a hole and referring to it -yes. 

But lets also be honest - who brought this up in the first place ?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 33.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2563

  • TheTeapot

    1391

  • Gladys

    1289

  • Nom de plume

    1028

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

OK. For what it's worth I'm going to try and explain why genomics is important in a ssRNA virus epidemic. No doubt it will end up being recited badly at a briefing, but, well, whatever. You read it he

Rachel has tried every which way to re-offer her services. This last tweet wasn't the first time she's reached out. Government has made it very clear they do not want her to be involved. I want h

I think you'll find most so called anti-government rhetoric is focused on government-stupidity and government-selfishness. In recent times - under Brown, Bell and now Quayle - all too many govern

Posted Images

1 hour ago, winnie said:

Please explain why? The uk rates are as low as the testing proceedure allows, most of the 50+ year olds have had a vaccine, covid hospital admissions are virtually zero in the uk and the death rate is below the average.

Please tell me why some-one can't travel back to IOM, test day 1 and 7, then be allowed to shop for essentials and excercise outside for the 2nd week?? 

Don't dare say because the IOM are trying to be covid free, because it's too late for that. Covid is here and it ain't going away - accept it, and work around it.

 

It shouldn’t be so hard to understand.

Yes UK rates are lower than they have been, but, even with vaccination, they are still worried about a third wave, especially new variants, coming from outside. That’s why UK have belatedly introduced border restrictions, quarantine and tests, on top of lockdowns.

You only have to look at how quickly it took hold here in late February, and through March, from only 1, 2 or 3 cases coming in. You only have to look at the number of admissions to hospital and how that put the system at danger of collapse and affected health care for all.

Its you who is delusional if you think the short term aim isn't anything other than local elimination. It is, and it’s achievable. Probably ( hopefully ) before end April. You can’t realistically impose, remove, and reimpose border restrictions. Internal circuit breaker lock downs are much more effective as long as your border restrictions are effective. That means quarantine and testing.

As for the length of quarantine, the number of tests, well it’s a balance between epidemiological advice and politics. We had 14 days and no tests, 14 days, test on day 7 and modified quarantine, 21 days but reduced to 14 with tests on 1 & 13 and now 1, 7 and 14. Cases have slipped through. Now they are being detected at days 7 & 14. So there’s a political decision to be made on a risk assessment.

Theres too many here think they know better ( on both sides of the argument ). Those organising Wim Hoff events or gatherings who seem to think the regulations shouldn’t apply to them or those who they attract, or those who undertake extreme sports solo, or someone I know who drives to Tesco 4 times a week to shop. People who don’t understand that stay at home unless it’s essential is good advice, safer for all. Thing is, when they don’t observe that simple request it’s them that mess with the mental health of others ( just as much as any lock down ) and put third parties at unnecessary risk.

The IOM Borders policy has given us 8 months out of 12 internal normality. It’s kept our health service working and available to all ( normal and unacceptable waiting lists apart ). I’d rather a few more months, full vaccination, before we go to a borders free for all.

However, all that considered Howie needs to take a leaf out of the Merkel book of apologies and say a fulsome apology for his error in not acting sooner on lock down 3. If they’d moved on 25/6 February and imposed a 14 day circuit breaker then it’s likely we’d have been out of it by now. Whilst their communication skills remain poor they’ve been pretty sure footed until then.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, piebaps said:

Fair point Cap'n. But we were either out or we weren't. The police didn't allow it to go ahead because the law said it was legal. They basically turned a blind eye instead of having to do something difficult. We're all over the Chief Secretary about the Steamy but the Chief Constable is also choosing which laws to enforce.

If this dickhead is going to cop it for arranging an open air swim then the BLM organizers should too.

I'll probably be labelled a racist now too.:D

 

By 2 June though you could have people in your garden, in your house I think up to 2 people as well as going for exercise with others provided you were socially distanced. That all started around 20 May. So it wasn't like it is today. Would be interesting to see how it would be approached now if it was organised for say tomorrow.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Apple said:

I don't think the whole island is actually talking about it, and it is because it is the law, not despite it. No-one should be able to  cherry pick the regulations they agree with and abide with them and ignore the others.

Is our government stupid -yes. Are some of the curbs unrealistic and not warranted -yes. Can some of our curbed or illegal activities be deemed to be low or even no risk - possibly and yes.

Should posters stop digging a hole and referring to it -yes. 

But lets also be honest - who brought this up in the first place ?

 

If we're being honest - which of the two scenarios is the more serious?  Which of the two should result in a stronger case of retribution and accountability?

Given the history, who would you imprison first? Who would get the longer sentence?

Howard or Ian?

This is why people are fed up.  They are seeing this inequality over and over again. One rule for one and one rule for another. If our government got their house in order and behaved to the letter of the law and took the blame for the times when they have not, I think you'd find there would be a far higher level of compliance at every level.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Apple said:

 No-one should be able to  cherry pick the regulations they agree with and abide with them and ignore the others.

 

Isn't this just what our government is doing?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Howard the Duck MBE TBC said:

The current regulations are stupid.

Example below.

 

Screenshot_20210326-111156_Facebook.jpg

You're right.  No one needs a challah bun, or a takeaway coffee, or a Mc Donald's, or to click and collect some daffodils from B&Q, or have meals delivered to their house or a bumper box of brownies.  The reason we are allowed this is that they are all deemed to be low risk.

If 'low risk' is the benchmark then everything that is low risk should be allowed - or not. This woolly cherry-picking of 'low risk' activities is duplicitous and open to any kind of interpretation.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, snowman said:

whether the individual concerned is guilty of breaking the law or not - time will tell

 

they were taking the piss 

So is the government. 

Where does that sit on your ‘piss taking’ radar?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

Because the courts aren't open hopefully by then things might be back open again.

They are open, they convicted the guy who turned up drunk at test centre looking for a vaccinations 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...