IOM Covid removing restrictions

[TheTeapot]

Ooh, about time we had a flounce. Excellent

[code99]

The Australian State Governments have adopted a '14 days without any locally transmitted cases’ rule of thumb as a precondition for lifting interstate border restrictions. It appears that IOM Gov might be using a similar passive rule of thumb, not to lift its’ border restrictions, but instead to lift its highly restrictive latest lockdown. Given our dependence on the UK and Europe in general, we can’t keep our external borders shut indefinitely, like what they are doing in Australia and New Zealand. It is therefore a great pity that IOM Gov have decided not to follow another international maxim - test, test, test!

The WHO has undoubtedly suffered reputational damage in the course of this pandemic, but they still remain the leading international authority for combating Covid-19. From the beginning, their advice has been to test as many people as possible. IMHO, the IOM Gov should have listened to them and implemented an inward ‘test everybody crossing over our borders’ testing regime. This testing program should have been done at the Government’s expense. By not doing this and instead allowing people to quarantine and not be tested, there was always the risk that the virus would ‘escape’ into the community. This is exactly what has happened, and now we are paying the price for that 'penny-pinching' mentality. According to the Treasury Minister, the cost to Government coffers of this (avoidable) second lockdown will be about £10m. Surely, no amount of testing would have cost that much…? The approach that the Government has decided to take is clearly false economy. The latest lockdown(s) will cost us more than if we had put in place, from the outset, mandatory (and IOM Gov funded) 1-7-13 days testing regime for all arrivals to the Island.

[manxst]

The government has responded...but unless there is legislation to say people can’t do that, and subsequently powers to enforce it, people are going to do what they want. The communication is poor, and the legalities just as much. 

[Non-Believer]

5 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

Firstly, my nearest beach is a ten minute walk away, I generally find it’s mostly the dog walkers who pick up most of the plastic/rubbish on the beaches and people who will be driving their dogs to the beach/other suitable litter picking locations will be burning fuel regardless. Secondly we are being actively encouraged to do daily exercise and If we combine that with litter picking it seems even more worthwhile.

Nobody will ever convince me that there is any aerobic exercise benefit to be gained from wombling. Not now, not ever. It's just a temptation for people to mingle, next thing there'll be minibuses organised to do it.

If you need to exercise, do something that is of physical benefit, ie mildly strenuous, jogging, fast walking. Otherwise stay at home as per instructions.

[Barlow]

12 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Ooh, about time we had a flounce. Excellent

HTT (who I assume you refer to) isn't a flouncer. They're made of more persistent stuff.

[Barlow]

10 minutes ago, code99 said:

The Australian State Governments have adopted a '14 days without any locally transmitted cases’ rule of thumb as a precondition for lifting interstate border restrictions. It appears that IOM Gov might be using a similar passive rule of thumb, not to lift its’ border restrictions, but instead to lift its highly restrictive latest lockdown. Given our dependence on the UK and Europe in general, we can’t keep our external borders shut indefinitely, like what they are doing in Australia and New Zealand. It is therefore a great pity that IOM Gov have decided not to follow another international maxim - test, test, test!

The WHO has undoubtedly suffered reputational damage in the course of this pandemic, but they still remain the leading international authority for combating Covid-19. From the beginning, their advice has been to test as many people as possible. IMHO, the IOM Gov should have listened to them and implemented an inward ‘test everybody crossing over our borders’ testing regime. This testing program should have been done at the Government’s expense. By not doing this and instead allowing people to quarantine and not be tested, there was always the risk that the virus would ‘escape’ into the community. This is exactly what has happened, and now we are paying the price for that 'penny-pinching' mentality. According to the Treasury Minister, the cost to Government coffers of this (avoidable) second lockdown will be about £10m. Surely, no amount of testing would have cost that much…? The approach that the Government has decided to take is clearly false economy. The latest lockdown(s) will cost us more than if we had put in place, from the outset, mandatory (and IOM Gov funded) 1-7-13 days testing regime for all arrivals to the Island.

This is a theme that has been emerging for some time but particularly since Lockdown Two.

There are more intangible costs and benefits too which need to be taken into account such as people's wellbeing. But painful as it is, the bottom line accounting should now tell the tale.

[Annoymouse]

7 minutes ago, manxst said:

The government has responded...but unless there is legislation to say people can’t do that, and subsequently powers to enforce it, people are going to do what they want. The communication is poor, and the legalities just as much. 

So I can’t buy an item socially distanced from 1 household but I can buy a pizza box of sweets prepared alongside hundreds of others, who will also be delivering to 100s of other households? Not to mention all these homemade fabric mask sellers who seemed to have popped up, I highly doubt they even  have business insurance for deliveries.

 

[Gladys]

12 minutes ago, manxst said:

The government has responded...but unless there is legislation to say people can’t do that, and subsequently powers to enforce it, people are going to do what they want. The communication is poor, and the legalities just as much. 

Wouldn't it be better not to use "etc" in the guidelines? 

[manxst]

1 minute ago, Gladys said:

Wouldn't it be better not to use "etc" in the guidelines? 

It’d be better not to have ‘guidelines’ at all, and for people to be told exactly what they can and can’t do as a result of enacted law. Then we’d all know for sure.

[dreamon]

15 minutes ago, code99 said:

The Australian State Governments have adopted a '14 days without any locally transmitted cases’ rule of thumb as a precondition for lifting interstate border restrictions. It appears that IOM Gov might be using a similar passive rule of thumb, not to lift its’ border restrictions, but instead to lift its highly restrictive latest lockdown. Given our dependence on the UK and Europe in general, we can’t keep our external borders shut indefinitely, like what they are doing in Australia and New Zealand. It is therefore a great pity that IOM Gov have decided not to follow another international maxim - test, test, test!

The WHO has undoubtedly suffered reputational damage in the course of this pandemic, but they still remain the leading international authority for combating Covid-19. From the beginning, their advice has been to test as many people as possible. IMHO, the IOM Gov should have listened to them and implemented an inward ‘test everybody crossing over our borders’ testing regime. This testing program should have been done at the Government’s expense. By not doing this and instead allowing people to quarantine and not be tested, there was always the risk that the virus would ‘escape’ into the community. This is exactly what has happened, and now we are paying the price for that 'penny-pinching' mentality. According to the Treasury Minister, the cost to Government coffers of this (avoidable) second lockdown will be about £10m. Surely, no amount of testing would have cost that much…? The approach that the Government has decided to take is clearly false economy. The latest lockdown(s) will cost us more than if we had put in place, from the outset, mandatory (and IOM Gov funded) 1-7-13 days testing regime for all arrivals to the Island.

But, HQ & associates, in their infinite wisdom, were more knowledgeable - ignoring similar advice from Rachel Glover!

[Barlow]

3 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Wouldn't it be better not to use "etc" in the guidelines? 

It's sloppy, fence-sitting, wishy-washy. Just what we need right now.

[Lxxx]

2 minutes ago, Barlow said:

It's sloppy, fence-sitting, wishy-washy. Just what we need right now.

It's typical civil servant abdication of any defined responsibility as well as being reflective of the level of intelligence we have in key roles right now. 

[Utah 01]

1 hour ago, Lxxx said:

And we have an MBE presiding over this fiasco

I'm trying to recall what MBE stood for when applied to the little fat-one; isn't it something like  Mumbling Bleedin' Eejit?

[Annoymouse]

1 minute ago, Utah 01 said:

I'm trying to recall what MBE stood for when applied to the little fat-one; isn't it something like  Mumbling Bleedin' Eejit?

Mr Big ‘Ed 

[manxst]

Mighty bullshit expert?