10pm Curfew

Out of the 70 deaths the other day. How many were 0-59?

 

Labour Party will not vote against maintaining the 10pm curfew:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-54460270?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5f7eff95c898d102e44439fb&Labour will not vote against England's 22:00 pub curfew&2020-10-08T12:20:39.211Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:b2abebda-f782-493e-b6cd-cc3ee828328e&pinned_post_asset_id=5f7eff95c898d102e44439fb&pinned_post_type=share

Unsatisfactory.

 

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

Going on the statistics of just England hospital deaths.....

October 7: 2/54
October 6: 4/50
October 5: 0/10
October 4: 0/28
October 3: 4/42
October 2: 3/47
October 1: 0/44

So far this month English hospitals have announced 275 deaths and 13 of them were under 60 years old. It would be interesting to know how many had underlying health issues. Why the entire country regardless of circumstances are all being treated the same when it's clear many months down the line who needs looking after the most, I don't know.

 

He knows that they're there to oppose doesn't he ? He's admitted that it's not working - but let's keep it anyway. I think if we're hoping for a fresh set of eyes to look at how to manage Covid then it's not coming from Westminster. Because we are going to have to manage it., not try and eradicate it by razing the economy.

Do you think they'll perhaps look again when suicide rates rise & there's a national mental health epidemic ?

 

But it's not a vote purely on the 10pm curfew. Starmer is in favour of having restrictions in place to reduce infection rates, but can't put an amendment in that is just about the curfew.

 

It's very honourable of Starmer going along with the Tories in the national interest. However, will that win him votes in 2024?

 

Difficult to say what will win him votes in 2024, at the moment the main thing that will win him votes is Johnson's incompetence. Unfortunately for Starmer, Johnson will be long gone by 2024. Unfortunately for the rest of us, he's not going now.

 

I know you didn't ask me, but...

I'm against restrictions. If I genuinely thought they were the right way forward to restrict the spread of the virus and save lives I'd want evidence of where a lot of infections are taking place. In the absence of that I'd take a punt on places where people gather and sit. It just seems logical to me with my knowledge of the spread of the virus. As such I'd maybe look at restricting access to bars restaurants and cafés.

I don't have any evidence, but I do know what appears logical isn't always correct and is sometimes very wrong.

 

I think we should shield the elderly and vulnerable and let the rest of us get back to normal. Having seen all the angles I'm against the first lock down as recent numbers are showing that in spite of social distancing and wearing masks the numbers are still rising.

 

You can always tell when it is the (call it what you like - but I will call it deep state agenda) being implemented as it does not matter one jot that the statistics and facts tell you that an action doesn't work (in this case, lockdowns) they just say "Let's just keep doing this anyway".

Lockdowns don't work, fact. So what is the true motive for doing it? Could it be to mentally and emotionally ruin people to the point of begging for a vaccine perhaps? I don't know. But we are yet again, sleepwalking into another lockdown (although there are a lot more people voicing their opinions against it this time) and the same old "repeater" excuses come out.

If you have pre-existing conditions or are elderly, then self-isolate and socially distance yourself, everyone else, ignore the jerks in Government and live your lives.

 

They won't throw people in jail for not paying fines they haven't the capacity and they can't have half of **** all. What gives?

 

Rule by fear, or at least it is a threat that most people will take seriously enough to think twice about 'rule' breaking.

 

This is the issue. We went into lockdown, mainly because nobody in the world really knew what they were dealing with. Unfortunately the UK haven't done the necessary work to open things up safely again.

Restrictions are only going to get so far, apparently over 85k people in the north that had been in contact with a positive case, haven't been contacted by test & trace. That is a bigger issue than the pubs and restaurants being open. Certainly a bigger issue than opening beyond 10pm.

Govt will impose restrictions and blame the public. When in reality, closing down the hospitality industry is the only thing they can think of to reduce interactions because they can't fix test & trace, nor can they come up with a proper plan for schools and universities.

 

I don't know where they got these numbers from, or whether they are accurate, but MPs have been shown figures suggesting 30% of new infections are from pubs, restaurants and cafes..

 

Yet barring a few back bench Tories and the lib dems who exactly is stopping the dictatorship juggernaut?

 

ITs a data subset.. missing is the transmission figures for educational settings, in the home - A lot of the local lockdown areas have at a guess 6 plus households. no mention of them.. Nor is there any workplace figures, be it factories or office hives. Or Care home residents. One of the biggest areas of positive tests given they are petri dishes at the best of times not matter how good a home they are.

Also Pub/Bar this includes eating out, entertainment and day trips. so its totally misleading.

It also contradicts the ONS.

 

New World Order slipped out.....