Emergency legislation - information and commentary
Discussion
Elysium said:
I am not convinced anyone is going to 'investigate' the Declaration to Travel forms.
I would describe this as leaving the UK to work abroad. Get on the flight and never look back.
Closing off my experience of foreign travel that I mentioned on 22nd March and quoting this as it was very accurate. I flew out of Gatwick and was asked a couple of questions at bag drop off. Everyone was asked, but the questions amounted to “Have you got anDeclaration to Travel? Can I see it please?” and that was it. It wasn’t really looked at and there were no questions about the purpose of my travel. This was done by someone wearing a DHL logo on their jacket and there wasn’t even a hint of a police presence anywhere in the airport. I would describe this as leaving the UK to work abroad. Get on the flight and never look back.
The flight was about 80-90% full but most onboard were immediately jumping onto another connecting flight rather than staying in the country I’ve headed to.
carinaman said:
"It all reminds me forcibly of conditions under communism in Eastern Europe before 1989. It is hard not to conclude either that the vaccine is ineffective and the continuation of restrictions is to disguise this, along with the enormous sums of money being made from it; or that regardless of its effectiveness, the vaccine is simply another control measure designed to instil fear and compliance."what utter tripe!
I think the truth is that we know vaccines work a bit and that they work better if more people take them. So we go into sales mode to promote their use.
However, we also know vaccines will not absolutely prevent COVID death. Since we seem to have invented a society that thinks all COVID death is preventable that means vaccines alone cannot be the solution.
So we are at a crossroads. We either accept the existence of this disease and live alongside it or we impose permanent restrictions on our freedoms. The exact nature of those restrictions will depend on the real world efficacy of the vaccines, which we do not yet know.
I vote for freedom. As I have from the outset.
However, we also know vaccines will not absolutely prevent COVID death. Since we seem to have invented a society that thinks all COVID death is preventable that means vaccines alone cannot be the solution.
So we are at a crossroads. We either accept the existence of this disease and live alongside it or we impose permanent restrictions on our freedoms. The exact nature of those restrictions will depend on the real world efficacy of the vaccines, which we do not yet know.
I vote for freedom. As I have from the outset.
Gman20 said:
Unfortunately I think there is evidence on this thread and many others like it is that you are wrong. The court of the bottom of the internet doesn't play by your rules.
Fair enough. I just thought the article was particularly poor.I have no issue with opposing viewpoints when they appear to be backed by some analysis - see the discussion a few days ago about the UCL deaths projections versus the more conservative SAGE ones. I do have an issue when someone links to tin foil hat anti-vax b
ks about the elites' desire for population control and taking away our freedoms.The analysis I have seen (from all sides of the pro/anti lockdown debate) is that the vaccines do work, contrary to what that article says. For some reason, Boris Johnson is denying this, but then I don't tend to regard him as a reliable source.
NickCQ said:
Fair enough. I just thought the article was particularly poor.
I have no issue with opposing viewpoints when they appear to be backed by some analysis - see the discussion a few days ago about the UCL deaths projections versus the more conservative SAGE ones. I do have an issue when someone links to tin foil hat anti-vax bks about the elites' desire for population control and taking away our freedoms.
The analysis I have seen (from all sides of the pro/anti lockdown debate) is that the vaccines do work, contrary to what that article says. For some reason, Boris Johnson is denying this, but then I don't tend to regard him as a reliable source.
I don’t think he’s denying the vaccine works, he’s saying it’s not the only reason that the cases / deaths have dropped. I have no issue with opposing viewpoints when they appear to be backed by some analysis - see the discussion a few days ago about the UCL deaths projections versus the more conservative SAGE ones. I do have an issue when someone links to tin foil hat anti-vax b
ks about the elites' desire for population control and taking away our freedoms.The analysis I have seen (from all sides of the pro/anti lockdown debate) is that the vaccines do work, contrary to what that article says. For some reason, Boris Johnson is denying this, but then I don't tend to regard him as a reliable source.
NickCQ said:
NGee said:
Same as you then!
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."Really, these are very serious matters, we are seeing increasingly tenuous reasons for continuing with restrictions and virtually no challenge to this, neither by our elected representatives nor the majority of our so called free press.
jm doc said:
NickCQ said:
NGee said:
Same as you then!
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."Really, these are very serious matters, we are seeing increasingly tenuous reasons for continuing with restrictions and virtually no challenge to this, neither by our elected representatives nor the majority of our so called free press.
jm doc said:
The only justification for lockdown was always only about protecting the NHS which many accepted, albeit reluctantly, whether it worked or not is not the issue now.
I think we probably disagree on this bit - I do think there were justifications for lockdown beyond protecting the NHS. Reducing the number of cases in the population and consequently the number of people the virus could kill before vaccines were rolled out was a Good Thing. Whether that was what the government messaged at the time is not hugely relevant to me.jm doc said:
goal posts are constantly being moved
I also find it hard to get worked up about that in itself. Keynes said “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” I'd prefer a government that listens to a range of qualified opinions and makes a decision, rather than one that blindly continues with a course of action simply because it committed to it a few months ago when the data was different. Not that we really have the former, of course.NickCQ said:
jm doc said:
The only justification for lockdown was always only about protecting the NHS which many accepted, albeit reluctantly, whether it worked or not is not the issue now.
I think we probably disagree on this bit - I do think there were justifications for lockdown beyond protecting the NHS. Reducing the number of cases in the population and consequently the number of people the virus could kill before vaccines were rolled out was a Good Thing. Whether that was what the government messaged at the time is not hugely relevant to me.jm doc said:
goal posts are constantly being moved
I also find it hard to get worked up about that in itself. Keynes said “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” I'd prefer a government that listens to a range of qualified opinions and makes a decision, rather than one that blindly continues with a course of action simply because it committed to it a few months ago when the data was different. Not that we really have the former, of course.jm doc said:
Show us the evidence that the threat we now face warrants this course of action? There is none, there is no existential threat now other than the continuation of their current policy.
The government's evidence, for what it's worth, is the SAGE "reasonable worst case" of 18k deaths from the current unlocking trajectory, presumably more if you accelerated it.As we have discussed on here ad nauseam, that forecast suffers from an abundance of caution / application of the precautionary principle / "Goebbels-style propaganda" (depending on your viewpoint). But it's out there and it's put together by people that know far more than you or I and who, whatever the Conservative Woman blog says, don't want to control our lives for the sake of it.
When the facts change, the government haven't listened, though.
When the facts don't suit them, they've retreated farther into the clutches of ever more irrational and shrill sounding 'scientists' who proclaim the world will never be safe again. Hence the exposed lie that the current unlocking is about data not dates. They are resolutely sticking to dates despite the data.
The trick in politics, as in all life, is to watch what people do rather than what they say.
When the facts don't suit them, they've retreated farther into the clutches of ever more irrational and shrill sounding 'scientists' who proclaim the world will never be safe again. Hence the exposed lie that the current unlocking is about data not dates. They are resolutely sticking to dates despite the data.
The trick in politics, as in all life, is to watch what people do rather than what they say.
I am certainly not defending the government. I think the best explanation for their hyper-cautious actions at the moment is that they know they will not survive another lockdown. Therefore they are extending the current one as long as possible to give themselves the best chance on the way out. They went too far the other way last summer with the idea of "back to normal" and then got unlucky with variants.
That seems more probable than the idea that this is part of a masterplan to bankrupt airlines and the entertainment industry while reinvigorating domestic tourism and generating extra revenue from the speed cameras on the A303.
That seems more probable than the idea that this is part of a masterplan to bankrupt airlines and the entertainment industry while reinvigorating domestic tourism and generating extra revenue from the speed cameras on the A303.
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
I think you're probably right. It might also be that you're more tolerant of the restrictions than some others, including me. That's your position to take, of course.
I am anti-social bd with no kids working an office job remotely from a holiday home so yes... I'm not the most impacted.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff