Will you go for a pint when restrictions are lifted?

[Duke of Marmalade]

90 mins increased to 105 mins as a compromise Who is going to enforce these arbitrary regulations? The 20km/own county travel restriction is equally unenforceable and is effectively ignored judging by the traffic on our motorways.

 

[Sunny]

Yeah, so a closed space, like two people in an office or house, i.e., a lot more than 2m apart. I don't think you're suggesting pubs should be limited to a single group?

It would seem from your arguments that the only logical conclusion is to keep them closed.

A close contact is anyone in a closed space with a confirmed case for more than 2 hours. The distance doesn't matter. If your office has a confirmed case, you all become potential close contacts after 2 hours even if you have done 2m social distance and a risk assessment will need to be carried out by public health.

So that's the rule for offices. Now apparently I can go to the pub for 105 minutes, sit one metre away from a group different to my own (who I am not socially distancing from even though they might not be from my household as we are sharing a table), and eat a €9 meal.

So I can have a 2 hour meeting in a meeting room with some colleagues or outside vendors/visitors but if I go to my local restaurant, I can sit with anyone at my own table, sit 1m away from other tables for 105 minutes but that is considered the same risk only because I am buying a €9 meal and there for 15 minutes less?

Reduce social distance to 1m for all businesses. It is going to happen anyway so do it now. Let pubs and restaurants open without time limits. If you try to impose time limit on pubs when they reopen at the end of July, then you are just going to encourage pub crawls which is more dangerous. So why impose time limits now for the sake of 4 weeks? Who is even going to regulate it? Are you going to call the guards if people are there for 2 hours? Drop the ridiculous requirement to buy food. I have seen plenty of very drunk people tuck into a €50 steak in Shanahans over the years. It's just nanny state. Let licensed premises do what they are responsible for and serve responsibly. If they dont and have drunk people climbing over tables, close them down.

 

[Leo]

Reduce social distance to 1m for all businesses. It is going to happen anyway so do it now.

Sure why did we bother with restrictions at all? They were all going to be scrapped anyway....

 

[odyssey06]

So that's the rule for offices. Now apparently I can go to the pub for 105 minutes, sit one metre away from a group different to my own (who I am not socially distancing from even though they might not be from my household as we are sharing a table), and eat a €9 meal.
So I can have a 2 hour meeting in a meeting room with some colleagues or outside vendors/visitors but if I go to my local restaurant, I can sit with anyone at my own table, sit 1m away from other tables for 105 minutes but that is considered the same risk only because I am buying a €9 meal and there for 15 minutes less?

The €9 meal has been explained to you half a dozen times on the thread already.
It's a legal definition used to allow pubs to re-open for the purposes of operating as a restaurant serving substantial meals.
You obviously don't get it but hopefully you're not running a licensed premises.
Anyone with an ounce of cop-on knows that without it that many pubs would just re-open as solely drinking establishments.

The time limit is a way of further reducing the risk of exposure in conjunction with the minimum social distancing of 1 metre.
2 metres is the recommended social distance and should be adopted wherever possible.

Under the guidance published last night, pubs will be permitted to implement one-metre distancing in controlled environments where two-metre physical distancing is not possible.
However, they will have to ensure other risk mitigation requirements have been met and that pre-booked time slots are in place.
Customers may only be allowed to stay in a premises for 105 minutes, with an additional 15 minutes between bookings to allow for adequate cleaning and to ensure customers leave and enter without mixing.

'There's a lack of understanding of the business': Pubs frustrated by late timing of re-opening guidelines

New guidance on the re-opening of pubs was published by Fáilte Ireland last night.

www.thejournal.ie

 

[Sunny]

Sure why did we bother with restrictions at all? They were all going to be scrapped anyway....

Yeah because that is what I said. Do you have any idea how much money is been spent by businesses in making sure they adhere to 2m social distance that the Government have stated is under constant review. How many businesses can't open because of the 2m? They have stated that different sectors might require different distances. They said schools might have no social distance. Make a decision on what they want now. There is plenty of research on social distance. There are plenty of other countries that have less than 2m that we can look at. Plenty of countries that have 2m that we can look at. If we want to have 2m, then fine. But make it consistent and make a decision. We are going end up doing what we did with masks and end up with a confused mess.

Anyway, this is going the way of bitcoin and I am not going 23 pages.....

 

[Sunny]

The €9 meal has been explained to you half a dozen times on the thread already.
It's a legal defintion used to allow pubs to re-open for the purposes of operating as a restaurant.
You obviously don't understand it but hopefully you're not running a licensed premises.

Actually the 'legal definition' that you cling to is in shillings......Now suddenly it is a key part of licencing legislation. The Legislation also states that it should be a main course so can a pub not sell a nice starter dish of two big prawns for €9.05 or are we going to have staff tell someone that they need to eat more as technically the meal is not substantial enough??? Or is it just the price that makes it substantial. Can I spend €9 on a crisp sandwich and eat away??

 

[odyssey06]

Actually the 'legal definition' that you cling to is in shillings......Now suddenly it is a key part of licencing legislation. The Legislation also states that it should be a main course so can a pub not sell a nice starter dish of two big prawns for €9.05 or are we going to have staff tell someone that they need to eat more as technically the meal is not substantial enough???

Remember that quote from Shakespeare: "First thing we do, we kill all the lawyers."
You're making some fair points about the impact on businesses of 2m v 1m.
But this bar-room(!) barrister stuff isn't doing you any favours.

Sit down at a table at lunch in a busy tourist spot, e.g. a fishing village in Malta.
They don't want someone tying up a table ordering beers and a side of chips.
They had no problem telling people if they wanted drinks they needed to order a main course lunch.
So why would an irish pub have a problem doing the same unless they determine that they want to evade the rules or be difficult.

If an Irish pub wants to open but is too timid or pig ignorant to tells its customers what it needs to do, it shouldn't open and frankly if it goes bust it is its own fault.

 

[Sunny]

Remember that quote from Shakespeare: "First thing we do, we kill all the lawyers."
You're making some fair points about the impact on businesses of 2m v 1m.
But this bar-room(!) barrister stuff isn't doing you any favours.

Sit down at a table at lunch in a busy tourist spot, e.g. a fishing village in Malta.
They don't want someone tying up a table ordering beers and a side of chips.
They had no problem telling people if they wanted drinks they needed to order a main course lunch.
So why would an irish pub have a problem doing the same unless they determine that they want to evade the rules or be difficult.

If an Irish pub wants to open but is too timid or pig ignorant to tells its customers what it needs to do, it shouldn't open and frankly if it goes bust it is its own fault.

You are missing the point. I couldn't care less if pubs have to serve food. But what has it got to do with reducing your chances of getting Covid?

Also the definition of what food is? We seem to have decided on €9 is what decides. So what is to stop any pub deciding to sell €9 euro sandwiches? But it has to be substantial? Well who decides that? Staff? Are we going to have inspectors going around checking to make sure people ate a substantial mean? It's just nonsensical

Bring in restrictions and regulations by all means. But they have to make sense and they have be able to be enforced. Again, it is like the mask mess. We encourage you to wear it unless you can't. Don't stigmitise anyone who decides not to wear one. We should be wearing masks. We need to do better. It is a confusing mess.

The problem here is that pubs serving food were right to say they should be allowed to open same time as restaurants and should not have been in later phase. These restrictions just seem like they were made up to justify bringing forward the opening of these places.

 

[odyssey06]

You are missing the point. I couldn't care less if pubs have to serve food. But what has it got to do with reducing your chances of getting Covid?
Also the definition of what food is? We seem to have decided on €9 is what decides. So what is to stop any pub deciding to sell €9 euro sandwiches? But it has to be substantial? Well who decides that? Staff? Are we going to have inspectors going around checking to make sure people ate a substantial mean? It's just nonsensical
Bring in restrictions and regulations by all means. But they have to make sense and they have be able to be enforced. Again, it is like the mask mess. We encourage you to wear it unless you can't. Don't stigmitise anyone who decides not to wear one. We should be wearing masks. We need to do better. It is a confusing mess.
The problem here is that pubs serving food were right to say they should be allowed to open same time as restaurants and should not have been in later phase. These restrictions just seem like they were made up to justify bringing forward the opening of these places.

That is the problem but the side effect is that if they don't have some concept of substantial meal, non food serving pubs will just re-open as drinking dens.
If you think enforcing the restrictions on a food serving establishment is difficult, how are you going to enforce any restrictions on them as drinking dens?
Is someone going to go into the pub with a 2 metre giant hurl and start swinging?
Who is going to enforce any of the restrictions in these establishments?

It's screamingly obvious that's the reason behind the substantial meal concept.
If it's such difficult concept why has it been on the statute books for 50 years?

You offer no alternatives in terms of what these restrictions and regulations are that make sense to you and are enforceable in an establishment serving alcohol to allow partial re-opening.
In the absence of those, the logical conclusion of your argument is either don't allow anywhere to open or abolish all restrictions.

ps I agree with you they have been embarrassing on masks but that's a whole other thread

 

[joe sod]

90 mins increased to 105 mins as a compromise Who is going to enforce these arbitrary regulations

The social media addicts will enforce it probably,they are the new "valley of the squinting windows". I think that's one of the unfortunate consequences of the corona virus, a bigger state that has a bigger say in the minutiae of your life and an army of social media informers to enforce it.

 

[Leo]

Yeah because that is what I said. Do you have any idea how much money is been spent by businesses in making sure they adhere to 2m social distance that the Government have stated is under constant review. How many businesses can't open because of the 2m?

Agreed, all you have just complained about the measures that are being considered in response to pressure from the publicans' lobbies to facilitate pubs opening earlier than planned.

Again, what measures do you think would sufficiently mitigate the risk to allow them open earlier than planned? Keep in mins they must be easily understood and easily enforced.

 

[joe sod]

I see all the Temple Bar pubs are now not opening on june 29, Ive heard alot of others are not opening either , the costs and work to comply are too onerous its just not worth it. I think when july 20 rolls along some consideration and thought will have to be given to bars like in Temple bar, that are not restaurants , that are not table service where the main offering is entertainment

 

[Purple]

I see all the Temple Bar pubs are now not opening on june 29, Ive heard alot of others are not opening either , the costs and work to comply are too onerous its just not worth it. I think when july 20 rolls along some consideration and thought will have to be given to bars like in Temple bar, that are not restaurants , that are not table service where the main offering is entertainment

And they cater to tourists... and there's no tourists.

 

[Sophrosyne]

The way I look at it is that it is all about personal responsibility from now on.

The virus is still here. We know how we contract it and we know how to avoid contagion.

Some will take chances, like the unfortunates displaying almost frenzied excitement at the re-opening retail businesses, queuing for hours and abandoning all distancing restraints.

However, despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary, I think the vast majority are sensible and don’t need laws to enforce what they know already. Were it not so, we could never have suppressed the virus as well as we did.

Just because a business wants to open is no guarantee of enough customers to ensure sustainability.

Customers will decide and to some extent, dictate what is safe for them.

 

[odyssey06]

The way I look at it is that it is all about personal responsibility from now on...
However, despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary, I think the vast majority are sensible and don’t need laws to enforce what they know already. Were it not so, we could never have suppressed the virus as well as we did.
Just because a business want to open is no guarantee of enough customers to ensure sustainability.
Customers will decide and to some extent, dictate what is safe for them.

In general I think you are right that the actions of individuals is key. The vast majority may be sensible but not all the time and not in all their actions.

But where the state has a key role to play in the restrictions are those situations where personal responsibility is not absolute.
An individual should not be rushed back to work by their employer unnecessarily.
And, when it comes to pubs and drinking we have laws about drink driving etc because we have seen personal responsibility is not enough.
Likewise, we have fire safety limits on venues and concerts because we know that many owners will otherwise let too many people in.

 

[Sophrosyne]

But where the state has a key role to play in the restrictions are those situations where personal responsibility is not absolute.

For sure we need laws, but my post was about matters over which people have discretion.

 

[Foxy007]

In general I think you are right that the actions of individuals is key. The vast majority may be sensible but not all the time and not in all their actions.

But where the state has a key role to play in the restrictions are those situations where personal responsibility is not absolute.
An individual should not be rushed back to work by their employer unnecessarily.
And, when it comes to pubs and drinking we have laws about drink driving etc because we have seen personal responsibility is not enough.
Likewise, we have fire safety limits on venues and concerts because we know that many owners will otherwise let too many people in.

Also you get into the tricky area of health condition disclosures to Employers .....been there, done that and was burned.

 

[joe sod]

I see dublin pubs are booked out for the first days of reopening on Monday, obviously a pent up demand there after 3 months of closure. This could last a while though, restricted capacity and pent up demand, the psychology of queuing comes into play where people desire something more the harder it is to gain entry. Obviously the risks of the corona virus are still there but the young are fed up of lockdown and want to get back to some sort of social life. In London yesterday there were clashes with police and youngsters determined to party after 3 months of lockdown. I think the government has made the right call in getting everything opened up now they could not maintain this for much longer

 

[odyssey06]

This is what can happen when you open up pubs too soon and social distancing goes out the window...
State officials have attributed much of the new outbreak to young adults flocking to bars after they reopened in most of the state three weeks ago, with many of them ignoring social distancing restrictions aimed at lowering the virus’s spread.
Bars, like restaurants, were supposed to limit patrons to 50% of their normal capacity, under the state’s emergency orders. Patrons had to sit at tables, with groups six feet apart. No congregating at the bar or on the dance floor was permitted.
The new order prohibits any establishment that makes more than 50% of its revenue from alcohol sales from serving alcohol for consumption on site.
Restaurants that primarily sell food can still serve alcohol to customers seated at tables.
Business and Professional Regulations Secretary Halsey Beshears said he issued the order because too many bars and patrons were breaking the rules, overwhelming his department’s inspectors.

Florida bans alcohol consumption in bars as virus spirals

The move came as the state’s daily coronavirus cases record was smashed again.

www.thejournal.ie

 

[twofor1]

I walked past my local this evening, a well known suburban Dublin pub. A few of the regulars were outside smoking. They told me that you can book or just turn up. You have to sign in, you can order food but it is not necessary, if anyone comes in and asks, just say you have ordered or had food. You can also sit at the bar and drink, though there are some screens. A one way system was also in place, in one door only and out another, but this did not seem to apply to smokers.