[Closed] Easing of Scottish lockdown

I was reading this and can’t see any reference to household mixing being the biggest issue.

Is that not the Family and Friends Gatherings which is just as big in the graph of T&T reported positives? (Roughly around para 35 but I’m on a phone so don’t have it open anymore).

And no nat 5 exams this year, not sure how I feel about that one. MinibutnowtallerthanmeLD seems to think it’s all good. First real exams will be highers!

If they are smart they won’t bother bringing them back either - perhaps having some sort of small scale structure assessments along the way but I really don’t think exams prove much at that stage that can’t be obtained other ways which may be fairer about things that matter.

The advice on travelling or not outwith your own health board is not clear IMO. I live in Lanarkshire HB area, and would normally drive to Greater Glasgow and Clyde to ride trails at Mugdock. Both in the 5 affected areas.... is it bad practise or acceptable ??

scotroutes
Full Member

cheers

iainc
Full Member
The advice on travelling or not outwith your own health board is not clear IMO. I live in Lanarkshire HB area, and would normally drive to Greater Glasgow and Clyde to ride trails at Mugdock. Both in the 5 affected areas…. is it bad practise or acceptable ??

seems fairly clear, don't travel unless necessary.

Up to you to make a judgement though, are you going to be in contact with anyone would be my overriding consideration.

is it bad practise or acceptable ??

I think you only needed 1 ?

From the FMs speech

We are not imposing mandatory travel restrictions at this stage, and specifically, we are not insisting that people cancel any half term breaks they have planned.

However, in general, we are advising people living in Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Lanarkshire, Ayrshire & Arran, Lothian and Forth Valley not to travel outside the health board area they live in, if you don’t need to - and likewise people in other parts of Scotland should not travel to these areas if they don’t need to.

More detail of all that I have just set out will be available on the Scottish Government website.

However, there does not appear to be anything (yet) on the ScotGov website concerning these travel restrictions.

I’m not so sure about travelling from one of the 5 areas to another one or one outside that region. Is that now against the guidance?

It depends what for, there is guidance posted by Scotroutes but also elaborated on in the Q&A after. No outright ban but don't be a dick, if plans already made, no need to change, but if you make new ones you're a dick...?

"We are not saying to people in those health board areas that they cannot travel. I am not saying to people in those areas that, if they have an October holiday break planned, they cannot go."

sake, are we really back here again, go mtbing ffs, you'll be sound. 😆 you're not going to be in doors aren't in contact with loads of folk, so happy days. Just use common sense.

Thanks, my own feeling is that it is not in the spirit of the guidance to drive half an hour from home, in Lanarkshire HB, to park in Milngavie, in GGCHB, and go for a 3 hr ride, and drive home.

If I happened however to have booked a holiday air bnb over that side of town for a few days break to go ride Mugdock and Campsies every day over the weekend it would be fully within the spirit of the guidance..

seosamh77
Full Member
sake, are we really back here again, go mtbing ffs, you’ll be sound. 😆 you’re not going to be in doors aren’t in contact with loads of folk, so happy days. Just use common

This;but don't post it on any social media or the self-appointed covid police will get you.

sake, are we really back here again, go mtbing ffs

I agree, let's not go back there.

Yes, that would be my interpretation too. Go if it was already planned before the announcement but if not it’s not within the spirit of the new rules. Whether that matters to you or not is down to your own conscience I guess.

^^^^ yes, that's very much where my mind sits on this one. Keen however to see what other views are held as part of the debate 🙂

Our original plan of 2 households (1 from Glasgow and 1 from Lothian) going to a house on Lewis for a week from this Saturday, has changed slightly.

Daughter who doesn't live with us agreed not to go so we could still go.
She now has tested positive for Covid, she reckons from being in a bar in Glasgow.
Thankfully we've not seen her for 3 weeks.

I've messaged the property owner to see if they are still happy for us to come.
So currently we are still planning on going!

Was listening to Radio Scotland earlier, not sure who from govt was answering but her insistence the rules were very clear was somewhat undermined by her then confusing it even more. IN essence it's - don't change plans ie cancel (obvs to protect tourism as much as possible) but equally do not travel. Which I interpret as if you have plans then go but be very careful and respectful, if you don;t have plans then stay close to home in your region.

I think what most folk (including government) are doing to trying to limit the spread by using intelligence/common sense. Hospitality limitations are probably sensible because a lot of folk make less good decisions after a few pints. Travelling wise I think Nicola and co have always tried to express that the reason for limits is to stop the spread from higher infection area to lower and I think the reason there is no travel ban is to allow us to make informed decisions.
Do I live in a high infection area, where have I been in the last 14 days that I possibly could have caught the virus? Where am I planning to go and what possible implications could there be if I am infectious? Should I buy food/drink in the area to support the economy or should I be self sufficient? If you feel there is a real risk of you infecting someone in that region then don't go. If the risk is minimal and manageable and you are willing to change plans if risk increases for whatever reason (busyness) then think twice more and go if you can justify it. That's why it's not a ban. Only other question to ask in my mind is whether my decisions/actions will have an effect on others who might make less informed decisions?

Is it confusing? if you have a previous booking, go if you want but be sensible once there, but don't make a new booking?.

We've just cancelled ours, as it was a group thing for a couple of days paddling, it couldn't really go ahead IMO.

I've cancelled my plan partly due to perceived risks of being in a hotel and trying to find food and partly because it might be fairly miserable. I feel bad about not spending in the area but on balance probably better not to go. I would still be going if I had booked self catering.
I will be looking at day trips with the bike, fully risk assessed.

Nothing mentioned on gov.scot about travel out of the your health board area. Leaving the central belt etc. Only news websites it is mentioned.

So If I live in Stirling and have a bolthole in the borders that I use for bikes. Should I not go to the borders now at all for 2 weeks?

lightfighter - that would be my understanding - advised not to rather than ordered tho.

Yep. The FM said not to travel outside one of the 5 affected areas and that details would be in the ScotGov website. They aren't (yet). We've seen delays to guidance before, sometimes changes being documented announced.

I will be looking at day trips with the bike, fully risk assessed.

Are you off this week?

I've boats and bikes that need using...

Off Fri/Sat/Sun/Mon pm and next Thursday.
Not doing gravel 😉

Still nothing on government website but this is fairly conclusive on half term breaks in particular. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scotland-staycation-lockdown-rules-confirmed-22811460

Fairly conclusive, but open to interpretation.

Basically, you should stay within the central belt areas and not travel to other parts of the country, but if you want to travel outwith that area you can, just be sensible.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-52646738 also summarises it the same way.

still kinda vague on travel within the central belt areas, but yes, message is consistently don't go away from home unless you have a prebooked break

ScotGov also having an absolute shocker with the whole cafe/restaurant thing. Where do Bistros fall?

I’m a cafe and so is my wife.

In the spirit of Boris and his 3 word catchphrases, nae public swally would have been a clearer message.

scotroutes
Full Member
ScotGov also having an absolute shocker with the whole cafe/restaurant thing. Where do Bistros fall?

They aren't really, it's just the usual people looking for ways around the restriction.

If it's so difficult for everyone, the answer is simply shut everything.

A bistro or bistrot /ˈbiːstroʊ/, is, in its original Parisian incarnation, a small restaurant, serving moderately priced simple meals in a modest setting with alcohol. Bistros are defined mostly by the foods they serve. French home-style cooking, and slow-cooked foods like cassoulet, a bean stew, are typical.

Nice that I got the 1888th post! 😆

M'on the Bhoys.

I was about to post that too seosamh77. It's not too complicated. People just want to make it complicated.

Hotel posted on Facebook as though it were some complex piece of international trading law.
Nope you're a hotel with a restaurant think of it as part of your licence. Yes they knacker some of your ability to do your job and seem to be taking the brunt of it. A feeling shared by a lot of people.

Spoke to campsite we're at tomorrow in Oban, first question - Are you coming tomorrow ? Yes of course. Good, last thing we need is people cancelling because they think they should.

Nice that I got the 1888th post

Wonder who got 1690?

In the spirit of Boris and his 3 word catchphrases, nae public swally would have been a clearer message.

This. Why over-complicate it?

Has anyone checked to see which McDonald's Restaurants are still open in the Central Belt?

It’s not too complicated.

Well I for one do not find it straightforward. Since we’re meant to be following the science (are we still doing that?) - what are the different risks associated with cafes v restaurants? I presume if you’re the owner of a restaurant or an employee at risk of losing their job it must seem incredibly arbitrary and unjust. Sturgeon blethered on, but she didn’t clearly explain the distinction. Just that if people couldn’t see the difference then everything would need to shut.
I’m increasingly surprised at the lack of criticism the Scottish Government are receiving, personally I don’t see much difference between them and Johnson&co, apart from delivery of their message.

Wonder who got 1690

The equivalent would be 1872, don't be a bigot Gordi.....

😆

Gauss - she did explain the reasons - the definitions were poor tho. she would like to shut down all hospitality but recognises cafes are lifelines for some people so exempted cafes. also ( not stated) but pissed people are more likely to behave stupidly

Gauss – she did explain the reasons – the definitions were poor tho. she would like to shut down all hospitality but recognises cafes are lifelines for some people so exempted cafes.

Did she? Because I listened to her today and I do not recall hearing her explain the difference between people going to a cafe v going to a restaurant. It is not obvious to me which is riskier. I suspect that is why people cannot see the difference, rather than not knowing if somewhere is a cafe or a restaurant (although a lot of places seem to sit somewhere between the two). Surely restaurants are lifelines for a number of people too.

Aye you're right enough, point taken Nobeer

She explained the reasons for exempting cafes quite clearly - that they are a lifeline for many lonely folk.

Its not an absolute science here. All actions have downsides, there are no good answers. It has to be a judgment on how to achieve the best results for the least downsides and this is her judgement.

Its not about the absolute risks. Its about the balance of risks

Its obvious pubs are more risky but not hugely so

gauss1777
Free Member
Did she? Because I listened to her today and I do not recall hearing her explain the difference between people going to a cafe v going to a restaurant. It is not obvious to me which is riskier.

She did quite clearly, it's to do with numbers, they need to shut down a certain amount of activity, the balance to leave cafes open is to give some of the more isolated members of society a place where they can go.

Cafes aren't being left open cause they are less risky.

Aye you’re right enough, point taken Nobeer

Lol, nae worries Gordi, we're no aw tub thumping loon balls in the southside on any given saturday! 😃

Is it an image thing? Cafe for me is under an hour, sandwich/panini etc, coffee, cake, chat.
Restaurant is a couple of hours, 3 courses and usually a glass of wine or a beer. Huge drop in profits for them as big margins on alcohol. Confusion arose initially because some cafes sell bottles of beer occasionally, but not a big part of their turnover.

Scotroutes - Dunfermline McDonalds is as took the kids for their end of term ‘treat’ this afternoon. Although Fife isn’t central belt.....oops

Chapeau to my local. I was a bit busy today and couldn’t make it in for a few pints to help them empty the casks - so they dropped them off for me at 6:30 lovely people. I’ve set up a direct debit for them since the start of this shambles to try and help.

She did quite clearly, it’s to do with numbers, they need to shut down a certain amount of activity, the balance to leave cafes open is to give some of the more isolated members of society a place where they can go.

Cafes aren’t being left open cause they are less risky.

What is apparently clear to everyone else, is far from clear to me. If it’s to do with the numbers, I’d love to see the calculations. ‘A certain amount of activity’ - how much is that then? Clearly, they’ve made a balls of this since they reopened schools, numbers are rising quickly. It all feels a bit haphazard, with a large dose of wishful thinking.

Pretty clear to me, <1hr cafe for coffee n’ cake and a chat, minimal contact with each other and waiting staff, >1hr restaurants shut as meal + table service/increased close contact between each other and waiting staff. Pubs shut coz.......well......cause certain age groups of folk are dicks when drunk and social distancing is the last thing on their mind and much greater risk of taking home more than a hangover.

Of course you could then say that with the pubs shut folk will just meet up in houses and get drunk with even more risks leading to the spread of the virus, these folk will do whatever the **** they like no matter what the advice leading to consequences for society as a whole.

You can only do so much, i dunno how we will get on top of this as long as folk take the piss.

Somafunk speaks sense as usual.

Pretty clear to me, <1hr cafe for coffee n’ cake and a chat, minimal contact with each other and waiting staff, >1hr restaurants shut as meal + table service/increased close contact between each other and waiting staff

I would hazard that doubling the time does not double the risk. Whereas doubling the number of people you’re in contact with does. There are more people in and out of a cafe than a restaurant. ‘Airborne risk’ is greater than ‘physical contact’ risk as far as I’m aware; so lots of people coming and going in a poorly ventilated cafe, may well be riskier than fewer people spending longer in a more spacious restaurant. I don’t know any of this with any certainty, but I am surprised that so many others find it all so clear and cannot understand why restaurant owners are perplexed.

gauss1777
Free Member
‘A certain amount of activity’ – how much is that then?

Not shut down enough if you ask me, we should have had a 2 week "circuit break" 3 weeks ago.

The horse has bolted.

restaurant owners are perplexed. 😆

If you are calling yourself a restaurant, yer a restaurant. pretty blinking simple! 😆

🤣😃🤣

I'm not convinced by the complaints from the various business owners.The common thread is that no matter which particular sector they work in business owners think that their business should remain open and someone else's should be made to close. It's a natural thing theyre worried about their own livelihood and their staff. I don't think there is going to be any quick solution to this , vaccines can take several years to develop. So every individual needs to take responsibility for their own actions in order to restrict the spread of the virus, and countries need to start to co-operate with one another as do the big pharma companies so that research makes quicker and better co-ordinated progress

Clearly I am either talking pish or not explaining myself at all well. Hey ho, ‘twas ever thus. I hate eating out and whilst I usually enjoy visiting a cafe, I’ve only been once since February. However, I’d appreciate some rationale behind the Government’s decisions - I’m not convinced there’s much rigour to their decisions at the moment.

gauss1777
Free Member
‘A certain amount of activity’ – how much is that then?

Not shut down enough if you ask me, we should have had a 2 week “circuit break” 3 weeks ago.

I’d be happier with this too. Lots of confusing, half-measures are more painful.

Gauss

I don't know how else we can explain it. the risks of keeping both cafes and pubs open are similar yes - but the FM has decide that the social role of cafes is important enough to accept the risk of them staying open given the reduction in total risk from the other measures

I and others have tried to explain this

its not a judgement based on hard science - its one based on social need

I don't think shutting pubs and restaurants will do much to even slow, let alone stop the number of folks catching this going up.

I do think they're losing folks' support as it seems like they're doing this so it looks like they're doing "something".

Don't really know what their end goal/target is

I don’t think shutting pubs and restaurants will do much to even slow, let alone stop the number of folks catching this going up.

Once it gets into a household everyone in the house is probably going to get it. So if one person brings it into a household of 4, boom, 4 cases. What the measures are designed to stop are the links between households and therefore reduce the opportunity for rapid growth household transmission provides.

That's the theory anyway, I think. How successful that will be is very much up in the air.

Aye, households may be where the transmission takes place, but it's got to come from somewhere, schools are fairly important, work ditto (and lots still wfh) pubs and restaurants are not a necessity. IMO cafes are only getting a stay of execution, if numbers don't show some form of regression or at least stagnation, they'll get the chop too.

I don't believe for a minute pubs will reopen in 16 days either.

I understand the theory. But does anyone think this will make the r number go down? Possibly slow the rate of increase a little but not going to turn it around.