Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Since when did gelato ice cream on lordship lane become essential food? A queue of about 20 people getting ice cream. Complacency and rule bending will only lengthen the government lockdowns. The one outing a day is to reduce contact and limit social occurrences. Selfish when people are slaving away in hospitals without sun and their double chip chocolate gelato.

1. When am I allowed to leave the house?

You should only leave the house for very limited purposes:


Shopping for basic necessities, for example food and medicine, which must be as infrequent as possible

One form of exercise a day, for example a run, walk, or cycle - alone or with members of your household

Any medical need, including to donate blood, avoid or escape risk of injury or harm, or to provide care or to help a vulnerable person

Travelling for work purposes, but only where you cannot work from home.

Multi tasking, you can leave your house to exercise/buy food and get an icecream. If Sainsbury's can sell ice cream to takeaway then surely other businesses can?


Some.people will not be happy until all we are allowed to do is sit at home eating bread and water and judging people.

Multitasking by going to loads of different shops should be avoided- pretty obvious, no?

As an adult If you?re mental well-being is reliant on getting an ice cream and you can?t sacrifice your normality for just a few weeks you?ve got bigger concerns.

The whole reason the government advice kindly posted above limits the number of times you go out the house and queue up, this is pointless if you ?multi task? and stand in 4 different queues each with different people.

Again stop making stuff up. You can leave the house for essential food and medicine and one form of exercise a day. You may as well say I shouldn't go separelty to my local butcher or baker because I can do it all in one trip at Sainsbury's.


I have no desire or need for ice cream. But we all want out local businesses to survive this so just stop piling on a business for running their business within the rules.


Now one area you could criticise is if they are not able to manage their pick up queue appropriately.

ED_2010 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Unfortunately leaving the house to cheer yourself

> up is not allowed.



True. But have you noticed how many people on here seem to leave their homes only to return miserable or in a bad mood about something they consider unacceptable and then post about it

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ED_2010 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Unfortunately leaving the house to cheer

> yourself

> > up is not allowed.

>

>

> True. But have you noticed how many people on here

> seem to leave their homes only to return miserable

> or in a bad mood about something they consider

> unacceptable and then post about it



You're assuming these people are not working in hospitals & the very last thing they want to do is step outside their homes. They weren't even given bank holidays. So I think they have every right to feel the way they do & air their concern. Who better than those frontline, witnessing this very real situation first-hand. It's an insult to them, regardless of whether they're giving out freebies, to be confusing the public on what is & is not essential.


Completely agree with you, Jonny Comfort.

If you read/listened to the news though, non essential shops shouldn?t be open. So why make exceptions such as ice cream? Where do the exceptions stop?

This is why the government has set up funds for businesses. They should help in doing their bit by closing.

Survival of people should be the focus not an ice cream parlour that can receive 10k for the lock down period.

Careful Jonny. Once you start pronouncing on who can queue up for what reason and which shops can and can?t trade it can be a slippery slope.


How did you happen to notice this queue anyway? Do you have a flat overlooking the shop or were you out wandering around or driving past?

I?d agree that ice cream parlours, off-licences, coffee shops even are not essential and should not be causing groups of people to gather.

Whether these items can be purchased in supermarkets / larger stores is a separate conversation probably, the focus should be on reducing crowds and queues with minimal shops open as possible.

Strangely America and many European countries are about to start to re-open businesses to restart their economies.


We can?t stay locked down indefinitely. Sadly Covid-19 will be with us for years with several waves possibly. Hopefully less virulent each time.

If you stick to government guidance it?s hard to justify getting an ice-cream. And I also wonder how people eating them are washing their hands prior to handling or eating cold food. It?s not just about the risk to an individual but about the risk of spreading covid around our community.

Jonny Comfort Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Multitasking by going to loads of different shops

> should be avoided- pretty obvious, no?

> As an adult If you?re mental well-being is reliant

> on getting an ice cream and you can?t sacrifice

> your normality for just a few weeks you?ve got

> bigger concerns.

> The whole reason the government advice kindly

> posted above limits the number of times you go out

> the house and queue up, this is pointless if you

> ?multi task? and stand in 4 different queues each

> with different people.


I combine my daily exercise with shopping for essentials, often these essentials require going to more than one shop as I dont buy all my edibles in say M&S and Sainsbury-and if on my daily walk I see a place offering takeaway coffee (as Lucas does where I often go to get bread) I get a coffee too.

I know getting a takeaway coffee is a luxury (not a necessity as I have coffee at home )but y'know what...that coffee cheers me up, it makes my day it feels like a taste of normality and if seeing me coming back from my walk carrying my groceries whilst drinking a take-out coffee upsets anyone-I'm sorry but thats my treat.

I wouldn't go to Costa if it was open as I dont support chains but I think buying a coffee from a local cafe I want to support and miss going to to eat is not a crime.

Likewise I dont think that people going for their walk with their families on a hot day should not be allowed to buy an ice-cream because although its not essential (nor is booze) its food and its a treat.

Over sixteen thousand people have died from covid-19. Why is your ?treat? more important than their lives? Seriously get over yourself and your entitlement to ?treats?. We would all like to go back to our normal lives but if we did that then hundreds of thousands more people would die. Get a grip. Sorry to be harsh but you are actually talking about ice cream. Stay home, save lives.

ED_2010 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Over sixteen thousand people have died from

> covid-19. Why is your ?treat? more important than

> their lives? Seriously get over yourself and your

> entitlement to ?treats?. We would all like to go

> back to our normal lives but if we did that then

> hundreds of thousands more people would die. Get a

> grip. Sorry to be harsh but you are actually

> talking about ice cream. Stay home, save lives.





This X infinity.

I think lockdown is making you lose your your grip on reality ED_2010 and ED Bird. NewWave?s coffee treat is not responsible for the death of those poor people.


The world has got to face up to a very harsh reality - life versus livelihood. This virus isn?t going to go away anytime soon and the world economy is on the edge. Trump is correct. We need to be careful the cure isn?t worse than the disease.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
    • Aria is my go to plumber. Fixed a toilet leak for me at short notice. Reasonably priced and very professional. 
    • Anyone has a storage or a display rack for Albums LPs drop me a message thanks
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...