Perhaps some see a difference between the responsibilities of the family as a way of shrinking the welfare state and the right to family life which has been an obstacle to deportations and the like.
thirdcrank wrote:Perhaps some see a difference between the responsibilities of the family as a way of shrinking the welfare state and the right to family life which has been an obstacle to deportations and the like.
Oh yeah . I was forgetting nothing must stand in the way of getting rid of immigrants.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
First Brexit and now C19. The government has scared people with C19 so much so that friends in the UK talk about nothing else. Leaving the EU with no deal may have always been the aim but with talk of nothing but how dangerous the virus is any challenge to no deal is hardly heard amidst talk of local restrictions, testing, which social group is breaking the latest rule.
I'm not sure if the government is being fiendishly cunning or hugely incompetent.☹️.
The communist countries had honorary monitors who dealt with people who put the washing out on Sundays, or who smoked on their balconies, parked their cycles in wrong places, parked their cars nose in, &c, etc
This is a gross exaggeration,but they were employed to oversee dissident behaviour such as accumulating assets,profiteering and listening to anything by Cliff Richard,after he left the Shadows.You can appreciate they had a valuable role.
IMO anyone who "shops" neighbours for having family round under these stupid C-19 "rules" deserves any repercussions that follow.These people should not have anonymity.I have no time for people like that. If its a party/BBQ etc with 20/30/40 people then have a quiet word...or a beer and a burger...but phoning the Police doesn't sit right with me and would take us down a very dangerous path.
If my neighbours were interrupted during a party etc,in the scenario described,a quiet word would not work.The numbers you refer to is way more than agreed limit,and if they needed such frivolity they should drive to a remote place and isolate themselves.As for repurcussions are you expectin g some sort of baseball bat assault.My neighbours would be too wary to threaten such action.
Syd wrote:I don’t know there reasons but it’s not to make being Roman Catholic, agnostic, or a Lib Dem supporter illegal and suggested in the OP.
So you don't know - there is nothing in there that specifies a maximum standard, so the only reason to opt out is to reduce basic human rights.
This lot are power grabbing ${expletive}s who shouldn't be anywhere near the halls of government.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way.No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse. There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.