Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well I've had me haircut, been to the pub, gone abroad but now I'm not allowed to go to a cricket match. It seems OK for 10,000s to go to the beach but not for a 1000 people to congregate in very well controlled environment. Far be it for me to moan, and use the forum as a soap box but I'd be interested in how others feel we are handling it. Fortunately I'm not typing from Spain which must be a complete bummer if you've just gone there on your hols.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/259573-relaxinghardening-of-lockdown/
Share on other sites

Funny how in the first month of lockdown this website had only one main topic of interest yet now on the eve of another lockdown very little activity. I spose it sums up society as a whole, I've not caught it, nobody in my immediate family/neighbours has got it*, the government have given us a veiled green light to return to normal and I've got other things on my mind.


To throw down the gauntlet a little the thread on Spain came across as rather snobbish/pompous as if those who go out to the Costas are from another planet. Reinforcing the view that it wont happen to me.


To return to the subject of the thread, and some further views, we've sort of got it right on lots of fronts with avoiding mass gatherings in the work place, entertainment and travel. Set some rules up for pubs, shops and restaurants which are variable in their enforcement.


I was jumped on for questioning why we had closed our borders to those countries with lower rates than us on the continent. Was this due to catching coronavirus whilst traveling or when in that country? It seems to me that the two key things still apply social distancing and good hygiene, wherever you are.


And that this seems to have gone for many in our population. So cancelling pilot spectator events and opening of a few other businesses appears to be a drop in the ocean/tokenistic when tens of thousands are gathering on our beaches and others, in particular those under 30 are in close contact.


* Contacts who had it: Person in street (after returning from Italy), two colleagues and one son of a colleague (all untested), one cycle buddy (untested).


Anyway feel free to shout me down. Interested in how others see things.

seenbeen Wrote:

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

> the irony is that the younger ones are spreading

> it about but it's older people who will get locked

> down!


Can you imagine the complaints by the young if it was the other way around..

"You oldies have ruined this planet now you are killing us"


Maybe us oldies should start a similar cry

"The cotton wool generation are trying to wipe us out" or something similar 😆

The Prime Ministers spokesman was asked about over 50s


"He also dismissed reports at the weekend that people over 50 might be asked to shield in the event of rising infections in the winter as inaccurate."


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/03/english-pubs-likely-to-be-spared-new-covid-19-restrictions-no-10-says

Allegedly that was war gaming a worst case scenario, probably deliberately leaked to see the reaction from the public, that's how this populist Gov rolls. The problem with that is when the inevitable row back happens they come across as dithering, haven't known a Gov perform so many u-turns over it's lifetime yet alone in it's first year, never a good look. Populism has always been easy answers/promises to difficult problems/situations. It can thrive under a concept like Brexit but withers when it meets reality, in this case, Covid. Johnson assumed his premiership would be defined by delivering an 'oven ready Brexit' (which, surprise, surprise, doesn't exist) and instead it's been trumped by Covid...
What's wrong with a U-turn, especially if it's in your favour? Those who whine when a party they do not vote for reviews its stance to be in line with their views waste oxygen. I didn't vote for this government but I am glad when it changes policy to something I think is more responsible -- but not to the point of crowing. Much better to accept it and move on.

pk Wrote:

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

> Nigello Wrote:

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

> -----

> > What's wrong with a U-turn?

>

> you don't think it's better to get things right

> first time around?


And what is "right"?

pk Wrote:

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

> Nigello Wrote:

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

> -----

> > What's wrong with a U-turn?

>

> you don't think it's better to get things right

> first time around?


Loads of people flouted the rules from day 1 anyway and it just got worse....we had no chance since millions of infected people left China with the blessing of the WHO

KalamityKel Wrote:

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

> pk Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Nigello Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > What's wrong with a U-turn?

> >

> > you don't think it's better to get things right

> > first time around?

>

> And what is "right"?


Obvs it depends on what the question is

seenbeen Wrote:

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


> Loads of people flouted the rules from day 1

> anyway and it just got worse....we had no chance

> since millions of infected people left China with

> the blessing of the WHO


Xenophobic bollox. It's just as likely that tourists, business people brought it back with them.

Even during the lockdown we were still letting in tourists untested. The buck stops with Johnson and his cabal...

Loads of people flouted the rules from day 1 and are STILL flouting the rules as the idiots seemed to think (I wonder why???) that Dominic Cummings gave them carte blanche to do just what they liked.


So- it matters not one jot what Boris Johnson said or did because they would've done what they wanted anyway!


https://apnews.com/c42eabe1b1e1ba9fcb2ce201cd3abb72

My father used to ask , when I did something silly spurned on by my mates, if your mates jumped off a cliff would you ?


Nowadays people look for an excuse for not taking responsibility for their own actions.


So DC didn't jump off a cliff but the generic question remains. Why did you?

Bit disappointed. I thought that someone would have some value to add to this thread. Some posts early on in Covid-19 were phenomenal in helping my understanding. Catching up now I've learned nothing. I've got my own views but I'd like to get others' take. Suppose I will have to leave it to future generations' interpretations, if I live long enough.

A lot of repeats of the following rumour on twitter which sounds like Cummings doesn't give a t@ss. If he cares so little about ballet what chance do any of you have (unless it's his favorite pastime) ?


?I have it on good authority that at a Zoom meeting about the future of the Arts with Downing Street, Cummings told Sam Mendes that he wasn't interested and that :"the f**king ballerinas can get to the back of the queue "


seenbeen Wrote:

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

> Loads of people flouted the rules from day 1 and

> are STILL flouting the rules as the idiots seemed

> to think (I wonder why???) that Dominic Cummings

> gave them carte blanche to do just what they

> liked.


Care to quantify ''loads''? You're previously posted anecdotal 'evidence' of people walking around Lordship Lane is meaningless, you don't know why they were there or what they were doing, and begs the question why and what were you doing there?

The overwhelming majority of the population adhered to the lockdown, while occasionally the press would zoom in on random cases of a couple sitting on a beach, or someone driving their car to go for a walk in a beauty spot, and so on. DC's eyesight test holiday stuck two fingers up to all those who had adhered to the lockdown, so although I agree with Spartacus' point about not 'jumping off the cliff' too, I can understand why many were angry enough to do so.

None of this should distract, for that's what you're trying to do, from the Gov's failure to enforce a lockdown much sooner than it did after flip flopping from it's initial 'herd mentality' strategy. One of several reasons why this Gov has so much blood on its hands, and I see that another group of MPs has released a damning report of the Gov's shambolic role in this pandemic, and right on cue after my last post, it highlights the serious errors regarding border control and quarantining...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53654644

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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