Easing of Restrictions from 10th May

Hotels, B&Bs, hostels, guesthouses and other tourism accommodation are now permitted to reopen.
Indoor hotel bars and restaurants, along with leisure facilities, can also resume for overnight guests only.

 
Planned opening of indoor dining on July 5th has been delayed due to Delta variant concerns.
Possibility that indoor dining will re-open initially to the fully vaccinated.

*Hospitality sector will be hoping the weather stays good to encourage people to socialise outdoors :)

Hospitality sector will not be positive in anyway with the proposals, and if it rains and it will we will probably have them on the TV asking Met Eireann for the data on how it rained and why couldn't the clouds be "quarantined " for a few months.

I do have sympathy for them but Jaysus they do play the poor mouth well.

I went for a pint Sunday evening and I'll guarantee that the amount of people outside were far in excess of what could have fitted into the entire pub in normal times.
 
Last edited:
Planned opening of indoor dining on July 5th has been delayed due to Delta variant concerns.
Possibility that indoor dining will re-open initially to the fully vaccinated.
looks like major controversy over this decision, discriminating against young people who are not vaccinated will not be accepted. I don't think the government will be able to hold the line on this for much longer especially based on dubious nphet modelling completely at odds with whats happening internationally
 
discriminating against young people who are not vaccinated will not be accepted
I don't think there's any chance the authorities will actually rule that restaurants, pubs etc can open to indoor customers but only for those fully vaccinated or who have had Covid because many of these businesses will not ask people to prove they are in this cohort. It's unpoliceable.
 
I don't think there's any chance the authorities will actually rule that restaurants, pubs etc can open to indoor customers but only for those fully vaccinated or who have had Covid because many of these businesses will not ask people to prove they are in this cohort. It's unpoliceable.
Exactly, but the debate is going to be hilarious.
 
We will follow the UK & NI numbers of cases if we re-open indoor dining. Who wants 2K extra deaths? I am surprised at the number but it is pure math based on the facts, not guesses or prediction. Our death rate is pretty high already. 2% of cases currently are ending up in hospital. Denmark are open for fully vaccinated people to dine indoors, Ireland would not be unusual in going in that direction.

Currently it is a race, getting people vaccinated versus the delta wave taking off. The restaurant and pub lobby are very powerful and fill the radio waves. But no one hears the 19 yr old server who is on minimum wage afraid to work because they are unvaccinated. Most staff are unvaccinated due to their age group. And they are pushing hard to vaccinate, I had a co-worker yesterday say that she is getting the second Pfizer dose after 3 weeks not 4. But we are still less vaccinated than the UK and they had 20K cases yesterday so it is back to the maths.

The most optimistic Nepht model is 82K cases between 1 July & 30 Sept, 1530 hospitalised and 250 deaths (most over 40 yr old). Worst case model is touching 20K cases a day by mid September.

And despite wanting to open up indoors fully we are in a worse position than UK with regards to fully vaccinated and if we compare ourselves to Denmark their numbers are declining and ours are static. That have had more cases than us but 2K fewer deaths, we are not in a good position compared to them.

The modelling team in NEPHT have access to a lot more data and nuanced interpretation than I have, but it is clear it is all based on maths, not wishful thinking, or doomsday predictions. Our health system is not robust to pandemics and we are stuck in the middle of one.
 
if we compare ourselves to Denmark their numbers are declining and ours are static.That have had more cases than us but 2K fewer deaths, we are not in a good position compared to them.

The modelling team in NEPHT have access to a lot more data and nuanced interpretation than I have, but it is clear it is all based on maths, not wishful thinking, or doomsday predictions. Our health system is not robust to pandemics and we are stuck in the middle of one.
Ok just some figures versus Denmark, you are correct on deaths, but every other metric is almost identical, 1st doses (62.4 v 63.5% , and fully vaccinated (35.6%). Denmark has received about 400,000 more vaccines than us but I don't think that's a huge factor.

The big hole in our data is deaths, Denmark's 7 day is 0, ours on the 11th of May was 3 but we haven't had any updates since , its probably reasonable to assume there has been some improvement?

I think the problem here is that NPHET gave the worst and best case scenarios and the worst case frightened the pants of many ministers and as you say the amount of data that they have is far more than we have.

We all appreciate that modelling isn't easy or in fact is 100% accurate but if actual and forecasted results were within 95% significance the figures produced would be stark in the worst case scenario.

Modelling for something like a virus where minute changes have huge effects is even more difficult and perhaps some input variables aren't quantifiable and assumptions aren't accurate.

So, I think that an independent review now would be a good idea. We know for example that vaccines appear to weaken the link between cases and hospitalisation to what extent is a question. We still don't really know what exactly the transmission rate of the Delta variant actually is and these unknowns will affect modelling outcomes.

I don't know how many scenarios they run but if its only 3 that's not enough they might run more and average out to 3 but that has issues too.

Either way the public now need absolute assurance that the modelling is of the highest level possible.
 
As someone who's fully vaccinated (pfizer) I will not support any bar or rest. that discriminates against young people who put their life's on hold for the last 15 months to protect 'auld' fellas like me. Its completely wrong and needs to be legally challenged. Hopefully the high court case next week goes in favour of the rest. organisation.
 
As someone who's fully vaccinated (pfizer) I will not support any bar or rest. that discriminates against young people who put their life's on hold for the last 15 months to protect 'auld' fellas like me. Its completely wrong and needs to be legally challenged. Hopefully the high court case next week goes in favour of the rest. organisation.
But are you not adding to their plight by not being a customer.?

Have they really "put their lives on hold" though, I think there is a lot of emotive language banded about by all sides and it doesn't help any argument.

Obviously it's your choice to do as you think is right.
 
I don't think there's any chance the authorities will actually rule that restaurants, pubs etc can open to indoor customers but only for those fully vaccinated or who have had Covid because many of these businesses will not ask people to prove they are in this cohort. It's unpoliceable.
I find it strange that restaurants and pubs have no problem with discriminating against 17 year olds every day, but this to them crosses some sort of moral boundary?

Now on practical grounds, we don't have the equivalent level of docs to support the certification, so on those grounds I don't see it as workable and objectsions on that grounds are reasonable.

Otherwise, most of the howls about in the media are just embarrassing.
They discriminate and police matters like this all the time when it comes to age.
They are actually supposed to do it too when it comes to serving intoxicated people, but most seem to laugh at that idea too.

I have no objections to this on any moral grounds or grounds of fairness.
If unvaccinated people want to socialise, they can. They are younger sorts too who can stand it better :)
They haven't had the equivalent of a sword of damocles hanging over their heads like the highly vulnerable for the last year.

Allowing fully vaccinated indoors, and everyone else outdoors, would allow the pub or restaurant to make better use of their space, staff, kitchens etc and make more money. Which I thought was something they'd want to do. Guess not.

IF indoors dining isn't opened sooner to vaccinated people, it will be longer than that to open for everyone. I don't see who that helps.
 
I find it strange that restaurants and pubs have no problem with discriminating against 17 year olds every day, but this to them crosses some sort of moral boundary?

Now on practical grounds, we don't have the equivalent level of docs to support the certification, so on those grounds I don't see it as workable and objectsions on that grounds are reasonable.

Otherwise, most of the howls about in the media are just embarrassing.
They discriminate and police matters like this all the time when it comes to age.
They are actually supposed to do it too when it comes to serving intoxicated people, but most seem to laugh at that idea too.

I have no objections to this on any moral grounds or grounds of fairness.
If unvaccinated people want to socialise, they can. They are younger sorts too who can stand it better :)
They haven't had the equivalent of a sword of damocles hanging over their heads like the highly vulnerable for the last year.

Allowing fully vaccinated indoors, and everyone else outdoors, would allow the pub or restaurant to make better use of their space, staff, kitchens etc and make more money. Which I thought was something they'd want to do. Guess not.

IF indoors dining isn't opened sooner to vaccinated people, it will be longer than that to open for everyone. I don't see who that helps.
The vintiners and restaurant associations simply went on the attack immediately because they knew it would get media attention and deflect from their practices that as you say discriminate daily on age, appearance and any other thing they can make up.

There is a solution that isn't 100% what they want but as you say would be better their businesses .

Ok, the implementation might be a bit tricky but that would be only for a time.
 
I find it strange that restaurants and pubs have no problem with discriminating against 17 year olds every day, but this to them crosses some sort of moral boundary?

Now on practical grounds, we don't have the equivalent level of docs to support the certification, so on those grounds I don't see it as workable and objectsions on that grounds are reasonable.

Otherwise, most of the howls about in the media are just embarrassing.
They discriminate and police matters like this all the time when it comes to age.
They are actually supposed to do it too when it comes to serving intoxicated people, but most seem to laugh at that idea too.

I have no objections to this on any moral grounds or grounds of fairness.
If unvaccinated people want to socialise, they can. They are younger sorts too who can stand it better :)
They haven't had the equivalent of a sword of damocles hanging over their heads like the highly vulnerable for the last year.

Allowing fully vaccinated indoors, and everyone else outdoors, would allow the pub or restaurant to make better use of their space, staff, kitchens etc and make more money. Which I thought was something they'd want to do. Guess not.

IF indoors dining isn't opened sooner to vaccinated people, it will be longer than that to open for everyone. I don't see who that helps.

That's pretty dismissive of the impact of something like this.

So children under 12 can't eat indoors even though there are no plans for them to be vaccinated?

A married couple or a couple on a date have to eat outside unless both people are vaccinated? A family or group of friends can't eat indoors unless they have all been vaccinated?

The plan is that this will be extended to other indoor activities like cinemas and theatres as it will be a vaccine pass. So it's not just a case of 'socialising' in a pub.

A lot of older people choose not be vaccinated for whatever reason. You and I might not understand that but vaccination is not mandatory. It is not a legal requirement. And yet we are talking about excluding these people from certain activities. I suppose we could stop them using public transport as well.

Young people who are not vaccinated will be allowed serve vaccinated people in restaurants but they won't be allowed sit with them and have a meal. NPHET's explanation for this is that they will be wearing a mask. If wearing a mask is all it takes, why has retail been closed for the past few months?

50 people can eat inside at a wedding reception without being vaccinated but 50 people can't eat in a restaurant unless they are vaccinated?

Vaccinated and non vaccinated people can eat and drink in hotel restaurants and bars and have been for weeks so no large outbreaks. But yet can't do that in a restaurant on the street.

Who is going to be fined if an unvaccinated person eats in a restaurant? The Restaurant? The Individual? What's law is in place to allow enforcement? Are Guards going to be called?

How are tourists going to prove they are vaccinated? What if they are not vaccinated but have negative PCR tests and are perfectly allowed to be here?

Young people have occasions to celebrate too but they are not welcome in pubs and restaurants until they are vaccinated. They are not welcome at family occasions that would normally be celebrated with a meal out. So people are driven to celebrate at home despite us hearing for months that household mixing is what drives the cases.

I want to sit down, have a coffee and a pastry in a coffee shop. I now need to show a vaccine cert and probably some form of ID to someone behind the counter earning minimum wage and is now expected to police this.

I could go on and on about how unworkable this is....And that's without even starting on the modelling that projects nearly 700k cases in three months on a worst case scenario. Zero mention about the probability of this scenario and yet that seems to be what the Government focused on.

And this isn't just about the economic impact on pubs and restaurants. There is a huge wider economic impact to this so it is unfair to say that this is just a problem for greedy pub and restaurant owners.
 
Last edited:
That's pretty dismissive of the impact of something like this.

So children under 12 can't eat indoors even though there are no plans for them to be vaccinated?

A married couple or a couple on a date have to eat outside unless both people are vaccinated? A family or group of friends can't eat indoors unless they have all been vaccinated?

The plan is that this will be extended to other indoor activities like cinemas and theatres as it will be a vaccine pass. So it's not just a case of 'socialising' in a pub.

A lot of older people choose not be vaccinated for whatever reason. You and I might not understand that but vaccination is not mandatory. It is not a legal requirement. And yet we are talking about excluding these people from certain activities. I suppose we could stop them using public transport as well.

Young people who are not vaccinated will be allowed serve vaccinated people in restaurants but they won't be allowed sit with them and have a meal. NPHET's explanation for this is that they will be wearing a mask. If wearing a mask is all it takes, why has retail been closed for the past few months?

50 people can eat inside at a wedding reception without being vaccinated but 50 people can't eat in a restaurant unless they are vaccinated?

Vaccinated and non vaccinated people can eat and drink in hotel restaurants and bars and have been for weeks so no large outbreaks. But yet can't do that in a restaurant on the street.

Who is going to be fined if an unvaccinated person eats in a restaurant? The Restaurant? The Individual? What's law is in place to allow enforcement? Are Guards going to be called?

How are tourists going to prove they are vaccinated? What if they are not vaccinated but have negative PCR tests and are perfectly allowed to be here?

Young people have occasions to celebrate too but they are not welcome in pubs and restaurants until they are vaccinated. They are not welcome at family occasions that would normally be celebrated with a meal out. So people are driven to celebrate at home despite us hearing for months that household mixing is what drives the cases.

I want to sit down, have a coffee and a pastry in a coffee shop. I now need to show a vaccine cert and probably some form of ID to someone behind the counter earning minimum wage and is now expected to police this.

I could go on and on about how unworkable this is....And that's without even starting on the modelling that projects nearly 700k cases in three months on a worst case scenario. Zero mention about the probability of this scenario and yet that seems to be what the Government focused on.

And this isn't just about the economic impact on pubs and restaurants. There is a huge wider economic impact to this so it is unfair to say that this is just a problem for greedy pub and restaurant owners.
None of the cohorts you have listed can eat indoors today.
All of the cohorts you have listed can eat, socialise and celebrate outside at pubs and restaurants today.

They can also socialise indoors at hotels where they are staying, and therefore mixing with a fixed set of known individuals.

If you're talking about economic impact, you would want indoor dining to open for vaccinated people sooner;
Rather than wait longer for it to open for everyone.

People who aren't vaccinated would only be serving people indoors who are vaccinated, and vaccines are known to reduce transmission and viral load.

It's your right not take the vaccine, just as it is your right to smoke. But you can't smoke indoors in a pub or restaurant, though you can outdoors.

You want to have a drink in a pub, or buy a bottle of wine in a shop, you have to show ID if you look under 25.
Do you expect that to be policed?
How is this any different in terms of responsibility?

If you want to talk about how it could be enforced and what documentation could be used, that is a different argument and that is one for the administration to see if they can resolve, or not.

The other objections I think are self-defeating nonsense from the vintners to be honest, the same crowd who demanded the exemption to open to serve food and spent the rest of the time whinging about it.
 
As Sunny has stated above, we as a society are heading down the road of making it a legal and mandatory requirement to get vaccinated for all in door services.. Will it be mandatory for kids between 15 and 23 to attend school and college!
 
A vaccine apartheid regime is not the way to go. It could quickly creep into more areas of life resulting in a de facto forced vaccine policy. This is not China.
 
@odyssey06 so you still think nphet are correct with the very pessimistic analysis, the most pessimistic on the continent of Europe. Also the fact that the Irish government are afraid to diverge from what nphet say , this is a very dangerous precedent for an unelected body.
Look at Wembley yesterday with stadium half full of joyful fans, yes they are taking risks but with the over half their population vaccinated they have decided this is worth the risk. Real normal life has to come back it cannot be postponed indefinitely because of academic and extreme scenarios that have not been risked properly anyway.
 
None of the cohorts you have listed can eat indoors today.
All of the cohorts you have listed can eat, socialise and celebrate outside at pubs and restaurants today.

They can also socialise indoors at hotels where they are staying, and therefore mixing with a fixed set of known individuals.

If you're talking about economic impact, you would want indoor dining to open for vaccinated people sooner;
Rather than wait longer for it to open for everyone.

People who aren't vaccinated would only be serving people indoors who are vaccinated, and vaccines are known to reduce transmission and viral load.

It's your right not take the vaccine, just as it is your right to smoke. But you can't smoke indoors in a pub or restaurant, though you can outdoors.

You want to have a drink in a pub, or buy a bottle of wine in a shop, you have to show ID if you look under 25.
Do you expect that to be policed?
How is this any different in terms of responsibility?

If you want to talk about how it could be enforced and what documentation could be used, that is a different argument and that is one for the administration to see if they can resolve, or not.

The other objections I think are self-defeating nonsense from the vintners to be honest, the same crowd who demanded the exemption to open to serve food and spent the rest of the time whinging about it.

I really don't get your point. Of course they can't eat indoors today. So you are saying it is ok because if we don't just limit to vaccinated people then we won't allow anyone. So that black and white choice is just accepted as gospel?

Comparing a vaccine cert to carrying out age checks is complete nonsense. It is against the law to serve alcohol to someone under age. It is not against the law to not get vaccinated. People who want to get vaccinated might have to wait until September or October to get vaccinated even if they wanted to do. Children under 12 will not be vaccinated at all. So what choice do they have?

So hotels are safe because it is a fixed set of known individuals? That's what makes is safe compared to a restaurant who has the names and numbers of any person dining in their restaurant and where they were sitting at any time? Having recently spent time in a hotel bar, I can tell you that they no idea who was sitting where and for how long.

This isn't just about vintners and whatever agenda you have against them. They want to protect their business just like every other sector of the economy. This goes way beyond that. They are already linking these vaccine passports to concerts, theatres, cinemas and other indoor and outdoor events and a way to get them back. So after spending months completely dismissing the idea, they suddenly decide on the back of no preparation that we now we need this system to re-open

There are huge ethical questions on this that can't be just dismissed as whinging by pub owners. It deserves proper debate. Not as a gun to held to people's heads. Accept this or no-one gets to eat indoors or go to an event.....
 
As Sunny has stated above, we as a society are heading down the road of making it a legal and mandatory requirement to get vaccinated for all in door services.. Will it be mandatory for kids between 15 and 23 to attend school and college!
Really and you think that this would be tolerated by the vast majority of the population?
These measures are in response to a global pandemic and talk of "mandatory requirements " being used in other settings is frankly conspiracy theories being dreamt up.
 
@odyssey06 so you still think nphet are correct with the very pessimistic analysis, the most pessimistic on the continent of Europe. Also the fact that the Irish government are afraid to diverge from what nphet say , this is a very dangerous precedent for an unelected body.
Look at Wembley yesterday with stadium half full of joyful fans, yes they are taking risks but with the over half their population vaccinated they have decided this is worth the risk. Real normal life has to come back it cannot be postponed indefinitely because of academic and extreme scenarios that have not been risked properly anyway.
That's a different debate again.
I have doubts when we are 'outliers' in terms of the rest of the EU and their health authorities, whether that is on restrictions or vaccines.
We seem to be on our own here, which suggests it may represent an abundance of caution.
Although if anyone is aware of other countries which these kind of rules, please shout.

I am assuming this is a temporary measure until more people are vaccinated, which should bring down the case count and get us to something like an effective herd immunity.
 
Back
Top