What is the rationale behind the tier 2 pub meal restrictions?

[BlackLambAndGreyFalcoln]

Genuine question. I understand that when restrictions first started to be placed on pubs (10pm curfew etc) it was because people were slipping with the social distancing after they'd had a few. But given that in tier 2 you can only go with your household anyway, it's table service only and you have to wear a mask when not seated at your table what difference does it make if people just have a few drinks or a 3 course meal? It makes it very difficult for pubs to trade outside of meal times. I'm struggling to see the rationale here.

Youngsters out on the lash as splashed across the media regularly.

Makes perfect sense to me. Without the restriction DH and I would go out for a boozy lunch and then stop at another pub or two on the walk home... potentially spreading covid to the people in 2-3 venues instead of just one.

The drunks definately contribute. DP lives on a highstreet and before Covid you only had to open the window to see and hear massive groups of drunk people singing, fighting and generally getting close to each other after coming out of pubs/moving on to next venue. That was every night and worse at the weekends.

The curfew has lessened that massively, but seven pubs just in the town centre have been fined for breaking it. Our area is in the top three worst in Kent! Not hard to see why.

We were in tier 2 before this lockdown (London) and we (speaking just about my locality rather than the whole city) didn't experience this problem precisely because you could only go to pubs with your household so it vastly cut down on the youngsters congregating together on the lash issue.

I take the point about spreading between venues, although personally it now means (assuming that we are back in tier 2 and not in tier 3) that before we might have gone to the pub late afternoon and had one or two drinks and then stayed for dinner whereas now we'd really just go for dinner so the pub will lose some some custom.

@HeddaGarbled

Youngsters out on the lash as splashed across the media regularly.

But they would only be able to go to the pub together in the first place if they were in the same household.

Well, those were the rules but they weren’t followed very well in many places.

@BlackLambAndGreyFalcoln It's fucking ridiculous, the pubs are safer than the supermarkets. We've been doing the substantial meal in tier 3 for a while now, it's fine but I really feel for the wet pubs, it's killing them.

I guess it could be youngsters? How is a pub to know if a group of people claim to live together in student accommodation?
I could go and get drunk with a friend and say we house share?

Pubs really were useless at following social distancing. That's why the restrictions are tougher this time around.

Not saying I agree with it by the way!!! Just trying to think if a reason

@HeddaGarbled

Well, those were the rules but they weren’t followed very well in many places.

They were where I am. We even once had to show proof of address to prove that we were all one household. What was not well followed was the rule in tier 1 areas (and everywhere in England prior to the tier system - unless the area was in local lockdown) that groups of 6 could meet inside in pubs/restaurants/cafes but that social distancing should be maintained between different households.

@Hugosmugo

Not saying I agree with it by the way!!! Just trying to think if a reason

Oh OK I see. Yes nothing to stop people lying I guess (unless asked for ID) but it's a pretty poor situation for the pubs - and everyone else who followed the rules the first time!

I agree - my local was ultra-compliant but has been shut down because so many weren’t. I wish there could be differentiation between those businesses who are compliant and those who aren’t, but I guess that’s too difficult to police.

You obviously cannot catch coronavirus when you are eating?!

Who defines what is a “substantial” meal? What one person would call a snack or a side dish would fill another person for the rest of the day - just look at the jacket potato thread on AIBU.

@BritWifeinUSA

Who defines what is a “substantial” meal? What one person would call a snack or a side dish would fill another person for the rest of the day - just look at the jacket potato thread on AIBU.

When this first came up when the tiers were announced, I seem to remember a cabinet minister saying a cornish pasty on its own didn't count, but a cornish pasty with salad did...

It's because hospitality is a convenient scapegoat when, in reality, it's not responsible, to any significant degree, for spreading the virus.

The idea that the virus is spread by swathes of "young people" hitting the pub, getting trolled is a myth. The spread comes from people doing normal everyday things - going to school, going to university, living in a care home.

@Flev - there was also that well publicised case about the pub that served slices of pizza getting pulled up by the police because it wasn’t counted as a substantial meal. Completely ignored the fact the ‘slice’ was huge, bigger than your head!

I think “substantial meal” is a term already recognised in the hospitality industry because 16 year olds are allowed to consume alcohol if it is bought by an over-18 and is consumed with a substantial meal. So although it sounds a bit unspecified to us, it was already a thing.

Pubs round here ask you to book a table, you get a 90 minute slot, order your meal from the table, sit with your household etc. It’s a lot more contained than “going out for a few drinks”. If you could just drink, you’d probably book another slot at a different pub after the first one, and move on. Especially if your household consists of you and 5 other young people.

I think “substantial meal” is a term already recognised in the hospitality industry because 16 year olds are allowed to consume alcohol if it is bought by an over-18 and is consumed with a substantial meal. So although it sounds a bit unspecified to us, it was already a thing.

It's also termed as a 'table' mealnin licensing laws, that may have been a better description for this? It's a bit of a minefield for the staff meant to police this, but personally I've refused 16/17 year old service when 4 have come in and ordered two bowls of chips and 4 pints. But I've been happy to serve a 17 year old who's ordered a starter as a main when the rest of the party order mains.

But am I right in thinking in Tier 2 previously groups of 6 could still meet and drink outside? At our local there were groups of six, mainly younger drinkers, in a group sat round an outdoor table with heater.

@Bellal

It's because hospitality is a convenient scapegoat when, in reality, it's not responsible, to any significant degree, for spreading the virus.

The idea that the virus is spread by swathes of "young people" hitting the pub, getting trolled is a myth. The spread comes from people doing normal everyday things - going to school, going to university, living in a care home.

I agree. My son caught Covid at school. The school has dozens of cases.

@Bellal

It's because hospitality is a convenient scapegoat when, in reality, it's not responsible, to any significant degree, for spreading the virus.

The idea that the virus is spread by swathes of "young people" hitting the pub, getting trolled is a myth. The spread comes from people doing normal everyday things - going to school, going to university, living in a care home.

If you accept that education settings and care homes are venues that are vulnerable to the spread of covid I’m not entirely clear on how you have come to the conclusion that pubs aren’t?

The examples you used are considered necessary and going to the pub isn’t. The compromise is allowing pubs open for meals. It’s still risky but it’s a nod at allowing an element of risk because there’s a tangible benefit.

It’s not that I don’t sympathise, I really do, but lines have to be drawn and unfortunately people will fall on the losing side. There’s no value in drawing false conclusions though.

Because with my household (mostly just dp and I but we have DD's heading back from university soon) we would go to the drinking only pub then somewhere else for food then perhaps another place after in the past. If we have to eat we will only go to one venue as I'm not a complete pig! I'm very concerned for our favourite pub as they don't serve food, hoping that they have done a deal with a local food van or two so we can go there. Pretty sure we are in tier 2 as whilst the local infection rate is low, we'll be lumped in with the rest of the unitary authority and the neighbouring town (20 miles away mind you) is higher as is the city nearby (10 miles and the county stretches to the city limits, new developments are now in the county technically despite affecting our county rate!)

@BlackLambAndGreyFalcoln
I've never been asked proof of address, just as well because I haven't changed my driving licence yet as I own two properties technically. We also have university aged dc whose id's have term time addresses on.