Tag Archives: coronavirus

This afternoon.

Grafton Street, Dublin 2

Rollingnews

Meanwhile…

From top: Leo Varadkar in the Phoenix Park, Dublin last Snday; Deputy Assistant Secretary General at the Department of Taoiseach Elizabeth Canavan

“Outdoor spaces and tourism sites, including car parks beaches and trails will be opened, where people can move around freely and where social distancing can be maintained. If you’re visiting a public amenity, try not to stay too long at the site or have picnics. Please do your exercise and then go home.”

Deputy Assistant Secretary General at the Department of Taoiseach, Elizabeth Canavan on May 18

Fluffybiscuits writes:

Leo contravening the goverment’s own advice: No picnics in the park?

Yesterday: Sunday In The Park With Leo

Irish taoiseach Leo Varadkar denies picnic with friends was Covid-19 rule breach (The Guardian)

Rollingnews

This afternoon.

Seriously.

Anyone?

Update:

Last night.

Prime Time on RTÉ One.

Coronavirus: Could there be a second wave? (BBC)

Trump says U.S. won’t shut down again if there’s second wave of coronavirus (CNBC)

Today’s The Cork Echo

This morning.

Via The Cork Echo:

Dr Mary Favier, who is President of the Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP), said that while changes to testing criteria meant that GPs could refer a wider number of suspected cases for testing, in addition to contacts of confirmed cases, that she was referring just a handful of people for testing weekly.

“You can really tell it has died back,” she said

Dr Favier also pointed out that sentinel practices which monitor influenza like illness (ILI) rates in Ireland were also seeing “pretty low” levels.

Cork GP referring fewer patients for coronavirus testing but warns people to remain alert to symptoms (The Echo)

Earlier: Dan Boyle: New Cork City

Meanwhile…

This morning’s New York Post.

End New York City’s lockdown now! (New York Post)

Dr Cillian De Gascun, Director of the National Virus Reference Laboratory

This morning.

On RTÉ Radio One’s Today with Sarah McInerney...

Further to confusion concerning the risks of  having the same people in the same room for a meeting for over two hours, Dr Cillian De Gascun, Director of the National Virus Reference Laboratory, said:

“So I think there are two separate issues which may have become conflated. So firstly, the two-hour is public health guidance around people who are gathered in an enclosed space together in essence.

“So I think the analogy that I would kindly use is…members of the royal family don’t travel together in case something terrible happens and you knock out the whole family together.

“So what we’re suggesting from a point of view of public health guidance is that if you’re gathered in a room of people for more than two hours, if one of those individuals subsequently becomes a confirmed case of Covid-19, everybody in that room then, if one of them subsequently becomes a confirmed case of, will be a contact and therefore will have to self-isolate for 14 days or two weeks.

“….so if they’re very senior individuals or if they’re providing a very key role in the organisation, then that key role has to stop for two weeks.

That’s really where the guidance comes from and that’s why in the context of the committee was the idea of not having the Chief Medical Officer, the CEO of the HSE and the Secretary General of the Department of Health all taken out of commission at the same time, should a case be reported in the Dail.

“So what we’re suggesting is that the work day can continue as normal but in order to manage the risk to an organisation is that what you might do, is that people working in groups that can function together would also, if one individual in that group should subsequently become unwell or should become a confirmed case and the rest of the group has to self-isolate as close contacts, that your whole organisation is not impacted by that single case.

“So it’s really about having, you know, staggered working hours, perhaps shift work, that people would take breaks at different times but perhaps with the same individuals with whom they’d be working. You wouldn’t have a single individual perhaps like say a management figure who would cross over, across the two or three different shifts of different groups of people because then if that person becomes infected then you lose your whole team.

“So that’s really where the two hours comes from.

“So it’s certainly safe to work with people for more than two hours in the same physical location. But, as I said, we’re trying to minimise the impact of a single case on the running of an organisation.”

Anyone?

Meanwhile…

Hmm.

Rollingnews

This evening.

All flights?

Mandatory?


At a Cabinet Subcommittee on Covid-19 are from left:  Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe, Minister for Health Simon Harris and Chief Medical Officer of the HSE Dr Tony Holohan; Ken Foxe

The Department of Health has refused to release copies of briefings and submissions for Minister Simon Harris relating to the spread of coronavirus.

The Department has said “the public interest would be best served by refusal of these records at this time”.

Separately, the HSE is also refusing to release a copy of the “draft unsigned agreement” between themselves and the operators of private hospitals.

Ken Foxe writes:

Access to that record has been refused under five different sections of the FOI Act: Section 29 on deliberations, Section 30 on functions and negotiations, Section 31, Section 35 on information obtained in confidence, and Section 36 on commercial sensitivity:

Section 29 has been invoked on the basis that the agreement is still under deliberation. Release of it could “impact negatively on the integrity” of that:

Section 30 has been invoked because the record is the subject of ongoing negotiations. Release of the record could be expected to disclose negotiating positions:

Section 35 and 36 have been invoked because the record contains “confidential information” and because they consider it to be commercially sensitive:

The HSE said that the public interest would not be served by release of the record. They said it would place them at a disadvantage in “its efforts to maximise its use of public funds and its capacity in response to the Covid-19 public health emergency”

For good measure, they also invoked Section 31 saying agreement was subject of confidential communications for the purposes of obtaining legal advice. They believe the record is “subject to legal professional privilege”. No public interest test is required for this exemption:

We suggested that the Dept/HSE could simply publish these records to their websites and we would be happy to withdraw our requests. That hasn’t happened and both will now go for internal review.

Good times.

Right To Know