networkn:

 

You are talking about two different issues here. You are talking about how "bad" the restaurant industry is, and how many low quality hospo places there are, but they existed prior to the pandemic and with appropriate guidance could plan and potentially remain open afterwards as well, paying those people who work for them meaning those people will not become a burden on the Government/taxpayer in the short term. Without some idea of how the lockdown ends, how can they plan? Communication is the key here. They are asking for clear communication. Even if the news is bad, then people can plan

 

Nope. They are trying to use the COVID-19 pandemic, which has exposed and exacerbated the underlying issues across the industry, as a means to extract money and undue consideration from others when there are presently greater priorities. I accept that no matter how well-run you are, against the background of this crisis, one will need some help. But it's unfair and unrealistic to act like providers of such discretionary services ought to be given the priority that she wants and to make bland, unjustified statements like the government's "ongoing indecisiveness and lack of planning" when these people have also benefited from unprecedented levels of support, paid for by their fellow taxpayers.

And she's not just asking for clear communication. Did you listen to her whole spiel? I did. She demanded that the government as soon as possible deliver the right messaging that it's safe for people to go out and eat and spend. No!! The government should devote resources to fight the pandemic and when it is actually under control or eliminated, we can start investigating lower priorities like how to get pubs and restaurants going. Contingency planning and risk management is part and parcel of doing business -- this woman wants to use lots of public resources to help her members do that, whilst simultaneously crapping on others who are contributing to their support. 

And I don't find that acceptable.