If or when the movement restrictions come into force, the supervising police can be said to be on their way to Alko. That should be enough in a situation where many other trips are banned, says political editor Timo Haapala.
Sanna Marinin (sd) The government seemed to get Marin’s demand for restrictions on movement and where to go in the future and with whom.
You can already guess that two professions are ringing if or when the bill comes into force with a decree – probably sometime after Easter:
1. The Parliamentary Constitution Committee
2. The Finnish police
Parliamentary the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, with its exceptions, has to go through a restriction proposal that seems insane in many respects.
The committee has sprinkled its head on a puma that it will get its hands on early next week.
The core question is this: are the disadvantages of restrictions greater than their benefits when fundamental rights are being addressed in Finnish conditions in historically severe ways?
The question is in place, and more and more questions are emerging all the time.
Movement is basically limited to the yard, but there are many, really many exceptions. Even so much that the real purpose of the exception is obscured.
Control is unclear.
If you decide to set off, and the police stop, so the easiest explanation is to tell you that you are on your way to the liquor store. Alcohol is classified as food, so it must also be sufficient to justify a trade trip.
The show allows the purchase of food and products that are regularly sold in grocery stores, pharmacies, gas stations and kiosks. Alcoholic beverages are by nature foods.
At the same time The specialty stores in Helsinki, Vantaa, Espoo, Kauniainen and Turku are ringing.
The doors may be open, but the customer has no reason / permission to enter them.
In Uusimaa, the turnover of specialty stores is about one billion euros a week.
Disadvantages and benefits?
So this is what a member of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs will be asking next week.
What about the police then? No one can control the massive ban in any way, but the police are expected to do so.
The Commissioner, who was reached by the IS, considered, for example, how to deal with passengers waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Commuting is allowed in the middle of it all, but what kind of rally is involved when there are a dozen passengers waiting for a bus on the side of the road?
They are hardly even related to each other; many can have running shoes on their feet…
There are other problems. Police are also concerned that police officers have not been vaccinated, even though they are the ones on the front lines.
Mask obsession is his own thing. The mask obligation applies to those born before 2007, ie hangers included to prove age. Otherwise, the fine of 40 euros will fluctuate.
The restrictive cage is also ideologically interesting during the red-green government. For example, you can go to a owner-occupied cottage, but if a low-income family has been able to save money for a week’s rented cottage after Easter, the trip is prohibited by law.
In the Committee on Constitutional Affairs therefore, even more precise information is expected from the ministries so that the committee can measure the risk-benefit balance, ie whether the restrictions on movement are reasonable.
And would there be easier ways?
This is what the committee was thinking when the restaurant opening restrictions were granted an extension. Some are still wondering whether the reasons for the continuation of the closure decision are sufficient, as no bomb-proof information has been provided by the government or authorities to justify the decision.
In terms of timing, the government is already late, as no restrictions will come into force by Easter.
That is, after Easter, it will be examined whether there is a need for a regulation enacting the laws.
At least The Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District (Hus) should not be asked, as the answer seems to depend on who answers the phone.
Instead, the Department of Health and Welfare (THL) is already obediently walking along government lines, as evidenced by the director Mika Salmisen from the face.
The basic question, even in the midst of a very serious corona situation, is whether such harsh measures should be put in place in a situation where 80-90% of citizens would certainly believe in recommendations, but a small proportion would not.
Would it have been easier, for example, to close the public areas of shopping centers and coldly restrict freedom of assembly than to stand up, so to speak, in front of a tree?
And it should be notedthat the seriousness of the situation is not disputed. No way. And something needs to be done.
But could the government have started this rollout even earlier, so that the movement restrictions would not be driven again by sweat in the hat and the glasses in a hurry to the finish line in a hurry?
In principle, there would have been a year for this as well.
Perhaps that famous corona fist could have presented this as well, but sorry: the fist should not be mentioned any further than among one’s own family in the courtyard, far from the Government Castle.
Many things have changed over the years.
A year ago, the government was given coronation peace, a time of uncritical action. The opposition was also quiet and gave the government peace of mind.
During the year, the opposition has woken up, but disagreements have also crept inside the government and are no longer leaving. It was seen in the erection of this containment operation and will continue to be seen.
Source site www.is.fi