Lockdown ban on wedding kisses ‘bizarre'
The long-term impact of Covid meant that weddings included more outdoor ceremonies and shorter timescales for planning, a humanist leader told the inquiry.
The inquiry's worship and life events impact hearings began on Tuesday, with evidence from faith leaders from different religions including the Catholic Church, the Jewish Council of Scotland, the Free Church of Scotland as well as from the Humanist Society Scotland and the .
Fraser Sutherland, of the Humanist Society Scotland, said as recently as 2024 weddings were going ahead which had been postponed during the pandemic, and branded some restrictions 'bizarre'.
Mr Sutherland said: 'We did also see a significant increase in small weddings. There were quite a lot of people who were relieved they didn't have to have a big wedding.
'The restrictions for masks for couples was removed. There was a bizarre circumstance where there was no kissing allowed.
'In humanist tradition, most of those couples would be already living together.'
All the faith leaders said they were dedicated to sticking to the restrictions. However, Mr Sutherland said that some venues were desperate to generate income and would allow people to break the rules.
Mr Sutherland said: 'There was a lot of push-back particularly as the pandemic pressed on, from couples, from wedding venues, who were keen to get as many people in as possible.
'We had a lot of difficult situations where couples were being told one thing by venues, our celebrant turns up and there's 50 people when there should be 20. We had couples saying 'everyone here is exempt, around mask wearing'.'
The Rev Donald MacDonald ,of the Free Church of Scotland, based in the Isle of Skye, said: 'We tend to get a number of elopement weddings every year – they came to an end when lockdown was announced. All these arrangements in place for a year to 18 months had to be cancelled.
'Others delayed planning of their weddings. We did schedule a meeting with government representatives to try to argue for permission of having weddings – within our tradition a number of folk moving in together is not an option before marriage.'
Ephraim Borowski, of the Jewish Council of Scotland, said: 'It might have been useful to have a hotline, or some kind of exception-granting mechanism, completely general, which would give us a definite answer, I think that would have helped.'
The Rt Rev Brian McGee, of the Bishops' Conference of Scotland, said that NHS workers were deprived of pastoral care in hospitals, along with sick or dying people, owing to restrictions.
He said that mass could only be celebrated in a church, and that faith leaders were not consulted about the decision to close places of worship in the second lockdown.
Mr McGee said: 'We've talked about ceremonies but when people were in hospital, they were looked after by NHS staff who were in fear for their own lives.
'When people are sick and they're nervous they would want the comfort of a visit, some pastoral care and prayers being said for them.
'I know the difficulty for that and infection control but could there have been more consideration given.'
The impact of restrictions on funeral rites was compared to 'physical pain' by other religious leaders, the inquiry heard.
Omar Afzal, from the Scottish Association of Mosques, said: 'I would describe the effect of not being able to fulfil religious rites as almost like physical pain in the effect it had.'
Ravi Ladva, from the Scottish Hindu Foundation, said: 'We didn't question why only six members are allowed in the crematorium. A lot of our community members are on the front line of the NHS and public services. As much as I would like to mourn, my duty to my community and the rest of Scotland comes first.
'Through the pandemic we were fortunate to scramble together online services where it still maintained some semblance of community.
'It does require review and has not been forgotten how we were treated and our practises and rituals were portrayed.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
5 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Illinois' rental assistance program has restarted. Here's what you need to know.
Struggling to pay your rent? Need to get paid for rent you are owed? There's a solution for those issues again after a two-month hiatus: Illinois' court-based rental assistance program reopened on July 31. While the program saw a third of its funds wiped away for the 2026 fiscal year that began July 1, $50 million in state funds are available. The reduction came as rents in Chicago keep rising and after the state grappled with serious fiscal challenges when balancing its budget this year, issues exacerbated by a federal government focused on axing spending. State lawmakers cut spending in various areas beyond housing as well. The state rental assistance program was previously funded by federal aid distributed during the COVID-19 pandemic and focused on helping tenants experiencing COVID-19-related hardships and at risk of eviction. The program has helped tens of thousands of renters and landlords since its inception in 2020. In the 2025 fiscal year, the inaugural year as a state-funded effort, more than $63 million in aid was distributed to help more than 7,680 families facing eviction. Around 39% of aided households were extremely low income, earning less than $36,000 a year for a household of four, the state said. The need was greater than the Illinois Housing Development Authority, the group in charge of administering the funds, expected, the agency said, which is why the program closed about three weeks before the end of the last fiscal year. Eviction filings in Cook County have hovered around pre-pandemic levels since 2022. Here's what you need to know about the state's court-based rental assistance program: Eligible tenants have to make 80% or less of the area median income and do not have to be facing a COVID-19-related hardship. For a household of four in Chicago, the income eligibility threshold is $95,900 or less, according to the Chicago Department of Housing's area median income calculations. For this year's round of assistance, the state said tenants will be ineligible if they have received aid in the last 18 months. Renters do not have to prove their citizenship status and must have an active eviction case due to nonpayment of rent to qualify. Housing providers are not allowed to evict tenants during the grant's coverage period for nonpayment of rent. For tenants whose landlords are unwilling to participate in the program, the state offers up to two months of future rent payments to help them find a new place to live. Renters in Chicago and Cook County maintain the right to stay in their homes if they pay their debts in full to their landlord at any time before an official eviction order is filed. Tenants and landlords can receive up to $10,000 in rental assistance per eviction case. This is a reduction from last year's $15,000 ceiling when the program was better funded. Kristin Faust, the Illinois Housing Development Authority's executive director, previously told the Tribune this decision was made based on data from last year's program and conversations with legal aid, tenants and landlords. The average grant amount last year was around $8,300, or eight months of rent. The authority estimates about 6,500 households will be able to receive assistance this year. The money can go toward paying past-due rent, up to $700 in court costs — up from $500 last year — and up to two months of future rent. To apply for the Illinois Court-Based Rental Assistance Program, go to The court-based rental assistance program is just one aspect of the state's eviction diversion program, known formally as the Early Resolution Program. Tenants and small landlords can also receive legal aid to help settle eviction cases before they go to trial. Those resources can be found at or by calling (855) 956-5763. The central hub for eviction help in the state is a website called Eviction Help Illinois: There are also separate rental assistance dollars allocated to the Illinois Department of Human Services, with $89.5 million total (including the $50 million court-based program) earmarked to support those efforts this fiscal year, the state said. More information for IDHS housing support programs can be found here: A three-year Chicago pilot program aiding low-income households with legal representation was recently extended through the end of the year thanks to carryover funds from its initial grant (federal stimulus money from the pandemic era) and city dollars, said Michelle Gilbert, legal and policy director for Law Center for Better Housing, one of the organizations involved in the program. The city will need to appropriate more funds in next year's budget (starting Jan. 1, 2026) for the program to continue.
Boston Globe
6 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Forget about Epstein. This 20-point polling gap should really worry Trump.
Almost impressively, Trump has gone on the offensive to push the Epstein story (and the awkward ties to his former friend) out of the daily news cycle. In recent weeks, we've seen aggressive ICE raids, threats to charge former President Barack Obama with treason, gerrymandering fights across the country, a federal takeover of the Washington police force, and now a high-profile meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The tactic seems to be working: Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But Trump can't simply wish away persistent inflation concerns — both real and perceived. And in an environment where economic sentiment often drives elections, this could soon become a much bigger problem for Trump and Republicans. Advertisement The latest government report showed a key measure of inflation Advertisement Polls suggest voters have noticed. Trump's approval rating has been sliding since April. Today, about 46 percent of Americans approve of his job performance, while 52 percent disapprove, according to the In other words, the political danger here is not speculative. It's already measurable. It's also, like the Epstein problem, self-inflicted. Trump clearly fueled the Epstein controversy, both while out of office and now through his decision to break a campaign promise. Economists say his policies are doing the same for inflation. Tariffs have always been politically risky; they function as a tax on imports that eventually trickles down to consumers. Trump, however, has shown no sign of abandoning them. It's worth noting the contrast with Joe Biden's presidency, when inflation became a central political liability heading into the midterms and last year's election. Biden's inflation spike was largely attributed to snarled supply chains as the economy reopened from the pandemic and the spike in oil prices from the Ukraine war, exacerbated by the massive COVID relief spending he pushed. By comparison, Trump's inflation problem appears to be rooted more completely in his own policy choices, particularly on trade. Advertisement The irony is that Trump's 2024 victory was powered more by economic discontent than any other factor. Now, less than a year into his second term, those same voters may be reassessing that assumption as prices continue to rise. Two questions loom. First, what, if anything, will Trump do to bring prices down? So far, there's little indication he plans to soften his tariff stance. Second, will Democrats seize this moment to hammer inflation as a clear and objective failure of Trump's leadership? History suggests they might and that voters could respond. The Epstein headlines may fade, but prices for a wide variety of consumer goods don't appear to be. James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump targets bolstering of US emergency drug reserve
US President Donald Trump has ordered the bolstering of the country's Strategic Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients Reserve (SAPIR) with important drugs, aligning with his wider ambition to reduce reliance on imported pharmaceutical products. The executive order, signed on 13 August, will see the active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) of around 26 'critical drugs' added to the SAPIR. Trump has directed the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) to curate the list of drugs whose APIs will be stored. The office of the ASPR is within the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and is responsible for safeguarding drugs involved in the country's public health strategies. The SAPIR was established in 2020 by the Trump administration in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The reserve is supposed to have nearly two years' worth of medicine supply for the most important treatments approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but a lack of investment means it has been near-empty for the past few years. The White House blames the Biden administration for failing to advance domestic production or fill the SAPIR, 'despite spending billions on supply chain initiatives'. Trump has requested a shorter timeframe for how long the repository should be able to provide the 26 drugs in the event of an emergency. The ASPR is tasked with obtaining a six-month supply of the critical APIs. It also instructed to update the 2022 list of 86 essential medicines, with a six-month supply planned too. The executive order has asked the ASPR to preferentially source the API via 'domestically manufactured' means. However, the office might have its work cut out to find these providers, given how reliant the US is on importing APIs. Of the manufacturers that produce APIs used in FDA-approved products, only 11% are based in the US. Around 43% of branded pharmaceutical API come from the EU. In a statement, the White House said the move to fill the SAPIR with more drugs 'addresses supply chain vulnerabilities'. A spokesperson added: 'Restoring capacity for domestic production of essential pharmaceutical products is essential to safeguarding national health and security against global supply chain disruptions.' The SAPIR executive order is part of Trump's strategy to bolster domestic pharma manufacturing. This has mainly been mediated via tariffs and economic policies. Last week, the FDA introduced a new scheme that will streamline the introduction of new pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities in the US. The PreCheck programme, unveiled by the agency on 7 August, comprises a two-phase approach to facilitate new US drug manufacturing facilities. Big pharma has been responding to Trump's pressurised calls by outlaying significant funds to boost US manufacturing sites. Johnson & Johnson is set to invest $55bn over the next four years, including a $2bn biologics production site in North Carolina that promises to create 500 jobs. Roche outlaid a similar amount, planning $50bn worth of investment in the US, which will generate more than 1,000 jobs in new and expanded facilities. "Trump targets bolstering of US emergency drug reserve" was originally created and published by Pharmaceutical Technology, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
