To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
It approaches JRMs "Common Sense" remarks about the Grenfell tower dead.
No. It's like defending those who ignored the stay in your room guidance in Grenfell and made the decision to evacuate. I'm not the one judging anyone.
If you're worried about safety then guidance is that. Guidance. Do whatever you think is right. If you think stating still is right do that. If you think getting to safety is right do that.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Friends in London, or maybe his sister could have driven down to London.
What I don't understand is why Dom just didn't just hire a taxi or wrangle a limo - he's got the cash and contacts.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
There has been a massive practical gap in the guidance, which covers stuff like hardware shops but does not cover what for millions of people is life's number one priority: the safety, care and welfare of children in the family. In the real world it is an overriding priority above all others. The regulations and guidance have sounded like things drafted by men with nannies or childless or divorced men. It covers stuff like access in split families but nothing about the daily practicalities of juggling work, ill parents, ill children, school off, nursery closed and all that.
If it emerges that this really is about child care and welfare he will get away with it. If not, I don't see how he can.
This is an order of magnitude worse than Ferguson & Calderwood. Driving 350 miles whilst you've either got or could be carrying (Due to his wife) the virus. It's not only breaking the rules, it's breaking the rules for the precise medical reason the rules were put in place ! Even with no lockdown, only the thickest or most arrogant would embark on a 350 mile trip for any reason whatsoever if there was a good chance they had the virus. Dom isn't thick, but he treats us all for fools and the Gov't is diminished every minute it tries to defend such vanity.
Ferguson was about having an affair. Dom was about looking after children.
Caring for children trumps having an affair. Caring for children isn't illegal.
Consenting adults can do what they like in this country Phil, here's a clue - the lockdown is for medical and not moral reasons. Unless you want a morality police ?
Indeed but it's not about morality, having an affair isn't a reasonable excuse. Caring for children is.
Bingo! You have just illustrated why the government's communication on this - guidelines/laws/rules - has been so shocking.
All this "just use common sense how hard can it be" guff results in exactly this. Everyone determining what reasonable means.
I believe in treating people like adults.
Every adult, every parent should think for themselves what reasonable means.
If I was worried for my children I would do whatever it takes to make sure my children were safe. Whatever it takes.
Whatever it takes. Indeed. And what if it was really really important that you go off to shag your mistress.
You get to be the person who determines the relative importance of every activity?
Everyone gets to make their own decisions.
In my eyes, as a parent, the well being of children trumps shagging your mistress. If you think otherwise that's your choice.
A society can't function with everyone making their own decisions.
Should we refer to the guidelines or the law or the rules for clarity?
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
It approaches JRMs "Common Sense" remarks about the Grenfell tower dead.
I think its worse. JRMs comment was insensitive and wrong but probably not dangerous.
The idea that parents have an automatic exemption to quarantine of a deadly and highly infectious disease on the basis of ill do anything for my kids will cause thousands of deaths if it is widely accepted.
Separated parents were granted an exception from lockdown...
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
I’ve already said I wouldn’t criticise him if he was a normal person.
However he isn’t a normal person, he’s a highly influential advisor to the Government, who has been telling people to stay at home under the same circumstances.
You’re arguing about something entirely different.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
He broke the rules. The rules are there to save lives, and he is part of the government responsible for enforcing the rules. Therefore, if he doesn't resign the government is saying that either the rules are not important, or that they don't apply to people like Cummings. If he and his wife had both got so sick that they couldn't look after their kid, and a family member had come to stay with them or come to pick the kid up, I don't think anyone would be complaining. What happened instead was that Cummings, who was either already showing symptoms or had a high chance of infection (the story keeps changing so who knows) got in a car and drove 300 miles to Durham. Presumably stopping on the way, and possibly staying with his elderly parents (again, this is unclear). If you think that that is going to wash with the public, I think you are very much mistaken, especially as the government has been happy to see others resign for smaller infractions, and has expected the public to obey the rules in all cases. BTW I have three kids, and I think what Cummings did was unacceptable.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
This is an order of magnitude worse than Ferguson & Calderwood. Driving 350 miles whilst you've either got or could be carrying (Due to his wife) the virus. It's not only breaking the rules, it's breaking the rules for the precise medical reason the rules were put in place ! Even with no lockdown, only the thickest or most arrogant would embark on a 350 mile trip for any reason whatsoever if there was a good chance they had the virus. Dom isn't thick, but he treats us all for fools and the Gov't is diminished every minute it tries to defend such vanity.
Ferguson was about having an affair. Dom was about looking after children.
Caring for children trumps having an affair. Caring for children isn't illegal.
Consenting adults can do what they like in this country Phil, here's a clue - the lockdown is for medical and not moral reasons. Unless you want a morality police ?
Indeed but it's not about morality, having an affair isn't a reasonable excuse. Caring for children is.
What? He couldn't stay in London and care for his child?
He had to go to county Durham instead, where the only extra help he could get was someone dropping food outside his door.
Dominic Cummings couldn't find anyone in the metropolis to drop food outside his door? Couldn't his friend Boris, the Prime Minuster, have arranged it?
Risible.
I live v close to Cummings. You can get almost anything on Deliveroo.
(Except pork pies, I was just looking).
Dom doesn't look like someone who consumes pork pies. Mind you, it might have been an issue for Boris
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
I've been saying think for yourself.
So when we have a national crisis, we don´t need a government to give us any guidance? A bit anarchist that, I think!
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
It approaches JRMs "Common Sense" remarks about the Grenfell tower dead.
I think its worse. JRMs comment was insensitive and wrong but probably not dangerous.
The idea that parents have an automatic exemption to quarantine of a deadly and highly infectious disease on the basis of ill do anything for my kids will cause thousands of deaths if it is widely accepted.
Separated parents were granted an exception from lockdown...
This line from the government - 'It's okay to break the lockdown if you think it's good for your kids' - is staggering. It turns adherence to the lockdown into a mere lifestyle choice. The government is destroying the very social and ethical foundations upon which the lockdown was predicated.
Putting aside the technalities of the rules, the actual politics of this are fairly simple, it looks awful for the government to be defending what is at best rule bending. Politcally I think Cummings should have been sacked last night. The government is really screwing this up, and there will be consequences should we need to tighten control measures at some point. Will the public comply with rules that they now expect people in government to break?
The problem is that the constant criticism of Cummings for doing so much as waking up in the morning, has make him pretty much unsackable now he has actually done something that might be considered wrong.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Friends in London, or maybe his sister could have driven down to London.
What I don't understand is why Dom just didn't just hire a taxi or wrangle a limo - he's got the cash and contacts.
There are sources downthread suggesting he did indeed hire an Albanian taxi driver, who himself was widely travelled and had some good stories to spread during the journey.
Conservatives have gained Nelson and Cone (now Pendle) and Rossendale from Labour in BBC Parliament's 1979 general election replay, the first Tory gains of the night
This line from the government - 'It's okay to break the lockdown if you think it's good for your kids' - is staggering. It turns adherence to the lockdown into a mere lifestyle choice. The government is destroying the very social and ethical foundations upon which the lockdown was predicated.
Putting aside the technalities of the rules, the actual politics of this are fairly simple, it looks awful for the government to be defending what is at best rule bending. Politcally I think Cummings should have been sacked last night. The government is really screwing this up, and there will be consequences should we need to tighten control measures at some point. Will the public comply with rules that they now expect people in government to break?
The problem is that the constant criticism of Cummings for doing so much as waking up in the morning, has make him pretty much unsackable now he has actually done something that might be considered wrong.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
It's been sat on until the government ratings went negative.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
I've been saying think for yourself.
You’ve been defending every thing the Government has done without any degree of independent thought or critical thinking.
Not true. I've criticised them when I find it appropriate to do so.
This line from the government - 'It's okay to break the lockdown if you think it's good for your kids' - is staggering. It turns adherence to the lockdown into a mere lifestyle choice. The government is destroying the very social and ethical foundations upon which the lockdown was predicated.
Putting aside the technalities of the rules, the actual politics of this are fairly simple, it looks awful for the government to be defending what is at best rule bending. Politcally I think Cummings should have been sacked last night. The government is really screwing this up, and there will be consequences should we need to tighten control measures at some point. Will the public comply with rules that they now expect people in government to break?
The problem is that the constant criticism of Cummings for doing so much as waking up in the morning, has make him pretty much unsackable now he has actually done something that might be considered wrong.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
I've been saying think for yourself.
You’ve been defending every thing the Government has done without any degree of independent thought or critical thinking.
Not true. I've criticised them when I find it appropriate to do so.
You say this all the time, but you haven’t.
But I have. It's a fact.
You can keep saying that but it doesn’t make it true. You’re not Dominic Cummings.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
I've been saying think for yourself.
So when we have a national crisis, we don´t need a government to give us any guidance? A bit anarchist that, I think!
When we have a national crisis we need guidelines and for people to think for themselves. Its always important to think for yourself and it's more important than ever to do so during a crisis.
This line from the government - 'It's okay to break the lockdown if you think it's good for your kids' - is staggering. It turns adherence to the lockdown into a mere lifestyle choice. The government is destroying the very social and ethical foundations upon which the lockdown was predicated.
Putting aside the technalities of the rules, the actual politics of this are fairly simple, it looks awful for the government to be defending what is at best rule bending. Politcally I think Cummings should have been sacked last night. The government is really screwing this up, and there will be consequences should we need to tighten control measures at some point. Will the public comply with rules that they now expect people in government to break?
The problem is that the constant criticism of Cummings for doing so much as waking up in the morning, has make him pretty much unsackable now he has actually done something that might be considered wrong.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
It's been sat on until the government ratings went negative.
The government ratings were always going to go negative, and massively so. Wait until a couple of million leave the furlough scheme and move to UC, as their job no longer exists. Eventually the costs of dealing with a pandemic have to be faced, up until now that's most certainly not been the case - see Sunak's ratings for details!
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
I've been saying think for yourself.
So when we have a national crisis, we don´t need a government to give us any guidance? A bit anarchist that, I think!
When we have a national crisis we need guidelines and for people to think for themselves. Its always important to think for yourself and it's more important than ever to do so during a crisis.
And you’re perfectly entitled to think that, but those were not the rules. At the time, the rules were that you stayed at home under ALL circumstances if you had coronavirus symptoms.
Dom Cummings has ignored his own Government’s rules as he is a hypocrite and believes he is above it all, unlike the plebs.
This line from the government - 'It's okay to break the lockdown if you think it's good for your kids' - is staggering. It turns adherence to the lockdown into a mere lifestyle choice. The government is destroying the very social and ethical foundations upon which the lockdown was predicated.
Putting aside the technalities of the rules, the actual politics of this are fairly simple, it looks awful for the government to be defending what is at best rule bending. Politcally I think Cummings should have been sacked last night. The government is really screwing this up, and there will be consequences should we need to tighten control measures at some point. Will the public comply with rules that they now expect people in government to break?
The problem is that the constant criticism of Cummings for doing so much as waking up in the morning, has make him pretty much unsackable now he has actually done something that might be considered wrong.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
The media need to sell news. Cummings makes news. I think they want him damaged not gone, hence the timing.
This line from the government - 'It's okay to break the lockdown if you think it's good for your kids' - is staggering. It turns adherence to the lockdown into a mere lifestyle choice. The government is destroying the very social and ethical foundations upon which the lockdown was predicated.
Putting aside the technalities of the rules, the actual politics of this are fairly simple, it looks awful for the government to be defending what is at best rule bending. Politcally I think Cummings should have been sacked last night. The government is really screwing this up, and there will be consequences should we need to tighten control measures at some point. Will the public comply with rules that they now expect people in government to break?
The problem is that the constant criticism of Cummings for doing so much as waking up in the morning, has make him pretty much unsackable now he has actually done something that might be considered wrong.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
Tories also gain Putney from Labour and David Mellor enters Parliament for the first time in the 1979 replay
David Mellor switched his allegiance from Fulham to Chelsea, decades before David Cameron made it fashionable for MPs to support any team wearing similar colours.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
I've been saying think for yourself.
You’ve been defending every thing the Government has done without any degree of independent thought or critical thinking.
Not true. I've criticised them when I find it appropriate to do so.
You say this all the time, but you haven’t.
But I have. It's a fact.
You can keep saying that but it doesn’t make it true. You’re not Dominic Cummings.
It's true. I can give examples. I've given examples when it come up in the past.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Try telling them that. Every single person who cared desperately about stopping Brexit is mysteriously jumping up and down on Twitter looking for revenge on Cummings...
The Gov't had best hope there is no second wave now, it's authority on anything socially lockdown related has evaporated.
Surely we should all hope there's no second wave, not just the Govt?
Or do you think some are hoping for a second wave so it embarrasses Cummings & the Govt?
There's a lot of people who give the impression of wishing for a more serious crisis, if it means more problems for the government.
IMO they've got a good majority and have four years to turn things around, which is a very large but achievable task if they work hard at it. They're not going to lose support of their own MPs for a natural disaster - unless they do something really stupid, like extend the Brexit transition and get an eleven-figure bill for Euro bailouts.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
Depressed people NEED human contact. Cancer patients NEED check-ups. Family members NEED to attend funerals of loved ones.
What’s your point? Need has nothing to do with this.
This is all convenient bollocks for political effect.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
So quarantine is voluntary for parents?
Not what I said.
If my daughter needs something I leave the house to go get it. But only if my wife is at home to supervise her. Children need childcare and if you don't think so you're an idiot.
Germany is blaming cramped living conditions for abbatoir workers. We must hope it is not that the virus has spread to farm animals and then back to workers via aerosols from sawing carcasses.
I'm sure we're amazed that the exploitation of migrants features in this story:
Two Romanian former employees of a Bavarian slaughterhouse told the Guardian they were “not at all” surprised at the outbreaks.
“There were houses where you could find even 20 people,” said *Alex. “It takes one asymptomatic person in one house to spread the virus to everyone else. You could not isolate alone in a packed house.”
Bohl said the subcontractors often made extra money by renting out cheap buildings – such as former army barracks or office spaces – to a large number of workers.
Former slaughterhouse worker *Lucas said that during his employment with a subcontractor there were sometimes as many as five people to a room and conditions were “terrible”. “In the first house we had cockroaches and mice and in the second house the room was full of mould and we had no heat – in November – until they brought an electric heater.”
Remind me again about the EU and its 'level playing fields'.
The meat industry is a hell hole everywhere. Not entirely surprising that an industry that is centred on industrial scale killing should also treat humans so badly too. Been a vegetarian for 32 years and never regretted it.
Hitler was a vegetarian, it does not guarantee morality.
There are also plenty of excellent organic farms producing meat
Seems clear that if we didn't eat meat we would have avoided Covid-19, Sars, Ebola, HIV-Aids, swine flu...
We are all paying a heavy price for our refusal to stop eating animals. Unfortunately those of us that don't have to pay the same price.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
I've been saying think for yourself.
So when we have a national crisis, we don´t need a government to give us any guidance? A bit anarchist that, I think!
When we have a national crisis we need guidelines and for people to think for themselves. Its always important to think for yourself and it's more important than ever to do so during a crisis.
And you’re perfectly entitled to think that, but those were not the rules. At the time, the rules were that you stayed at home under ALL circumstances if you had coronavirus symptoms.
Dom Cummings has ignored his own Government’s rules as he is a hypocrite and believes he is above it all, unlike the plebs.
The Police have said no law was broken. Take it up with the Police.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
Depressed people NEED human contact. Cancer patients NEED check-ups. Family members NEED to attend funerals of loved ones.
What’s your point? Need has nothing to do with this.
This is all convenient bollocks for political effect.
People have skipped funerals of loved ones for this absolute horseshit to be dumped on them from a great height. Serious misstep by Rishi outriding for Cummings this morning too, his first one of the crisis perhaps.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
So quarantine is voluntary for parents?
Not what I said.
If my daughter needs something I leave the house to go get it. But only if my wife is at home to supervise her. Children need childcare and if you don't think so you're an idiot.
It is what you are saying. Parents can make their own mind up about quarantine.
This line from the government - 'It's okay to break the lockdown if you think it's good for your kids' - is staggering. It turns adherence to the lockdown into a mere lifestyle choice. The government is destroying the very social and ethical foundations upon which the lockdown was predicated.
Putting aside the technalities of the rules, the actual politics of this are fairly simple, it looks awful for the government to be defending what is at best rule bending. Politcally I think Cummings should have been sacked last night. The government is really screwing this up, and there will be consequences should we need to tighten control measures at some point. Will the public comply with rules that they now expect people in government to break?
The problem is that the constant criticism of Cummings for doing so much as waking up in the morning, has make him pretty much unsackable now he has actually done something that might be considered wrong.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
The media need to sell news. Cummings makes news. I think they want him damaged not gone, hence the timing.
Cummings is a media personality - it's a massive Westminster story, but I reckon three quarters of the country have never heard of him and have no idea who he is. He hasn't been a public face of anything, he's a back-room operative.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
So quarantine is voluntary for parents?
Not what I said.
If my daughter needs something I leave the house to go get it. But only if my wife is at home to supervise her. Children need childcare and if you don't think so you're an idiot.
So because YOUR DAUGHTER needs something, its okay to break quarantine rules, but if it’s somebody else who needs something, in which you can’t relate, it’s no longer OK?
These were not the rules. No matter how much you want to pretend that the rules in place for those quarantining with symptoms offered nuance, they did not.
Conservatives have gained Nelson and Cone (now Pendle) and Rossendale from Labour in BBC Parliament's 1979 general election replay, the first Tory gains of the night
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
Depressed people NEED human contact. Cancer patients NEED check-ups. Family members NEED to attend funerals of loved ones.
What’s your point? Need has nothing to do with this.
This is all convenient bollocks for political effect.
If it came.to a depressing person getting human contact or committing suicide then I'd hope they'd choose to get human contact. I wouldn't criticise anyone who made that choice.
If a cancer patient needs a checkup they should get it. The government have repeated that, only thing they're delaying is immunosuppressive therapy if that's what the clinicians advise.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
Depressed people NEED human contact. Cancer patients NEED check-ups. Family members NEED to attend funerals of loved ones.
What’s your point? Need has nothing to do with this.
This is all convenient bollocks for political effect.
If it came.to a depressing person getting human contact or committing suicide then I'd hope they'd choose to get human contact. I wouldn't criticise anyone who made that choice.
If a cancer patient needs a checkup they should get it. The government have repeated that, only thing they're delaying is immunosuppressive therapy if that's what the clinicians advise.
Family can and should attend funerals.
Am I being inconsistent?
Yes you’re being inconsistent, because you’re conflating your own position with that of the Government. You may believe that people should think for themselves, but that was not the Government’s position.
The Government’s position (in which Dom Cummings is part) was that if you had symptoms, you stayed at home. The end.
Wether you not you agree with that advice is neither here nor there, and as you know, I don’t agree with that advice.
On the 3rd of April - while Dom was swanning around the country, the family of that 13yo who died of Covid weren't able to go to his funeral because they were self isolating. No special government exemption for them, no minister looking at the case on the news and saying 'hang on a second'. The rules are definately just for the little people.
"Funeral of boy, 13, who died with Covid-19 held without self-isolating family UK News | Published: Apr 3, 2020
None of Ismail Mohamed Abdulwahab’s immediate family were able to attend after two of his six siblings began displaying symptoms of the virus.
Ismail, from Brixton, south London, died alone in hospital in the early hours of Monday."
Cummings will have to go, but he'll need to be dragged out whilst he clings on with his fingernails.
The trouble is, if he doesn't, the Government's whole lockdown message dissolves instantly.
We've now had a series of top advisors in Government personally ignore their own advice, and this hasn't gone unnoticed by the public.
"Looking after children" - if that is what it was, will dissolve the lockdown?
Which part of your precious guidelines state that it’s okay to travel 250 miles to look after your children in your second home in Durham rather than in London?
It says its OK to leave the home to avoid harm.
Being incapable of looking after a young child is harmful.
How do people without castles in Durham ever manage?
The other interesting thing this is going to highlight is that Cummings is every bit a member of the elite he pretends to castigate.
To be fair that’s exactly what @Philip_Thompson is saying. I guess the guidance must not have been clear, despite his assertions for weeks, as everyone is very confused.
Indeed PT is going further, by not "thinking ahead" parents who obeyed the quarantine without travelling to stay with relatives were reckless putting their childrens lives in mortal danger.
If cummings and his wife were seriously ill, and could not look after their child, then who should have?
Social services?
Yes, if it meant he wasn’t spreading the ‘Rona to the North East from grubby London. Literally the whole point of the lockdown.
Someone who doesn't have kids or hasn't got nieces and nephews speaks. Kids stay with family. End of discussion.
My lack of children is irrelevant. We both know that this trip had nothing to do with the kids—they just fancied being quarantined in the North East rather than in the Smoke.
Again someone without kids or nieces and nephews speaks. If my niece was in that situation I'd break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was looked after properly. My sister would break whatever rules necessary to ensure she was being properly looked after. I've had the virus, trust me it doesn't matter where you're doing the quarantine and recovery you see the the bedsheets and the bathroom, very little else.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
Max we agree that the lockdown is a farce, but it wasn’t at the time period we are talking about.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The child's three? That settles it for me then.
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
Depressed people NEED human contact. Cancer patients NEED check-ups. Family members NEED to attend funerals of loved ones.
What’s your point? Need has nothing to do with this.
This is all convenient bollocks for political effect.
If it came.to a depressing person getting human contact or committing suicide then I'd hope they'd choose to get human contact. I wouldn't criticise anyone who made that choice.
If a cancer patient needs a checkup they should get it. The government have repeated that, only thing they're delaying is immunosuppressive therapy if that's what the clinicians advise.
Family can and should attend funerals.
Am I being inconsistent?
Yes you’re being inconsistent, because you’re conflating your own position with that of the Government. You may believe that people should think for themselves, but that was not the Government’s position.
The Government’s position (in which Dom Cummings is part) was that if you had symptoms, you stayed at home. The end.
Wether you not you agree with that advice is neither here nor there, and as you know, I don’t agree with that advice.
As I've said all along - and as the government have said - guidelines are guidelines, law is law.
The Police enforce the law. Not guidelines.
If you judge something to be right for your situation that is against guidelines but within the law then that's your choice. The Police etc won't and shouldn't enforce guidelines and I've criticised them if they've tried to.
On the 3rd of April - while Dom was swanning around the country, the family of that 13yo who died of Covid weren't able to go to his funeral because they were self isolating. No special government exemption for them, no minister looking at the case on the news and saying 'hang on a second'. The rules are definately just for the little people.
"Funeral of boy, 13, who died with Covid-19 held without self-isolating family UK News | Published: Apr 3, 2020
None of Ismail Mohamed Abdulwahab’s immediate family were able to attend after two of his six siblings began displaying symptoms of the virus.
Ismail, from Brixton, south London, died alone in hospital in the early hours of Monday."
It’s the cover up that gets you. The increasingly convoluted retconning attempts from government ministers are just making the whole Cummings affair worse.
As I've said all along - and as the government have said - guidelines are guidelines, law is law.
The Police enforce the law. Not guidelines.
If you judge something to be right for your situation that is against guidelines but within the law then that's your choice. The Police etc won't and shouldn't enforce guidelines and I've criticised them if they've tried to.
The guidelines do not say “you should self-isolate if you have coronavirus symptoms unless you think you shouldn’t”.
On the 3rd of April - while Dom was swanning around the country, the family of that 13yo who died of Covid weren't able to go to his funeral because they were self isolating. No special government exemption for them, no minister looking at the case on the news and saying 'hang on a second'. The rules are definately just for the little people.
"Funeral of boy, 13, who died with Covid-19 held without self-isolating family UK News | Published: Apr 3, 2020
None of Ismail Mohamed Abdulwahab’s immediate family were able to attend after two of his six siblings began displaying symptoms of the virus.
Ismail, from Brixton, south London, died alone in hospital in the early hours of Monday."
@Philip_Thompson: are these people stupid for not attending this funeral?
No. I'm not judging anyone for their choices in a tragic circumstance. The law said they could, if they chose not to that's their choice and I respect it.
What part of I respect people making their own decisions are you struggling with? What's right for you and what's right for someone else may not be the same thing. I don't believe one size fits all.
PS Hancock and others said afterwards they found that story tragic and wished they'd made it clearer that people could attend funerals, which was always legal.
On the 3rd of April - while Dom was swanning around the country, the family of that 13yo who died of Covid weren't able to go to his funeral because they were self isolating. No special government exemption for them, no minister looking at the case on the news and saying 'hang on a second'. The rules are definately just for the little people.
"Funeral of boy, 13, who died with Covid-19 held without self-isolating family UK News | Published: Apr 3, 2020
None of Ismail Mohamed Abdulwahab’s immediate family were able to attend after two of his six siblings began displaying symptoms of the virus.
Ismail, from Brixton, south London, died alone in hospital in the early hours of Monday."
@Philip_Thompson: are these people stupid for not attending this funeral?
No. I'm not judging anyone for their choices in a tragic circumstance. The law said they could, if they chose not to that's their choice and I respect it.
What part of I respect people making their own decisions are you struggling with? What's right for you and what's right for someone else may not be the same thing. I don't believe one size fits all.
PS Hancock and others said afterwards they found that story tragic and wished they'd made it clearer that people could attend funerals, which was always legal.
I thought you said the guidance was always clear? I’m confused.
And anyone who is annoyed by the story is just going to ignore the lockdown.
Which ironically is what the Government wants and needs at the moment to try and get the economy going.
That's definitely not what they need. It doesn't help the economy if people go back to work and then the virus flares up again, and either they go back into lockdown or you have months of people not daring to go out for fear of catching it.
What they need is for people to follow increasingly *targeted* advice to keep the virus under control while restarting the economy. This is harder to police than blanket rules, and it needs more cooperation, not less.
Comments
If you're worried about safety then guidance is that. Guidance. Do whatever you think is right. If you think stating still is right do that. If you think getting to safety is right do that.
Dom (and the bonking professor) are being condemned by people who would break the same rules were they in that situation.
He had been very keen on that idea in early March, according to “sources”.
PP/Bf: 1/3 stay; 15/8 go.
Ladbrokes: 2/5, 7/4.
If it emerges that this really is about child care and welfare he will get away with it. If not, I don't see how he can.
However he isn’t a normal person, he’s a highly influential advisor to the Government, who has been telling people to stay at home under the same circumstances.
You’re arguing about something entirely different.
If he and his wife had both got so sick that they couldn't look after their kid, and a family member had come to stay with them or come to pick the kid up, I don't think anyone would be complaining. What happened instead was that Cummings, who was either already showing symptoms or had a high chance of infection (the story keeps changing so who knows) got in a car and drove 300 miles to Durham. Presumably stopping on the way, and possibly staying with his elderly parents (again, this is unclear). If you think that that is going to wash with the public, I think you are very much mistaken, especially as the government has been happy to see others resign for smaller infractions, and has expected the public to obey the rules in all cases.
BTW I have three kids, and I think what Cummings did was unacceptable.
The idea that the pair of them couldn’t look after their three year old son between the two of them is ridiculous.
The bit I still don't understand is how this story appears to have been sat on for over a month - if it had come out at the height of the crisis, there would have been a lot less discretion in the matter. Instead, it's clear that the PM values his advisor and doesn't want to lose him, given that his political and media opponents will be cheering from the rooftops if he goes.
Or do you think some are hoping for a second wave so it embarrasses Cummings & the Govt?
Dom Cummings has ignored his own Government’s rules as he is a hypocrite and believes he is above it all, unlike the plebs.
Free money.
Knowing my record on this kind of market though he'll be gone by sundown.
Who's?
If the child was older then they can look after themselves more. My youngest daughter is three, she needs CONSTANT supervision.
Three year olds need childcare. End of story.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/brexit-busting-ferry-launched-from-dublin-port-1.3468760
IMO they've got a good majority and have four years to turn things around, which is a very large but achievable task if they work hard at it. They're not going to lose support of their own MPs for a natural disaster - unless they do something really stupid, like extend the Brexit transition and get an eleven-figure bill for Euro bailouts.
Cancer patients NEED check-ups.
Family members NEED to attend funerals of loved ones.
What’s your point?
Need has nothing to do with this.
This is all convenient bollocks for political effect.
If my daughter needs something I leave the house to go get it. But only if my wife is at home to supervise her. Children need childcare and if you don't think so you're an idiot.
We are all paying a heavy price for our refusal to stop eating animals. Unfortunately those of us that don't have to pay the same price.
Serious misstep by Rishi outriding for Cummings this morning too, his first one of the crisis perhaps.
That is voluntary quarantine, not compulsory.
These were not the rules. No matter how much you want to pretend that the rules in place for those quarantining with symptoms offered nuance, they did not.
Cummings should go.
He won't be going.
If a cancer patient needs a checkup they should get it. The government have repeated that, only thing they're delaying is immunosuppressive therapy if that's what the clinicians advise.
Family can and should attend funerals.
Am I being inconsistent?
Which ironically is what the Government wants and needs at the moment to try and get the economy going.
The Government’s position (in which Dom Cummings is part) was that if you had symptoms, you stayed at home. The end.
Wether you not you agree with that advice is neither here nor there, and as you know, I don’t agree with that advice.
Meanwhile the comments below the Daily Mail article show similar rage and that's the people the Government need to keep on side.
"Funeral of boy, 13, who died with Covid-19 held without self-isolating family
UK News | Published: Apr 3, 2020
None of Ismail Mohamed Abdulwahab’s immediate family were able to attend after two of his six siblings began displaying symptoms of the virus.
Ismail, from Brixton, south London, died alone in hospital in the early hours of Monday."
https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2020/04/03/funeral-of-boy-13-who-died-with-covid-19-held-as-close-family-self-isolate/
ETA Ladbrokes and Starsports (ht @Quincel) 2/5, 7/4.
The other interesting thing this is going to highlight is that Cummings is every bit a member of the elite he pretends to castigate.
The Police enforce the law. Not guidelines.
If you judge something to be right for your situation that is against guidelines but within the law then that's your choice. The Police etc won't and shouldn't enforce guidelines and I've criticised them if they've tried to.
Hope nobody bursts a vein in their temple - it’s a long weekend after all.
Has the Guardian been the unwitting stooge in a demonically devious plot?
Government's position getting worse by the hour.
Your position is ridiculous. Take a step back.
What part of I respect people making their own decisions are you struggling with? What's right for you and what's right for someone else may not be the same thing. I don't believe one size fits all.
PS Hancock and others said afterwards they found that story tragic and wished they'd made it clearer that people could attend funerals, which was always legal.
What they need is for people to follow increasingly *targeted* advice to keep the virus under control while restarting the economy. This is harder to police than blanket rules, and it needs more cooperation, not less.