My fear (well the fear of my father and his fellow medical professionals, sorry Eadric) is that the next wave will coincide with normal flu season/Christmas.
The government will say the elderly/vulnerable should shield, but people will ignore that and go visit elderly/vulnerable family over Christmas and they'll you have an even higher death toll than during the first wave.
Has any other country had a “second wave”? If we don’t have a vaccine by then, we’ll have to live with the virus. We can’t go through this lockdown hell again.
On the general point of second waves, there has been no instance of which I'm aware of there being a major second outbreak after the end of the first, and even if such a thing were to happen in this country then I don't see why the virus would unaccountably lay dormant all through the Autumn and return with a vengeance in December.
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
I have addressed it repeatedly. Safety comes first. Before going on a long cross country drive after illness going on a short drive first makes sense.
For general driving ability, that is true or true-ish; the more austere view being that the precautionary principle says If in doubt, don't, and the nitpicking logician says if you suspect your ability to drive is impaired how can you be confident about your ability to assess your ability to drive? And your ability to assess... The one, sole, solitary thing you can test without getting into a car, and can test objectively, is your eyesight. The test is set out on lie:
"Before you can start the driving test you must demonstrate that your eyesight is good enough to be able to drive safely. You do this by reading a clean number plate of the old style from a minimum distance of 20.5 metres (approximately 67 feet or 5 car lengths)."
What unravelled? I didn’t get all the q&a but did he say Mary doesn’t drive?
Well he said the trip towards the Barnard Castle area to test it was safe to drive for him, but why didn't let his wife drive instead if he wasn't sure about driving.
One other positive for Dom is he came across as fairly normal and not some kind of scuttling weirdo. For any fans he has lost he might gain a few new ones
Cummings press conference is the first time I have ever heard him speak and I expect he may have done sufficient to remain in place. The vox pop from Barnard Castle was quite positive for him especially from women
My anger is directed at Boris for his abymissal performance last night confirming my concern that he is not recovered. He made the issue worse, much worse
Boris isn't going to make the next 4 years. He wasn't great at Q&A at the best of times, trying to bluster through, but since having coronavirus he is useless. He can't even remember the question being asked most of the time.
You think it's a good idea after an illness to drive cross country without doing a short drive first is a good idea?
Seems like a good idea to do a small drive before a long one to me. Like a warm up before exercise.
Whether its a good idea or not is irrelevant mate. Its in breach of the law.
Not if you're doing it to avoid harm it's not.
Doing a cross country drive if you're not safe to do so is harmful. Doing a short drive first makes sense to avoid the harm of that.
What are you on about? He was safely at his Parent’s house. The harm had already been avoided. Driving back to London was not necessary to avoid harm. Certainly not if his vision was impaired. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Driving back to London was necessary to get back to work.
He didn't think his vision was still impaired but wanted to make sure he was fit to drive with his wife in car to take over if he felt the need. How is that not reasonable?
It's probably a basic building, I haven't seen it. Think he wanted to dispel the media illusion it was some regal country pile like Chequers
Yes but the problem is he's downplaying the fact he had a second home to go to in the first place. How many have that, I wish I could do that.
He doesn't "have a second home", his parents and sister live on a farm and had a empty lodging he could use.
If it was illegal to use your own second home and illegal to rent a home off someone else, it was clearly illegal to use someone else’s spare home free of charge. A point a certain PB’er also failed to understand.
You think it's a good idea after an illness to drive cross country without doing a short drive first is a good idea?
Seems like a good idea to do a small drive before a long one to me. Like a warm up before exercise.
Whether its a good idea or not is irrelevant mate. Its in breach of the law.
Not if you're doing it to avoid harm it's not.
Doing a cross country drive if you're not safe to do so is harmful. Doing a short drive first makes sense to avoid the harm of that.
What are you on about? He was safely at his Parent’s house. The harm had already been avoided. Driving back to London was not necessary to avoid harm. Certainly not if his vision was impaired. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Driving back to London was necessary to get back to work.
He didn't think his vision was still impaired but wanted to make sure he was fit to drive with his wife in car to take over if he felt the need. How is that not reasonable?
Because the vision story is bollocks. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it.
My fear (well the fear of my father and his fellow medical professionals, sorry Eadric) is that the next wave will coincide with normal flu season/Christmas.
The government will say the elderly/vulnerable should shield, but people will ignore that and go visit elderly/vulnerable family over Christmas and they'll you have an even higher death toll than during the first wave.
Has any other country had a “second wave”? If we don’t have a vaccine by then, we’ll have to live with the virus. We can’t go through this lockdown hell again.
On the general point of second waves, there has been no instance of which I'm aware of there being a major second outbreak after the end of the first, and even if such a thing were to happen in this country then I don't see why the virus would unaccountably lay dormant all through the Autumn and return with a vengeance in December.
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
Obviously there is a suspicion that the virus may be more transmissible during the Winter, because other coronaviruses are.
I have addressed it repeatedly. Safety comes first. Before going on a long cross country drive after illness going on a short drive first makes sense.
So why take his son? He had nieces who could look after the child if he wasn't sure about his ability to drive?
Because he never actually met his nieces during his trip, as he said today.
They were on standby in case both parents fell sick at the same time and were unable to look after him, but as it happens weren't required.
I'm sorry this is utter bollocks, if I wasn't sure about my ability to drive, I wouldn't take my kids along to make sure, I'd have left them with the nieces.
Reminds me of a conversation on South Uist, New Year's Eve, 30+ years ago:
"Mary Kate, where's Callum?" (her son).
"He has gone to Lochboisdale."
"What, walking? In this weather?"
"No, he was too drunk to walk, poor boy. He had to take the car."
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
Cummings press conference is the first time I have ever heard him speak and I expect he may have done sufficient to remain in place. The vox pop from Barnard Castle was quite positive for him especially from women
My anger is directed at Boris for his abymissal performance last night confirming my concern that he is not recovered. He made the issue worse, much worse
Boris isn't going to make the next 4 years. He wasn't great at Q&A at the best of times, trying to bluster through, but since having coronavirus he is useless. He can't even remember the question being asked most of the time.
John Major managed 7 years despite being not very good and having a small majority he frittered away. Boris did 8 as Mayor and is capable of doing more than 5 but I suspect Sunak will fight the next election.
Biggest question I have now is how the UK hangs together when in a few days England and Scotland at least are one whole step out of phase. Boris is talking about phase 2 from June 1. Sturgeon is talking about phase 1 from 28 May.
And the gap in lockdown restriction easing is getting bigger not smaller.
You think it's a good idea after an illness to drive cross country without doing a short drive first is a good idea?
Seems like a good idea to do a small drive before a long one to me. Like a warm up before exercise.
Whether its a good idea or not is irrelevant mate. Its in breach of the law.
Not if you're doing it to avoid harm it's not.
Doing a cross country drive if you're not safe to do so is harmful. Doing a short drive first makes sense to avoid the harm of that.
What are you on about? He was safely at his Parent’s house. The harm had already been avoided. Driving back to London was not necessary to avoid harm. Certainly not if his vision was impaired. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Driving back to London was necessary to get back to work.
He didn't think his vision was still impaired but wanted to make sure he was fit to drive with his wife in car to take over if he felt the need. How is that not reasonable?
Because the vision story is bollocks. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it.
The whole story is bollocks. If people can stomach him driving his wife from London to Durham when she had COVID-19 symptoms, there's no point arguing over the minutiae.
Biggest question I have now is how the UK hangs together when in a few days England and Scotland at least are one whole step out of phase. Boris is talking about phase 2 from June 1. Sturgeon is talking about phase 1 from 28 May.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
What you’d do in this hypothetical “didn’t happen” scenario is irrelevant.
Went home to wife, who says she has coronavirus symptoms, then goes straight back to Downing Street without ever getting tested.
Nothing else matters above this - he could have infected half the government and senior health figures, and seriously impacted the state's response to the pandemic.
There are so many devastating admissions like this that obsessing about whether people can go 4 hours without peeing (spoiler: they can) is insane.
Cummings confessed to so much there is barely a revelation left that the press can turn up.
Only picking apart his preposterous Castle story counts and that was so vague he can wriggle out of it easily.
My fear (well the fear of my father and his fellow medical professionals, sorry Eadric) is that the next wave will coincide with normal flu season/Christmas.
The government will say the elderly/vulnerable should shield, but people will ignore that and go visit elderly/vulnerable family over Christmas and they'll you have an even higher death toll than during the first wave.
Has any other country had a “second wave”? If we don’t have a vaccine by then, we’ll have to live with the virus. We can’t go through this lockdown hell again.
On the general point of second waves, there has been no instance of which I'm aware of there being a major second outbreak after the end of the first, and even if such a thing were to happen in this country then I don't see why the virus would unaccountably lay dormant all through the Autumn and return with a vengeance in December.
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
Well quite. There seems to be a weird assumption that a) there will be a second wave (despite the fact that no other country has had one) and b) it will arrive at the worst possible time in the depths of winter.
Now, both a) and b) might prove true, but what are these assumptions based on? Evidence or hyperbole?
You think it's a good idea after an illness to drive cross country without doing a short drive first is a good idea?
Seems like a good idea to do a small drive before a long one to me. Like a warm up before exercise.
Whether its a good idea or not is irrelevant mate. Its in breach of the law.
Not if you're doing it to avoid harm it's not.
Doing a cross country drive if you're not safe to do so is harmful. Doing a short drive first makes sense to avoid the harm of that.
What are you on about? He was safely at his Parent’s house. The harm had already been avoided. Driving back to London was not necessary to avoid harm. Certainly not if his vision was impaired. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Driving back to London was necessary to get back to work.
He didn't think his vision was still impaired but wanted to make sure he was fit to drive with his wife in car to take over if he felt the need. How is that not reasonable?
He's got an encrypted laptop. We've been instructed to work from home if possible. I've been doing so for ten sodding weeks non-stop.
And Cummings couldn't keep doing it for another few days?
"You may travel for work purposes, but only where you cannot work from home."
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
My fear (well the fear of my father and his fellow medical professionals, sorry Eadric) is that the next wave will coincide with normal flu season/Christmas.
The government will say the elderly/vulnerable should shield, but people will ignore that and go visit elderly/vulnerable family over Christmas and they'll you have an even higher death toll than during the first wave.
Has any other country had a “second wave”? If we don’t have a vaccine by then, we’ll have to live with the virus. We can’t go through this lockdown hell again.
On the general point of second waves, there has been no instance of which I'm aware of there being a major second outbreak after the end of the first, and even if such a thing were to happen in this country then I don't see why the virus would unaccountably lay dormant all through the Autumn and return with a vengeance in December.
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
That is exactly what happens with the flu...that is why they call it seasonal.....
I don' think we'll do a lockdown again.....but I cannot imagine this Xmas is going to be overfilling with parties......
Biggest question I have now is how the UK hangs together when in a few days England and Scotland at least are one whole step out of phase. Boris is talking about phase 2 from June 1. Sturgeon is talking about phase 1 from 28 May.
And the gap in lockdown restriction easing is getting bigger not smaller.
It's the narcissism of small differences but of course it's very very important for Sturgeon for Scotland to be doing something different to England.
Solid question from member of the public on quarantine....clear, concise...
Boris already waffling and no answer. I can't believe they haven't got the quarantine procedure nailed down given everybody else has done it & had months to think about it.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
What you’d do in this hypothetical “didn’t happen” scenario is irrelevant.
It's entirely relevant. If it's reasonable it's legal.
You think it's a good idea after an illness to drive cross country without doing a short drive first is a good idea?
Seems like a good idea to do a small drive before a long one to me. Like a warm up before exercise.
Whether its a good idea or not is irrelevant mate. Its in breach of the law.
Not if you're doing it to avoid harm it's not.
Doing a cross country drive if you're not safe to do so is harmful. Doing a short drive first makes sense to avoid the harm of that.
What are you on about? He was safely at his Parent’s house. The harm had already been avoided. Driving back to London was not necessary to avoid harm. Certainly not if his vision was impaired. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Driving back to London was necessary to get back to work.
He didn't think his vision was still impaired but wanted to make sure he was fit to drive with his wife in car to take over if he felt the need. How is that not reasonable?
He's got an encrypted laptop. We've been instructed to work from home if possible. I've been doing so for ten sodding weeks non-stop.
And Cummings couldn't keep doing it for another few days?
"You may travel for work purposes, but only where you cannot work from home."
Medical advice said he could. If say advising the PM is an important job.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
For 30 miles?
Half an hour normally for me personally as a rule of thumb. Not sure what the speed limit is there.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
With your kid in the car? I wouldn’t, not if there was any reasonable chance I might be incapable. Such as when he was too sick to continue for a while at Barnard’s Castle.
I don't think he said he was too sick to continue did he? I thought he said his child needed to relieve themselves?
Anyway I've regularly driven in the car with my children and felt the need to pull over because I'm tired from the drive and need a break before continuing. Motorways across the country always say to take a break. I don't see that as an issue?
He said that they stopped at Barnard's Castle near the river because he felt to sick to continue.
Note that at this point, Mary (who had been a lot less ill) did not take over the driving duties.
They were spotted by an elderly gentleman, who said hello.
Then he was feeling better and they headed off. The kid said he needed the loo, which was why they were seen outside all playing together and enjoying the woods at the local beauty spot.
Verdict? A farrago of confected nonsense put together only once enough time had passed to know what were the hard bits of evidence his case had to meet - hence the admission he had been to Barnard Castle.
His description carefully included all the firm sightings, and placed them in as innocent a context as possible. It ended up all too smooth to be anything other than a post hoc rationalisation. It included as little as possible which might one day be contradicted by new evidence. So a reasonable effort except for one thing.
The Barnard Castle thing on Easter Day had always stood out as a problem, and the failure to admit or account for it earlier suggests a hope, until yesterday (PM evaded it) or today, that it could be denied.
His explanation was plainly fanciful. Really apart from complex and true explanations (which of the lawful sort were clearly not available) he would have done better to use 'exercise'. Actually I think he was on a trip out, unlike the millions denied a trip to church on Easter Day.
His weakness here undermines his credibility generally. So, ultimately a fail.
Except that he explicitly said he didn't go to the castle.
He went with his family for a short drive, because he wasn't sure if driving would make him feel unwell, and wanted to take a short drive before undertaking a much longer drive back to work.
They went to the outskirts of the castle town, stopped by the river briefly, then returned to their lodgings. They didn't go to the castle.
(This is why I said initially that people's impressions of this afternoon's performance will vary hugely, depending on whether they watched it live or not).
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
What you’d do in this hypothetical “didn’t happen” scenario is irrelevant.
It's entirely relevant. If it's reasonable it's legal.
Like I said, you’re really doing yourself a huge disservice here. This is embarrassing.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
For 30 miles?
Half an hour normally for me personally as a rule of thumb. Not sure what the speed limit is there.
Went home to wife, who says she has coronavirus symptoms, then goes straight back to Downing Street without ever getting tested.
Nothing else matters above this - he could have infected half the government and senior health figures, and seriously impacted the state's response to the pandemic.
It said in the conference he got medical advice about returning to work so presume you are blaming the doctor.
Wrong. The medical advice he claims he got was at the end of his jaunt to Durham, What Andrew is referring to is the fact he admitted that at the very beginning he went back home when he was told that his wife had Covid symptoms and he went back to No 10 in the afternoon when he should have stayed home isolating. Given that he then claims he was very ill a couple of days later how many people might he have infected by going back to No 10?.
You think it's a good idea after an illness to drive cross country without doing a short drive first is a good idea?
Seems like a good idea to do a small drive before a long one to me. Like a warm up before exercise.
Whether its a good idea or not is irrelevant mate. Its in breach of the law.
Not if you're doing it to avoid harm it's not.
Doing a cross country drive if you're not safe to do so is harmful. Doing a short drive first makes sense to avoid the harm of that.
What are you on about? He was safely at his Parent’s house. The harm had already been avoided. Driving back to London was not necessary to avoid harm. Certainly not if his vision was impaired. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Driving back to London was necessary to get back to work.
He didn't think his vision was still impaired but wanted to make sure he was fit to drive with his wife in car to take over if he felt the need. How is that not reasonable?
He's got an encrypted laptop. We've been instructed to work from home if possible. I've been doing so for ten sodding weeks non-stop.
And Cummings couldn't keep doing it for another few days?
"You may travel for work purposes, but only where you cannot work from home."
Medical advice said he could. If say advising the PM is an important job.
Which he could do over an encrypted connection. Bearing in mind that the PM was just discharged from hospital on that very day and Downing Street announced he'd be at Chequers and "would be taking a break from work while he recovers."
My fear (well the fear of my father and his fellow medical professionals, sorry Eadric) is that the next wave will coincide with normal flu season/Christmas.
The government will say the elderly/vulnerable should shield, but people will ignore that and go visit elderly/vulnerable family over Christmas and they'll you have an even higher death toll than during the first wave.
Has any other country had a “second wave”? If we don’t have a vaccine by then, we’ll have to live with the virus. We can’t go through this lockdown hell again.
On the general point of second waves, there has been no instance of which I'm aware of there being a major second outbreak after the end of the first, and even if such a thing were to happen in this country then I don't see why the virus would unaccountably lay dormant all through the Autumn and return with a vengeance in December.
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
Obviously there is a suspicion that the virus may be more transmissible during the Winter, because other coronaviruses are.
Hmmmm, perhaps, but all one can say to that is that this particular virus went on the rampage and caused its peak of mortality during what will be the sunniest, and what may well also be the warmest, Spring ever recorded in the UK. Thus if temperature is the key determinant then you'd think we'd probably be right back in the doo-doo no later than October.
What unravelled? I didn’t get all the q&a but did he say Mary doesn’t drive?
No the idea is why couldn't Mary drive back and therefore why was the trip to Barnard Castle necessary to see if Dom could drive?
Could she drive for five hours? Would she do so after an illness without testing her abilities first? Honestly this just comes across as pathetically trying to find something to score with.
I don't know about other families each are different. In mine I am the one who drives. For my parents both drive but my mum doesn't do cross country drives.
Biggest question I have now is how the UK hangs together when in a few days England and Scotland at least are one whole step out of phase. Boris is talking about phase 2 from June 1. Sturgeon is talking about phase 1 from 28 May.
And the gap in lockdown restriction easing is getting bigger not smaller.
This is especially true regarding retail. Small and open markets are part of stage 2 of the Scottish plan whilst large retail units are part of stage 3. Therefore we could see somewhere like John Lewis reopen in England more than a month before they can in Scotland.
Verdict? A farrago of confected nonsense put together only once enough time had passed to know what were the hard bits of evidence his case had to meet - hence the admission he had been to Barnard Castle.
His description carefully included all the firm sightings, and placed them in as innocent a context as possible. It ended up all too smooth to be anything other than a post hoc rationalisation. It included as little as possible which might one day be contradicted by new evidence. So a reasonable effort except for one thing.
The Barnard Castle thing on Easter Day had always stood out as a problem, and the failure to admit or account for it earlier suggests a hope, until yesterday (PM evaded it) or today, that it could be denied.
His explanation was plainly fanciful. Really apart from complex and true explanations (which of the lawful sort were clearly not available) he would have done better to use 'exercise'. Actually I think he was on a trip out, unlike the millions denied a trip to church on Easter Day.
His weakness here undermines his credibility generally. So, ultimately a fail.
Except that he explicitly said he didn't go to the castle.
He went with his family for a short drive, because he wasn't sure if driving would make him feel unwell, and wanted to take a short drive before undertaking a much longer drive back to work.
They went to the outskirts of the castle town, stopped by the river briefly, then returned to their lodgings. They didn't go to the castle.
(This is why I said initially that people's impressions of this afternoon's performance will vary hugely, depending on whether they watched it live or not).
He went for a drive to test his eyesight, a 30 mile drive that just so happened to be on his wife's birthday.
Come on now, you're just being silly
That just happened to be after his quarantine period and just before his cross country drive home. What a coincidence.
STAY HOME PROTECT THE NHS SAVE LIVES
Drive 260 miles Use the NHS as if on holiday Drive 260 miles home
What unravelled? I didn’t get all the q&a but did he say Mary doesn’t drive?
No the idea is why couldn't Mary drive back and therefore why was the trip to Barnard Castle necessary to see if Dom could drive?
I know women who can drive and do but do not want to do long motorway driving.
So, its a possible that Cummings is not lying through his beanie on this one.
She also works in media and lives in central London, with good transport options. She may have a driving licence but not drive on a regular basis, if at all.
My fear (well the fear of my father and his fellow medical professionals, sorry Eadric) is that the next wave will coincide with normal flu season/Christmas.
The government will say the elderly/vulnerable should shield, but people will ignore that and go visit elderly/vulnerable family over Christmas and they'll you have an even higher death toll than during the first wave.
Has any other country had a “second wave”? If we don’t have a vaccine by then, we’ll have to live with the virus. We can’t go through this lockdown hell again.
On the general point of second waves, there has been no instance of which I'm aware of there being a major second outbreak after the end of the first, and even if such a thing were to happen in this country then I don't see why the virus would unaccountably lay dormant all through the Autumn and return with a vengeance in December.
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
Obviously there is a suspicion that the virus may be more transmissible during the Winter, because other coronaviruses are.
Hmmmm, perhaps, but all one can say to that is that this particular virus went on the rampage and caused its peak of mortality during what will be the sunniest, and what may well also be the warmest, Spring ever recorded in the UK. Thus if temperature is the key determinant then you'd think we'd probably be right back in the doo-doo no later than October.
No one thinks temperature is the "key determinant." They think there may be a seasonal variation, as there is with other coronaviruses, and other respiratory diseases in general.
My fear (well the fear of my father and his fellow medical professionals, sorry Eadric) is that the next wave will coincide with normal flu season/Christmas.
The government will say the elderly/vulnerable should shield, but people will ignore that and go visit elderly/vulnerable family over Christmas and they'll you have an even higher death toll than during the first wave.
Has any other country had a “second wave”? If we don’t have a vaccine by then, we’ll have to live with the virus. We can’t go through this lockdown hell again.
On the general point of second waves, there has been no instance of which I'm aware of there being a major second outbreak after the end of the first, and even if such a thing were to happen in this country then I don't see why the virus would unaccountably lay dormant all through the Autumn and return with a vengeance in December.
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
That is exactly what happens with the flu...that is why they call it seasonal.....
I don' think we'll do a lockdown again.....but I cannot imagine this Xmas is going to be overfilling with parties......
The behaviour of Covid-19 doesn't appear to have been seasonal.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
With your kid in the car? I wouldn’t, not if there was any reasonable chance I might be incapable. Such as when he was too sick to continue for a while at Barnard’s Castle.
I don't think he said he was too sick to continue did he? I thought he said his child needed to relieve themselves?
Anyway I've regularly driven in the car with my children and felt the need to pull over because I'm tired from the drive and need a break before continuing. Motorways across the country always say to take a break. I don't see that as an issue?
He said that they stopped at Barnard's Castle near the river because he felt to sick to continue.
Note that at this point, Mary (who had been a lot less ill) did not take over the driving duties.
They were spotted by an elderly gentleman, who said hello.
Then he was feeling better and they headed off. The kid said he needed the loo, which was why they were seen outside all playing together and enjoying the woods at the local beauty spot.
That's reasonable to me. If you're driving and feel you need to stop Highway Code advice is to take a rest it's not that someone else has to take over and continue immediately.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
With your kid in the car? I wouldn’t, not if there was any reasonable chance I might be incapable. Such as when he was too sick to continue for a while at Barnard’s Castle.
I don't think he said he was too sick to continue did he? I thought he said his child needed to relieve themselves?
Anyway I've regularly driven in the car with my children and felt the need to pull over because I'm tired from the drive and need a break before continuing. Motorways across the country always say to take a break. I don't see that as an issue?
He said that they stopped at Barnard's Castle near the river because he felt to sick to continue.
Note that at this point, Mary (who had been a lot less ill) did not take over the driving duties.
They were spotted by an elderly gentleman, who said hello.
Then he was feeling better and they headed off. The kid said he needed the loo, which was why they were seen outside all playing together and enjoying the woods at the local beauty spot.
That's reasonable to me. If you're driving and feel you need to stop Highway Code advice is to take a rest it's not that someone else has to take over and continue immediately.
The Highway Code says if you cannot drive with care and attention you should not be behind the wheel.
This is almost as idiotic as your trying to defend immigration with saying FOM is racist!
BJ was too ill to really take in that he was initially told about Dom's road trip. Handy..
I don't think BJ made up being ill and going into intensive care to give a handy covering of a story that would come out months later.
Uhuh. Have there been studies on Covid-19 amnesia and is it likely to have affected BJ right up to his patchy recall of the narrative he gave yesterday?
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
For 30 miles?
Half an hour normally for me personally as a rule of thumb. Not sure what the speed limit is there.
For 30 miles, yes or no.
If the speed limit is 60 then yes.
PS the half hour rule of thumb I've followed since I was 18, came from an RAC agent.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
I would have thought it is possible to reassure yourself about your eyesight, or otherwise, without having to get behind the wheel of a car.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives.
For 30 miles?
Half an hour normally for me personally as a rule of thumb. Not sure what the speed limit is there.
For 30 miles, yes or no.
If the speed limit is 60 then yes.
PS the half hour rule of thumb I've followed since I was 18, came from an RAC agent.
Comments
If it's going to get bad again then one would've thought that it would start to happen following further easing of the lockdown restrictions, i.e. at some point during the Summer. Because if the shops open and that doesn't do much harm then we get at least some of the hospitality trade back in July, if that also does no harm we'll probably get the rest of it in August, if that does no harm we'll get the schoolkids back en masse in September, and if all of that doesn't cause a mass outbreak then I doubt that anything else will.
It seems to me that the only reason to imagine that the disease will wait and wait and wait until the Winter flu season is that a worse outcome can scarcely be imagined, but that's not a logical supposition - but I'm no expert, and if there is some good scientific reason for supposing a lengthy period of dormancy until Winter, regardless of whatever else occurs in the intervening six months, then I stand to be corrected.
The one, sole, solitary thing you can test without getting into a car, and can test objectively, is your eyesight. The test is set out on lie:
"Before you can start the driving test you must demonstrate that your eyesight is good enough to be able to drive safely. You do this by reading a clean number plate of the old style from a minimum distance of 20.5 metres (approximately 67 feet or 5 car lengths)."
Lucky his family weren't in the car this time.
He didn't think his vision was still impaired but wanted to make sure he was fit to drive with his wife in car to take over if he felt the need. How is that not reasonable?
Resigned?
Okaaay..
"Mary Kate, where's Callum?" (her son).
"He has gone to Lochboisdale."
"What, walking? In this weather?"
"No, he was too drunk to walk, poor boy. He had to take the car."
And the gap in lockdown restriction easing is getting bigger not smaller.
Cummings confessed to so much there is barely a revelation left that the press can turn up.
Only picking apart his preposterous Castle story counts and that was so vague he can wriggle out of it easily.
Now, both a) and b) might prove true, but what are these assumptions based on? Evidence or hyperbole?
We've been instructed to work from home if possible.
I've been doing so for ten sodding weeks non-stop.
And Cummings couldn't keep doing it for another few days?
"You may travel for work purposes, but only where you cannot
work from home."
I don' think we'll do a lockdown again.....but I cannot imagine this Xmas is going to be overfilling with parties......
Boris already waffling and no answer. I can't believe they haven't got the quarantine procedure nailed down given everybody else has done it & had months to think about it.
Note that at this point, Mary (who had been a lot less ill) did not take over the driving duties.
They were spotted by an elderly gentleman, who said hello.
Then he was feeling better and they headed off. The kid said he needed the loo, which was why they were seen outside all playing together and enjoying the woods at the local beauty spot.
So, its a possible that Cummings is not lying through his beanie on this one.
Top top trolling!!!
Bearing in mind that the PM was just discharged from hospital on that very day and Downing Street announced he'd be at Chequers and "would be taking a break from work while he recovers."
He did not return to work for another two weeks.
I don't know about other families each are different. In mine I am the one who drives. For my parents both drive but my mum doesn't do cross country drives.
When are pubs reopening?
He isn't Blair.
Use the NHS as if on holiday
Drive 260 miles home
Even if there's a weekend/holiday factor that still encouraging.
Yes, she sound like my nan in her old Austin Allegro nervously popping to Kwik Save every other Sunday.
Desperate.
Again.
Okay Boris thanks, he broke the rules and he should be sacked
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1264985427406176259
Clear the front pages.
Great question, Robert. But I'm not going to answer it.
Cannot give any unconditional backing to anyone
This is almost as idiotic as your trying to defend immigration with saying FOM is racist!
Have there been studies on Covid-19 amnesia and is it likely to have affected BJ right up to his patchy recall of the narrative he gave yesterday?
PS the half hour rule of thumb I've followed since I was 18, came from an RAC agent.
@Philip_Thompson