Funny how many of those who say that Boris is too concerned with public opinion and won't stand up to it are now asking why Boris is standing by his advisor rather than bending to public opinion here? Maybe Boris is doing what he thinks is the right thing.
Now we know both the Guardian and Daily Mirror have printed lies on this subject I won't be holding my breath for prominent apologies/retractions from them.
Oh, so the Guardian still haven’t corrected the front page headline “Police Spoke to [Dominic] Cummings Over Lockdown Breach”, that kicked this story off, when it’s clear that police never spoke to D.C. and never spoke to anyone related about a lockdown breach?
So did these events contribute to a surge in coronavirus cases?
It's impossible to say for certain, but figures seen by the BBC Radio 4's File on 4 programme show in the last week of March, Liverpool and Cheltenham were among the areas with the highest number of suspected cases.
The figures come from the Covid-19 Symptom Study, and show an estimated 5-6% of the population, aged 20 to 69, having symptoms in those two regions.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
While I can understand, and indeed sympathise with, his and presumably his wife's, desire to have family members look after the little boy, surely, surely there's someone closer. Unless of course neither he nor his wife have any friends, as opposed to work associates.
In a sane world, we'd be arguing over whether the lockdown rules make any sense at all, now it's clear that the NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed, which was the original reason for ruining our economy and society and giving up many of our ancient freedoms.
No we wouldn't. Look at this chart. The UK is the worst in the world (vacillation), together with Sweden (anti-lockdown), Brazil (anti-lockdown) and the USA (nuts). Oh, and San Marino (no idea what their policy is).
In a sane world, we'd be arguing over whether the lockdown rules make any sense at all, now it's clear that the NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed, which was the original reason for ruining our economy and society and giving up many of our ancient freedoms.
No we wouldn't. Look at this chart. The UK is the worst in the world (vacillation), together with Sweden (anti-lockdown), Brazil (anti-lockdown) and the USA (nuts). Oh, and San Marino (no idea what their policy is).
We should not be trying to reinforce this record by further relaxation of public indoor activity until the situation improves further.
In terms of deaths per head overall Belgium is still first and Spain second, ahead of the UK. Even if they are seeing fewer deaths now but they like most of Europe are easing lockdown
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
No its the same explanation that has been given all along: They were sick and needed childcare, so fell within an exemption of the rules that applies to everyone.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
So did these events contribute to a surge in coronavirus cases?
It's impossible to say for certain, but figures seen by the BBC Radio 4's File on 4 programme show in the last week of March, Liverpool and Cheltenham were among the areas with the highest number of suspected cases.
The figures come from the Covid-19 Symptom Study, and show an estimated 5-6% of the population, aged 20 to 69, having symptoms in those two regions.
As a big city with an airport, port, big university and lots of urban poverty Liverpool would be expected to be among the high areas of infection, football, or no football.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
We’d be in a second wave now if the PB forecasts were true. Long before the lockdown was eased, people were falling over themselves on here to lambast Londoners for sitting in parks during a mid spring mini heatwave.
We were assured it would lead to a second spike.
It didn’t.
True. A Japanese paper I posted yesterday showed their statistics indicated transmission was around 18 times more likely indoors.
Even allowing for much greater mask wearing in Japan, that’s a huge difference.
I wouldn’t want to sit in a crowded football stand, but it looks as though parks are pretty safe.
I wonder if we will see season tickets for next year at 20% capacity. I think it could be done safely but will probably be untenable.
They could probably increase price by 2-3x and get those kind of attendances so might be able to salvage 50% of gate revenue.
If football clubs seriously tried to put their ticket prices up by even half that amount there would be an outcry from fans and rightly so. I suspect that the outcome for many football clubs is that they are going to have to cut costs significantly for the next couple years to survive and that means that the players are going to find that their wages are going to be cut, and in some cases fairly drastically.
In League Two, if you halved some younger players wages, you would be breaking minimum wage laws.
At the Premiership level yes of course, the wage inflation of the past 30 years is over for a while and clubs will have smaller squads on lower wages.
I never suggested that all players would need to see their wages cut drastically but I do think that the days of Championship teams paying 20K a week to some their players and even the 5K a week that some League 2 players are on are over for the time being. With little or no gate money for the rest of the year and a huge drop in sponsorship there is going to need to be huge cost reductions especially in the Championship down to the National League. Once you get below that a lot of the players are only on 1 or 2 year deals and therefore actually teams, come next month, will not have huge outgoings and therefore might actually be able to weather the storm. The EPL obviously is a different planet financially when looking at the wealth of the owners and the TV money that they will get for playing competitive training matches for the forseeable future.
Will there even be a 2020-1 season for League Two clubs if they are not allowed any supporters at all? Im not sure its viable. I think they will have to look at something like 20-30% of capacities.
Jack Rodwell was recently on 70k a week not getting in a League One starting XI! Yes those days are hopefully long gone.
Those days only existed because of the stupidity of that football club and the fact no-one wanted him on that money.
Listening to the chief executive of my local (fan owned) club at the weekend it sounds like the National League have really annoyed the clubs with their lack of advice and actions and a lot of clubs are seriously hurting.
Some such as Hartlepool are probably going to disappear.
Whilst I very much sympathise with the clubs, what advice can the National League actually give?
We are f***ed? Help? Find a very rich benefactor?
Find a rich local businessman, who wants to become a poor local businessman but have a good time doing it?
The Prem Leauge will mostly be okay, they’ll have to reduce squad sizes and get some cash from wealthy shareholders, but they’ll make it through.
The Championship clubs are probably in the worst position, they have a much bigger dependence on the gate than the Prem clubs, but also an awful lot of fixed costs and don’t generally have rich shareholders.
L1 and L2 have little media rights income, depend entirely on the gate, but don’t generally cram them in like they do in the higher leagues. They could also innovate with things like temporary stands. I spect most players end up part time though, or on something around an average man’s wages.
One way would be to allow the so called big clubs to help the lower league clubs, as Harry Kane has done with his sponsorship of Leyton Orient.
For example my club Chelsea could help lower league clubs local to them, not the bigger clubs such as QPR, Brentford and Fulham but Wimbledon. Not sure how it would work, maybe loan them players but continue to pay the wages themselves, help out in any way they can.
In the above case of Hartlepool, perhaps Newcastle could help them in some way
Will be nice to get back to a country where it's nobody's damn business when somebody goes for a drive with his son.
It will be.
But unfortunately, it will make no difference to Dominic Cummings’ actions.
The problem the press has is that, if they were in his situation, 90%+ of the population would have done what he did. Including 90%+ of the press.
We can all enjoy watching the discomfort of politicians on this. But ultimately, most will acknowledge "He did it for his family. As would I."
Er...no. What people will see is that they *didn’t* do it, because they were told it was dangerous and illegal, and he *did* because he thought it was reasonable and lawful.
In a sane world, we'd be arguing over whether the lockdown rules make any sense at all, now it's clear that the NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed, which was the original reason for ruining our economy and society and giving up many of our ancient freedoms.
Exactly so. Its the Jonathan Sumption argument and I agree with it. The need for regulation of peoples' behaviour was evident when there was a real and genuine risk that the NHS was going to be unable to cope putting lives in danger. What is the point now? If people are given their freedom back the vast majority will keep social distancing, some will maintain self isolation if they require it and nearly all of us will go back to work.
Regulation still has some role. For example we could catch up with the rest of the world and introduce quarantine for international travellers as so many other have done since February. We need the capacity to isolate someone infected whose behaviour risks infecting others. Other than that lets bring this whole sorry show to an end.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
Not really. Jenrick, Kinnock, Tahir Ali, Charles Windsor, and Gethin all seemed to think they could do as they pleased
Perhaps Foxy could review, but sounds like Cummings wife and child had Norovirus - vomiting, fever etc - highly contagious but very rarely fatal and usually resolved reasonably quickly. It is possible they had different bugs.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
While I can understand, and indeed sympathise with, his and presumably his wife's, desire to have family members look after the little boy, surely, surely there's someone closer. Unless of course neither he nor his wife have any friends, as opposed to work associates.
My children have only ever been looked after by family, never by friends let alone "associates".
I think its reasonable to ask family to help with looking after a potentially sick child, I don't think its reasonable to ask or expect a work associate to do so.
Funny how many of those who say that Boris is too concerned with public opinion and won't stand up to it are now asking why Boris is standing by his advisor rather than bending to public opinion here? Maybe Boris is doing what he thinks is the right thing.
Now we know both the Guardian and Daily Mirror have printed lies on this subject I won't be holding my breath for prominent apologies/retractions from them.
Will the Spectator run a piece apologising for Mary Wakefield’s piece that, by her husband’s own account, was a lie from beginning to end? I won’t hold my breath.
Who’s llying here? The Durham Police? They have changed their story themselves regarding what was said or not said to Cummings (Jr or Sr)? The witness to the 19 April trip to Durham? Clearly Cummings denies this trip, which was always reported as being witnessed by an unattributable source anyway, and when we only have Cummings word on this alleged mobile phone data. Gove? This morning he said Mary Wakefield may not have had C-19 when they left London - flatly contradicting both her and her husband. How can papers be expected to keep their story straight when the people they report on keep changing theirs to suit the circumstance?
Cummings ? Can we expect him to retract his claim that he misrepresented his 2019 blog piece on pandemics as mentioning SARS when he retrospectively changed it in April 2020 to do so? I won’t hold my breath.
As to the Spectator article, why did she feel the need to write it in that way? Why was she trying to hide the truth? And given his professed concern for da kidz, will he apologise for driving his own when he may not have had the eyesight to do so? Any errors by the Mirror and Guardian pale into insignificance compared to the outright untruths and negligent actions of Cummings.
Hell...it doesn’t matter. He’s kept his job which, for all of us who think this government are a bunch of charlatans that should be replaced as early as possible (sadly that is not until 2024), that is a good thing. I need to relax and just let you people keep digging.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
While I can understand, and indeed sympathise with, his and presumably his wife's, desire to have family members look after the little boy, surely, surely there's someone closer. Unless of course neither he nor his wife have any friends, as opposed to work associates.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
And now there are new allegations that he has doctored his blog so that it looks like he warned about this pandemic, as he told us he did last evening.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
It isn't unravelling, it's Cummings opponents getting lost in the detail. Most don't believe 100% of Cummings' story. I don't myself (though I still don't see what he did as a resigning matter). But the story will need more than this to revive it.
yeah, this needs the Guardian to make up some more details.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
And now there are new allegations that he has doctored his blog so that it looks like he warned about this pandemic, as he told us he did last evening.
Allegations? The evidence is pretty solid
As for the Barnard Castle journey, nope there were a lot of suitable places far closer than Barnie.
No its because of those who view families trying to do their best in difficult circumstances below being nasty hacks interested in partisan politics trying to bring down someone they perceive as an enemy.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
We’d be in a second wave now if the PB forecasts were true. Long before the lockdown was eased, people were falling over themselves on here to lambast Londoners for sitting in parks during a mid spring mini heatwave.
We were assured it would lead to a second spike.
It didn’t.
True. A Japanese paper I posted yesterday showed their statistics indicated transmission was around 18 times more likely indoors.
Even allowing for much greater mask wearing in Japan, that’s a huge difference.
I wouldn’t want to sit in a crowded football stand, but it looks as though parks are pretty safe.
I wonder if we will see season tickets for next year at 20% capacity. I think it could be done safely but will probably be untenable.
They could probably increase price by 2-3x and get those kind of attendances so might be able to salvage 50% of gate revenue.
If football clubs seriously tried to put their ticket prices up by even half that amount there would be an outcry from fans and rightly so. I suspect that the outcome for many football clubs is that they are going to have to cut costs significantly for the next couple years to survive and that means that the players are going to find that their wages are going to be cut, and in some cases fairly drastically.
In League Two, if you halved some younger players wages, you would be breaking minimum wage laws.
At the Premiership level yes of course, the wage inflation of the past 30 years is over for a while and clubs will have smaller squads on lower wages.
I never suggested that all players would need to see their wages cut drastically but I do think that the days of Championship teams paying 20K a week to some their players and even the 5K a week that some League 2 players are on are over for the time being. With little or no gate money for the rest of the year and a huge drop in sponsorship there is going to need to be huge cost reductions especially in the Championship down to the National League. Once you get below that a lot of the players are only on 1 or 2 year deals and therefore actually teams, come next month, will not have huge outgoings and therefore might actually be able to weather the storm. The EPL obviously is a different planet financially when looking at the wealth of the owners and the TV money that they will get for playing competitive training matches for the forseeable future.
Will there even be a 2020-1 season for League Two clubs if they are not allowed any supporters at all? Im not sure its viable. I think they will have to look at something like 20-30% of capacities.
Jack Rodwell was recently on 70k a week not getting in a League One starting XI! Yes those days are hopefully long gone.
Those days only existed because of the stupidity of that football club and the fact no-one wanted him on that money.
Listening to the chief executive of my local (fan owned) club at the weekend it sounds like the National League have really annoyed the clubs with their lack of advice and actions and a lot of clubs are seriously hurting.
Some such as Hartlepool are probably going to disappear.
Whilst I very much sympathise with the clubs, what advice can the National League actually give?
We are f***ed? Help? Find a very rich benefactor?
Find a rich local businessman, who wants to become a poor local businessman but have a good time doing it?
The Prem Leauge will mostly be okay, they’ll have to reduce squad sizes and get some cash from wealthy shareholders, but they’ll make it through.
The Championship clubs are probably in the worst position, they have a much bigger dependence on the gate than the Prem clubs, but also an awful lot of fixed costs and don’t generally have rich shareholders.
L1 and L2 have little media rights income, depend entirely on the gate, but don’t generally cram them in like they do in the higher leagues. They could also innovate with things like temporary stands. I spect most players end up part time though, or on something around an average man’s wages.
One way would be to allow the so called big clubs to help the lower league clubs, as Harry Kane has done with his sponsorship of Leyton Orient.
For example my club Chelsea could help lower league clubs local to them, not the bigger clubs such as QPR, Brentford and Fulham but Wimbledon. Not sure how it would work, maybe loan them players but continue to pay the wages themselves, help out in any way they can.
In the above case of Hartlepool, perhaps Newcastle could help them in some way
Is Wimbledon still close to Chelsea? Aren't they now in Milton Keynes?
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
No its the same explanation that has been given all along: They were sick and needed childcare, so fell within an exemption of the rules that applies to everyone.
Yes, that’s his explanation. The problem is, it is patently untrue. On his own admission, he made no attempt to sort out childcare in London. You are not going to tell me that in a city of 8 million people, including several members of his family, there were none at all he could at least have asked?
If he had spent two hours ringing round, and nobody could help, then he might have had a case. But on his version of events, it is literally incredible that he thought that was the only way out of his dilemma.
Again, we come back to ‘he wanted a nice house.’ Can understand that. Who wouldn’t, given the chance? But (a) that’s not legal and (b) he’s repeatedly tried to cover it up because he clearly knows that.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
By the pictures of mass parties on the beaches in Bournemouth and Brighton, I wouldn't be too sure that the polls will move as much as we think. Everyone was too busy relaxing at the seaside to worry too much about Mr Cummings' travails. Besides which our bank accounts are being replenished as we speak by Rishi's benevolence.
When the second wave comes as it inevitably will with all this premature celebration, then Boris' star will descend.
Will be nice to get back to a country where it's nobody's damn business when somebody goes for a drive with his son.
It will be.
But unfortunately, it will make no difference to Dominic Cummings’ actions.
The problem the press has is that, if they were in his situation, 90%+ of the population would have done what he did. Including 90%+ of the press.
We can all enjoy watching the discomfort of politicians on this. But ultimately, most will acknowledge "He did it for his family. As would I."
I wouldn't, not because of scruples about law breaking but because it's such a bloody stupid way of dealing with the situation. And you aren't up against hypotheticals but against people who actually left spouse or parent to die alone because the rules required it.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
I thought he managed his speech very well, but there were times during questions where he was struggling not to snap.
And agree about the announcements; almost seems a change of policy.
To be fair to the PM, the change of policy was always going to be this week, with start of June the target date for the implementation.
The announcements were possibly brought forward by a couple of days but that would probably actually be better as it gives businesses more time to adapt.
Imagine, for a moment, that Cummings really did drive his car for 40 miles with his child in the back to see if his eyesight was OK. What does that say about the judgement of the man the PM cannot function without?
Again, we come back to ‘he wanted a nice house.’ Can understand that. Who wouldn’t, given the chance? But (a) that’s not legal and (b) he’s repeatedly tried to cover it up because he clearly knows that.
The way that Cummings made a point of saying the house isn't even that nice was quite revealing.
Funny how many of those who say that Boris is too concerned with public opinion and won't stand up to it are now asking why Boris is standing by his advisor rather than bending to public opinion here? Maybe Boris is doing what he thinks is the right thing.
Now we know both the Guardian and Daily Mirror have printed lies on this subject I won't be holding my breath for prominent apologies/retractions from them.
Will the Spectator run a piece apologising for Mary Wakefield’s piece that, by her husband’s own account, was a lie from beginning to end? I won’t hold my breath.
Who’s llying here? The Durham Police? They have changed their story themselves regarding what was said or not said to Cummings (Jr or Sr)? The witness to the 19 April trip to Durham? Clearly Cummings denies this trip, which was always reported as being witnessed by an unattributable source anyway, and when we only have Cummings word on this alleged mobile phone data. Gove? This morning he said Mary Wakefield may not have had C-19 when they left London - flatly contradicting both her and her husband. How can papers be expected to keep their story straight when the people they report on keep changing theirs to suit the circumstance?
Cummings ? Can we expect him to retract his claim that he misrepresented his 2019 blog piece on pandemics as mentioning SARS when he retrospectively changed it in April 2020 to do so? I won’t hold my breath.
As to the Spectator article, why did she feel the need to write it in that way? Why was she trying to hide the truth? And given his professed concern for da kidz, will he apologise for driving his own when he may not have had the eyesight to do so? Any errors by the Mirror and Guardian pale into insignificance compared to the outright untruths and negligent actions of Cummings.
Hell...it doesn’t matter. He’s kept his job which, for all of us who think this government are a bunch of charlatans that should be replaced as early as possible (sadly that is not until 2024), that is a good thing. I need to relax and just let you people keep digging.
Which specific lies in the Spectator article are you referring to? Making unfounded allegations gives them an “out” on addressing the genuine lies.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
No its the same explanation that has been given all along: They were sick and needed childcare, so fell within an exemption of the rules that applies to everyone.
Yes, that’s his explanation. The problem is, it is patently untrue. On his own admission, he made no attempt to sort out childcare in London. You are not going to tell me that in a city of 8 million people, including several members of his family, there were none at all he could at least have asked?
If he had spent two hours ringing round, and nobody could help, then he might have had a case. But on his version of events, it is literally incredible that he thought that was the only way out of his dilemma.
Again, we come back to ‘he wanted a nice house.’ Can understand that. Who wouldn’t, given the chance? But (a) that’s not legal and (b) he’s repeatedly tried to cover it up because he clearly knows that.
I don't see why its more reasonable to expect a friend or acquaintance to look after a very young child who is possibly sick instead of a relative?
In a sane world, we'd be arguing over whether the lockdown rules make any sense at all, now it's clear that the NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed, which was the original reason for ruining our economy and society and giving up many of our ancient freedoms.
Exactly so. Its the Jonathan Sumption argument and I agree with it. The need for regulation of peoples' behaviour was evident when there was a real and genuine risk that the NHS was going to be unable to cope putting lives in danger. What is the point now? If people are given their freedom back the vast majority will keep social distancing, some will maintain self isolation if they require it and nearly all of us will go back to work.
Regulation still has some role. For example we could catch up with the rest of the world and introduce quarantine for international travellers as so many other have done since February. We need the capacity to isolate someone infected whose behaviour risks infecting others. Other than that lets bring this whole sorry show to an end.
Absolutely agree. The old and vulnerable (I'm one) should be encouraged and helped to stay isolated, but imposing mandatory rules on the rest of us is overdoing it.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
We’d be in a second wave now if the PB forecasts were true. Long before the lockdown was eased, people were falling over themselves on here to lambast Londoners for sitting in parks during a mid spring mini heatwave.
We were assured it would lead to a second spike.
It didn’t.
True. A Japanese paper I posted yesterday showed their statistics indicated transmission was around 18 times more likely indoors.
Even allowing for much greater mask wearing in Japan, that’s a huge difference.
I wouldn’t want to sit in a crowded football stand, but it looks as though parks are pretty safe.
I wonder if we will see season tickets for next year at 20% capacity. I think it could be done safely but will probably be untenable.
They could probably increase price by 2-3x and get those kind of attendances so might be able to salvage 50% of gate revenue.
If football clubs seriously tried to put their ticket prices up by even half that amount there would be an outcry from fans and rightly so. I suspect that the outcome for many football clubs is that they are going to have to cut costs significantly for the next couple years to survive and that means that the players are going to find that their wages are going to be cut, and in some cases fairly drastically.
In League Two, if you halved some younger players wages, you would be breaking minimum wage laws.
At the Premiership level yes of course, the wage inflation of the past 30 years is over for a while and clubs will have smaller squads on lower wages.
I never suggested that all players would need to see their wages cut drastically but I do think that the days of Championship teams paying 20K a week to some their players and even the 5K a week that some League 2 players are on are over for the time being. With little or no gate money for the rest of the year and a huge drop in sponsorship there is going to need to be huge cost reductions especially in the Championship down to the National League. Once you get below that a lot of the players are only on 1 or 2 year deals and therefore actually teams, come next month, will not have huge outgoings and therefore might actually be able to weather the storm. The EPL obviously is a different planet financially when looking at the wealth of the owners and the TV money that they will get for playing competitive training matches for the forseeable future.
Will there even be a 2020-1 season for League Two clubs if they are not allowed any supporters at all? Im not sure its viable. I think they will have to look at something like 20-30% of capacities.
Jack Rodwell was recently on 70k a week not getting in a League One starting XI! Yes those days are hopefully long gone.
Those days only existed because of the stupidity of that football club and the fact no-one wanted him on that money.
Listening to the chief executive of my local (fan owned) club at the weekend it sounds like the National League have really annoyed the clubs with their lack of advice and actions and a lot of clubs are seriously hurting.
Some such as Hartlepool are probably going to disappear.
Whilst I very much sympathise with the clubs, what advice can the National League actually give?
We are f***ed? Help? Find a very rich benefactor?
Find a rich local businessman, who wants to become a poor local businessman but have a good time doing it?
The Prem Leauge will mostly be okay, they’ll have to reduce squad sizes and get some cash from wealthy shareholders, but they’ll make it through.
The Championship clubs are probably in the worst position, they have a much bigger dependence on the gate than the Prem clubs, but also an awful lot of fixed costs and don’t generally have rich shareholders.
L1 and L2 have little media rights income, depend entirely on the gate, but don’t generally cram them in like they do in the higher leagues. They could also innovate with things like temporary stands. I spect most players end up part time though, or on something around an average man’s wages.
One way would be to allow the so called big clubs to help the lower league clubs, as Harry Kane has done with his sponsorship of Leyton Orient.
For example my club Chelsea could help lower league clubs local to them, not the bigger clubs such as QPR, Brentford and Fulham but Wimbledon. Not sure how it would work, maybe loan them players but continue to pay the wages themselves, help out in any way they can.
In the above case of Hartlepool, perhaps Newcastle could help them in some way
Is Wimbledon still close to Chelsea? Aren't they now in Milton Keynes?
Prof Tim Spector tells BBC (R4) that the COVID app identifies two spikes related to Cheltenham and the Merseyside match - interview at 07.50.
Pretty amazing seeing as the app wasnt launched until over 2 weeks later.
Surely the data was backdated? Don't really see your point therefore.
Its a daily tracker. There is no data in there about attendance at said events.
How can they tell whether Liverpool had more cases because there was a super spreader at a nightclub, a school, a church or a football match?
They cant.
Clusters, data, statistics, spikes ... it's not difficult.
As someone who does these types of analysis, it is actually quite difficult (and outside of a few specific quasi-experimental designs - for this you could do interrupted time series if there are good local data) you can't really infer causality. I haven't heard the interview, but would be surprised if what was said was stronger than 'associated with'. But it is like that XKCD cartoon* - correlation does not imply causation, but (where you continue to see correlations) correlation may waggle its eyebrows suggestively while gesturing furtively and mouthing 'look over there'. A peak after Cheltenham could well be coincidence, a peak after Cheltenham and the football match, could also be coincidental, throw in a few other things and try very hard to find alternative explanations and fail and you start to believe in it.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
We’d be in a second wave now if the PB forecasts were true. Long before the lockdown was eased, people were falling over themselves on here to lambast Londoners for sitting in parks during a mid spring mini heatwave.
We were assured it would lead to a second spike.
It didn’t.
True. A Japanese paper I posted yesterday showed their statistics indicated transmission was around 18 times more likely indoors.
Even allowing for much greater mask wearing in Japan, that’s a huge difference.
I wouldn’t want to sit in a crowded football stand, but it looks as though parks are pretty safe.
I wonder if we will see season tickets for next year at 20% capacity. I think it could be done safely but will probably be untenable.
They could probably increase price by 2-3x and get those kind of attendances so might be able to salvage 50% of gate revenue.
If football clubs seriously tried to put their ticket prices up by even half that amount there would be an outcry from fans and rightly so. I suspect that the outcome for many football clubs is that they are going to have to cut costs significantly for the next couple years to survive and that means that the players are going to find that their wages are going to be cut, and in some cases fairly drastically.
In League Two, if you halved some younger players wages, you would be breaking minimum wage laws.
At the Premiership level yes of course, the wage inflation of the past 30 years is over for a while and clubs will have smaller squads on lower wages.
I never suggested that all players would need to see their wages cut drastically but I do think that the days of Championship teams paying 20K a week to some their players and even the 5K a week that some League 2 players are on are over for the time being. With little or no gate money for the rest of the year and a huge drop in sponsorship there is going to need to be huge cost reductions especially in the Championship down to the National League. Once you get below that a lot of the players are only on 1 or 2 year deals and therefore actually teams, come next month, will not have huge outgoings and therefore might actually be able to weather the storm. The EPL obviously is a different planet financially when looking at the wealth of the owners and the TV money that they will get for playing competitive training matches for the forseeable future.
Will there even be a 2020-1 season for League Two clubs if they are not allowed any supporters at all? Im not sure its viable. I think they will have to look at something like 20-30% of capacities.
Jack Rodwell was recently on 70k a week not getting in a League One starting XI! Yes those days are hopefully long gone.
Those days only existed because of the stupidity of that football club and the fact no-one wanted him on that money.
Listening to the chief executive of my local (fan owned) club at the weekend it sounds like the National League have really annoyed the clubs with their lack of advice and actions and a lot of clubs are seriously hurting.
Some such as Hartlepool are probably going to disappear.
Whilst I very much sympathise with the clubs, what advice can the National League actually give?
We are f***ed? Help? Find a very rich benefactor?
Find a rich local businessman, who wants to become a poor local businessman but have a good time doing it?
The Prem Leauge will mostly be okay, they’ll have to reduce squad sizes and get some cash from wealthy shareholders, but they’ll make it through.
The Championship clubs are probably in the worst position, they have a much bigger dependence on the gate than the Prem clubs, but also an awful lot of fixed costs and don’t generally have rich shareholders.
L1 and L2 have little media rights income, depend entirely on the gate, but don’t generally cram them in like they do in the higher leagues. They could also innovate with things like temporary stands. I spect most players end up part time though, or on something around an average man’s wages.
One way would be to allow the so called big clubs to help the lower league clubs, as Harry Kane has done with his sponsorship of Leyton Orient.
For example my club Chelsea could help lower league clubs local to them, not the bigger clubs such as QPR, Brentford and Fulham but Wimbledon. Not sure how it would work, maybe loan them players but continue to pay the wages themselves, help out in any way they can.
In the above case of Hartlepool, perhaps Newcastle could help them in some way
Is Wimbledon still close to Chelsea? Aren't they now in Milton Keynes?
It isn't unravelling, it's Cummings opponents getting lost in the detail. Most don't believe 100% of Cummings' story. I don't myself (though I still don't see what he did as a resigning matter). But the story will need more than this to revive it.
So it's a solid and impenetrable tissue of lies ? Interesting take on it.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
How old are your children if you don't mind me asking?
If you're prepared to leave young children on your neighbours when there's family available then good for you. Not everyone is the same.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
By the pictures of mass parties on the beaches in Bournemouth and Brighton, I wouldn't be too sure that the polls will move as much as we think. Everyone was too busy relaxing at the seaside to worry too much about Mr Cummings' travails. Besides which our bank accounts are being replenished as we speak by Rishi's benevolence.
When the second wave comes as it inevitably will with all this premature celebration, then Boris' star will descend.
Everyone was relaxing on the beach because we've now discovered the rules aren't for Dom, they are rules for everyone but Dom.
And they decided that if Dom doesn't need to follow the rules they don't either.
Lockdown is finished, Quarantine is finished, when things need to be locked down again a large proportion of the population are going to bunk down while the rest will wilfully ignore the rules.
Boris screwed up at the weekend, in September / October I suspect he will discover just how badly he screwed up.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
How old are your children if you don't mind me asking?
If you're prepared to leave young children on your neighbours when there's family available then good for you. Not everyone is the same.
How many 17 year olds would you be happy to leave your children with for over a week?
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
I thought he managed his speech very well, but there were times during questions where he was struggling not to snap.
And agree about the announcements; almost seems a change of policy.
To be fair to the PM, the change of policy was always going to be this week, with start of June the target date for the implementation.
The announcements were possibly brought forward by a couple of days but that would probably actually be better as it gives businesses more time to adapt.
I don't see any evidence in the data that the 'unlocking' already made around the world has led to any statistical uptick in case numbers in those countries that are well clear of their peaks. If this continues, pressure to move more quickly will only grow.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
How old are your children if you don't mind me asking?
If you're prepared to leave young children on your neighbours when there's family available then good for you. Not everyone is the same.
We've often looked after children of other families in emergencies and so have they for us.
The idea there was nobody available closer to him is ridiculous, especially when he is at the top of Government.
It's so ludicrous it stinks of making up a story to fit a narrative.
So the fourteen day clock on quarantine should not be deemed to have started when they made the trip on the 31st of March.
Okay. So it started when Dom became ill a day or so later. Say, the 1st or 2nd of April.
-Adds 14 days to 1/4/20-
Hmm. That makes Barnard Castle even worse - Mary was out during the 14 day clock that started when someone she was living with (Dom) started to display symptoms.
But then again, it was her birthday and it was a lovely day, so it didn't count, right?
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
I was thinking how this might apply in my own situation.
I have a sister with two young children. She lives 90 miles away in Stroud. Unlike Cummings, she is in a very high risk group being both asthmatic and disabled. Her mother in law and our father are similarly in vulnerable categories.
Let’s say she and her husband fell ill, and couldn’t look after the children. What would she do?
Well, I’m guessing first port of call would be the brother in law. But he has a very cramped house, so might not be able to help. Next, she might try the godparents. Then, she’s got a work colleague nearby. Finally, there are at least two acquaintances from church who might rally round.
Only if none of them could help, for whatever reason, would she turn to me. And under those circumstances, yes, I think I would get the Beast out of slumber in the garage, drive to Stroud, pick them up and bring them to a Cannock. And I also think Staffordshire Police, who are pretty sensible, would wave me on with the proviso that we should all isolate very strictly for 14 days.
But nobody could say that was a rational first option. Which is what Cummings is effectively claiming here.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
This describes the political damage well. His account meets the requirements of detective fiction in that it is logically possible, but is not actually credible. It is still the case that there is no army of supporters prepared to come out and say "I believe him". Because the issue touches on matters which have been life and death for people, and caused immense emotional anguish this still has the capacity to be an Iraq moment for this government.
I am a Brexiteer Tory and have had, so far, a much more comfortable and fortunate lockdown than most - I have been lucky so far. But for the first time in ages my support for the Conservatives is very heavily qualified.
And I notice that his support among many ministers is heavily qualified too. And my Tory MP remains in a state of omerta.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
This describes the political damage well. His account meets the requirements of detective fiction in that it is logically possible, but is not actually credible. It is still the case that there is no army of supporters prepared to come out and say "I believe him". Because the issue touches on matters which have been life and death for people, and caused immense emotional anguish this still has the capacity to be an Iraq moment for this government.
I am a Brexiteer Tory and have had, so far, a much more comfortable and fortunate lockdown than most - I have been lucky so far. But for the first time in ages my support for the Conservatives is very heavily qualified.
And I notice that his support among many ministers is heavily qualified too. And my Tory MP remains in a state of omerta.
I'm more interested in views of people that are Tory/Brexit and have weakened their support than those who defend the Government whatever it does, so thanks for your post.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
How old are your children if you don't mind me asking?
If you're prepared to leave young children on your neighbours when there's family available then good for you. Not everyone is the same.
How many 17 year olds would you be happy to leave your children with for over a week?
Considering that's not what happened that's moot.
If a 17 year old relative was happy to be available for childcare I'd be grateful for that. 17 year old girls can be very responsible childminders and relatives especially so.
He's just admitted to committing a crime then, how stupid can these people be
He really hasn't just as Cummings didn't yesterday. The offence is driving with uncorrected eyesight below the legal requirements. If he (or Cummings) were wearing their glasses then no offence is committed. The idea that you drive 60 miles to test your capacity to drive is of course completely ludicrous but it is not the offence you are suggesting.
The problem with lockdown compliance is the same papers that dislike Cummings have had wall to wall photos of young people supposedly ignoring the lockdown measures for weeks, so they cannot exactly say people are now ignoring the rules.
Ultimately if you don't take personal responsibility then its your loss but unless you want a Police State or involve the army like Spain or Italy there isn't much that can be done.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
We’d be in a second wave now if the PB forecasts were true. Long before the lockdown was eased, people were falling over themselves on here to lambast Londoners for sitting in parks during a mid spring mini heatwave.
We were assured it would lead to a second spike.
It didn’t.
True. A Japanese paper I posted yesterday showed their statistics indicated transmission was around 18 times more likely indoors.
Even allowing for much greater mask wearing in Japan, that’s a huge difference.
I wouldn’t want to sit in a crowded football stand, but it looks as though parks are pretty safe.
I wonder if we will see season tickets for next year at 20% capacity. I think it could be done safely but will probably be untenable.
They could probably increase price by 2-3x and get those kind of attendances so might be able to salvage 50% of gate revenue.
If football clubs seriously tried to put their ticket prices up by even half that amount there would be an outcry from fans and rightly so. I suspect that the outcome for many football clubs is that they are going to have to cut costs significantly for the next couple years to survive and that means that the players are going to find that their wages are going to be cut, and in some cases fairly drastically.
In League Two, if you halved some younger players wages, you would be breaking minimum wage laws.
At the Premiership level yes of course, the wage inflation of the past 30 years is over for a while and clubs will have smaller squads on lower wages.
I never suggested that all players would need to see their wages cut drastically but I do think that the days of Championship teams paying 20K a week to some their players and even the 5K a week that some League 2 players are on are over for the time being. With little or no gate money for the rest of the year and a huge drop in sponsorship there is going to need to be huge cost reductions especially in the Championship down to the National League. Once you get below that a lot of the players are only on 1 or 2 year deals and therefore actually teams, come next month, will not have huge outgoings and therefore might actually be able to weather the storm. The EPL obviously is a different planet financially when looking at the wealth of the owners and the TV money that they will get for playing competitive training matches for the forseeable future.
Will there even be a 2020-1 season for League Two clubs if they are not allowed any supporters at all? Im not sure its viable. I think they will have to look at something like 20-30% of capacities.
Jack Rodwell was recently on 70k a week not getting in a League One starting XI! Yes those days are hopefully long gone.
Those days only existed because of the stupidity of that football club and the fact no-one wanted him on that money.
Listening to the chief executive of my local (fan owned) club at the weekend it sounds like the National League have really annoyed the clubs with their lack of advice and actions and a lot of clubs are seriously hurting.
Some such as Hartlepool are probably going to disappear.
Whilst I very much sympathise with the clubs, what advice can the National League actually give?
We are f***ed? Help? Find a very rich benefactor?
Find a rich local businessman, who wants to become a poor local businessman but have a good time doing it?
The Prem Leauge will mostly be okay, they’ll have to reduce squad sizes and get some cash from wealthy shareholders, but they’ll make it through.
The Championship clubs are probably in the worst position, they have a much bigger dependence on the gate than the Prem clubs, but also an awful lot of fixed costs and don’t generally have rich shareholders.
L1 and L2 have little media rights income, depend entirely on the gate, but don’t generally cram them in like they do in the higher leagues. They could also innovate with things like temporary stands. I spect most players end up part time though, or on something around an average man’s wages.
One way would be to allow the so called big clubs to help the lower league clubs, as Harry Kane has done with his sponsorship of Leyton Orient.
For example my club Chelsea could help lower league clubs local to them, not the bigger clubs such as QPR, Brentford and Fulham but Wimbledon. Not sure how it would work, maybe loan them players but continue to pay the wages themselves, help out in any way they can.
In the above case of Hartlepool, perhaps Newcastle could help them in some way
Is Wimbledon still close to Chelsea? Aren't they now in Milton Keynes?
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
No its the same explanation that has been given all along: They were sick and needed childcare, so fell within an exemption of the rules that applies to everyone.
Yes, that’s his explanation. The problem is, it is patently untrue. On his own admission, he made no attempt to sort out childcare in London. You are not going to tell me that in a city of 8 million people, including several members of his family, there were none at all he could at least have asked?
If he had spent two hours ringing round, and nobody could help, then he might have had a case. But on his version of events, it is literally incredible that he thought that was the only way out of his dilemma.
Again, we come back to ‘he wanted a nice house.’ Can understand that. Who wouldn’t, given the chance? But (a) that’s not legal and (b) he’s repeatedly tried to cover it up because he clearly knows that.
I don't see why its more reasonable to expect a friend or acquaintance to look after a very young child who is possibly sick instead of a relative?
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
Oh, so anybody with a holiday home could have gone to it? Even if they were ill with suspected Coronavirus?
Cummings literally said this himself yesterday, so what's the confusion with Gove saying the same thing now?
Good morning Philip
Don't you find it amusing that after our discussions last week where you thought the rules were clear and people should just use common sense and how could anyone be confused and I thought that there was a lacuna between the law and the guidance and the rules and that the government's elision of this would confuse people and come to no good...has now confused people and come to no good?
Not sure the idea about him not travelling again has been disproven, yet. He said originally he hadn't travelled a second time and then he did.
Unless he provides proof via GPS or whatever else, that allegation remains.
He confirmed in his statement he had GPS proof he did not go back a second time
However, this weekend we have witnessed Boris lose his USP and allow Cummings to damage his government
In my opinion it is over for both of them but I am not sure just when
Boris should take paternity leave at best and if I was betting I would put 2021 as his resignation/retirement
This won't be the last time Cummings will drop Johnson right in the shit. The PM has had his warning.
Off topic.
Rifling through my favourite automotive archive footage during lockdown, I was reminded of a Rover Group video from the 1980s. The late Tony Pond covers the TT course in a Rover 827 Vitesse (yes a Rover 827!) averaging a shade under a 100mph for the entire run. Pond even gets the power steering fluid to boiling point! It is on YouTube, I just searched Tony Pond, Rover, TT and all 15 minutes plus of the run are shown. It is remarkable drive which one would be hard to beat with something newer and more sophisticated.
In a sane world, we'd be arguing over whether the lockdown rules make any sense at all, now it's clear that the NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed, which was the original reason for ruining our economy and society and giving up many of our ancient freedoms.
Exactly so. Its the Jonathan Sumption argument and I agree with it. The need for regulation of peoples' behaviour was evident when there was a real and genuine risk that the NHS was going to be unable to cope putting lives in danger. What is the point now? If people are given their freedom back the vast majority will keep social distancing, some will maintain self isolation if they require it and nearly all of us will go back to work.
Regulation still has some role. For example we could catch up with the rest of the world and introduce quarantine for international travellers as so many other have done since February. We need the capacity to isolate someone infected whose behaviour risks infecting others. Other than that lets bring this whole sorry show to an end.
Absolutely agree. The old and vulnerable (I'm one) should be encouraged and helped to stay isolated, but imposing mandatory rules on the rest of us is overdoing it.
I fully accept that there is a proper roll for guidance in all of this but that is different from regulation.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
I was thinking how this might apply in my own situation.
I have a sister with two young children. She lives 90 miles away in Stroud. Unlike Cummings, she is in a very high risk group being both asthmatic and disabled. Her mother in law and our father are similarly in vulnerable categories.
Let’s say she and her husband fell ill, and couldn’t look after the children. What would she do?
Well, I’m guessing first port of call would be the brother in law. But he has a very cramped house, so might not be able to help. Next, she might try the godparents. Then, she’s got a work colleague nearby. Finally, there are at least two acquaintances from church who might rally round.
Only if none of them could help, for whatever reason, would she turn to me. And under those circumstances, yes, I think I would get the Beast out of slumber in the garage, drive to Stroud, pick them up and bring them to a Cannock. And I also think Staffordshire Police, who are pretty sensible, would wave me on with the proviso that we should all isolate very strictly for 14 days.
But nobody could say that was a rational first option. Which is what Cummings is effectively claiming here.
If it was an actual emergency as he seemed to imply it was, surely 999 would be your port of call eventually if you exhausted all other options?
What I find so preposterous is that in London of all places, in his job, he couldn't find anyone. You can't walk 5m in London without seeing anyone else (perhaps different in lockdown albeit), so the idea nobody was available to help is just untrue to me.
Of course the comeback is that he would have spread the disease - but he seems to have put a lot more people in danger with his long trip and random trip to a castle on his wife's birthday.
No its because of those who view families trying to do their best in difficult circumstances below being nasty hacks interested in partisan politics trying to bring down someone they perceive as an enemy.
Does anyone other Piers and Scott care about twitter 'trends'. You need about 0.005% of the country to get something 'trending', yet it means nothing in the real world.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
If you have a neighbour who'd be willing and able to drop everything to look after a four year-old (AIUI, this is no small commitment) then good for you. Most people don't.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
While I can understand, and indeed sympathise with, his and presumably his wife's, desire to have family members look after the little boy, surely, surely there's someone closer. Unless of course neither he nor his wife have any friends, as opposed to work associates.
My children have only ever been looked after by family, never by friends let alone "associates".
I think its reasonable to ask family to help with looking after a potentially sick child, I don't think its reasonable to ask or expect a work associate to do so.
We had three children and have seven grandchildren. All but one of them are now teenagers or adults. I'm sure that at some stage or other all of them have been looked after for a while...... at least an evening ......by someone outside our family unit. The point about 'associates' is that just maybe the Cummings don't have what I and would expect you, would describe as friends; people outside our work circle with whom we mix for the pleasure of their company.
In a sane world, we'd be arguing over whether the lockdown rules make any sense at all, now it's clear that the NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed, which was the original reason for ruining our economy and society and giving up many of our ancient freedoms.
I am afraid we do not live in a sane world. I have seen child murderers get less press coverage than the toilet habits of a 4 year old. The desperation of the press to "get their man" is scary.
I think you are missing the point.
The single most important thing as lockdown is relaxed is that anyone with symptoms of respiratory infection stays at home.
A second pandemic wave could cost the country tens of thousands of deaths, and many more billions of pounds.
The example Cummings set - and the government handling of it - has sent out the worst possible message if they are interested in preventing such a thing.
I could not give a damn about Cummings one way or the other. But I care deeply about the future of this country, and his entirely unrepentant demeanour is utterly toxic.
In a sane world, we'd be arguing over whether the lockdown rules make any sense at all, now it's clear that the NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed, which was the original reason for ruining our economy and society and giving up many of our ancient freedoms.
Exactly so. Its the Jonathan Sumption argument and I agree with it. The need for regulation of peoples' behaviour was evident when there was a real and genuine risk that the NHS was going to be unable to cope putting lives in danger. What is the point now? If people are given their freedom back the vast majority will keep social distancing, some will maintain self isolation if they require it and nearly all of us will go back to work.
Regulation still has some role. For example we could catch up with the rest of the world and introduce quarantine for international travellers as so many other have done since February. We need the capacity to isolate someone infected whose behaviour risks infecting others. Other than that lets bring this whole sorry show to an end.
Absolutely agree. The old and vulnerable (I'm one) should be encouraged and helped to stay isolated, but imposing mandatory rules on the rest of us is overdoing it.
I fully accept that there is a proper roll for guidance in all of this but that is different from regulation.
Will be nice to get back to a country where it's nobody's damn business when somebody goes for a drive with his son.
It will be.
But unfortunately, it will make no difference to Dominic Cummings’ actions.
The problem the press has is that, if they were in his situation, 90%+ of the population would have done what he did. Including 90%+ of the press.
We can all enjoy watching the discomfort of politicians on this. But ultimately, most will acknowledge "He did it for his family. As would I."
I wouldn't, not because of scruples about law breaking but because it's such a bloody stupid way of dealing with the situation. And you aren't up against hypotheticals but against people who actually left spouse or parent to die alone because the rules required it.
If I was worried I was about to fall ill I would not start a 264 mile car journey for fear that I would fall ill before reaching my destination and end up stranded at a motorway service station (at best).
By the details provided by Cummings he was perhaps less than 8 hours from this scenario. It was astonishingly reckless behaviour that put his family in unnecessary danger and demonstrates extraordinarily bad judgement.
Interesting. The story last week was that the request from F1 had made it all the way to the PM's desk, before being declined. Maybe they've revised the plan, which I believe includes chartering planes and creating a 'bubble' of regularly tested people inside each track.
Hopefully the plan works, there's tens of thousands of jobs depending on it.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
If you have a neighbour who'd be willing and able to drop everything to look after a four year-old (AIUI, this is no small commitment) then good for you. Most people don't.
*After* I'd exhausted all other options, if I explained the situation, they would help me.
To me, I don't think he exhausted all reasonable options.
No its because of those who view families trying to do their best in difficult circumstances below being nasty hacks interested in partisan politics trying to bring down someone they perceive as an enemy.
Does anyone other Piers and Scott care about twitter 'trends'. You need about 0.005% of the country to get something 'trending', yet it means nothing in the real world.
Prime Minister Ed Milliband and President Hillary Clinton and Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn probably care about Twitter too.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
I was thinking how this might apply in my own situation.
I have a sister with two young children. She lives 90 miles away in Stroud. Unlike Cummings, she is in a very high risk group being both asthmatic and disabled. Her mother in law and our father are similarly in vulnerable categories.
Let’s say she and her husband fell ill, and couldn’t look after the children. What would she do?
Well, I’m guessing first port of call would be the brother in law. But he has a very cramped house, so might not be able to help. Next, she might try the godparents. Then, she’s got a work colleague nearby. Finally, there are at least two acquaintances from church who might rally round.
Only if none of them could help, for whatever reason, would she turn to me. And under those circumstances, yes, I think I would get the Beast out of slumber in the garage, drive to Stroud, pick them up and bring them to a Cannock. And I also think Staffordshire Police, who are pretty sensible, would wave me on with the proviso that we should all isolate very strictly for 14 days.
But nobody could say that was a rational first option. Which is what Cummings is effectively claiming here.
If it was an actual emergency as he seemed to imply it was, surely 999 would be your port of call eventually if you exhausted all other options?
What I find so preposterous is that in London of all places, in his job, he couldn't find anyone. You can't walk 5m in London without seeing anyone else (perhaps different in lockdown albeit), so the idea nobody was available to help is just untrue to me.
Of course the comeback is that he would have spread the disease - but he seems to have put a lot more people in danger with his long trip and random trip to a castle on his wife's birthday.
I’m thinking more if they had to go into hospital. That is the potential crunch point.
Interesting. The story last week was that the request from F1 had made it all the way to the PM's desk, before being declined. Maybe they've revised the plan, which I believe includes chartering planes and creating a 'bubble' of regularly tested people inside each track.
Hopefully the plan works, there's tens of thousands of jobs depending on it.
They've decided the PM needs an "eye-catching initiative with which he can be personally associated".
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
If you have a neighbour who'd be willing and able to drop everything to look after a four year-old (AIUI, this is no small commitment) then good for you. Most people don't.
*After* I'd exhausted all other options, if I explained the situation, they would help me.
To me, I don't think he exhausted all reasonable options.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
You're seriously telling me, nobody from the Government, no friends, nobody in London could help.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
If you have a neighbour who'd be willing and able to drop everything to look after a four year-old (AIUI, this is no small commitment) then good for you. Most people don't.
But Cummings can’t know either way, because he never asked.
What else have I been doing wrong all these years? Do I need to go for a walk to check my legs before I walk somewhere?
Yes that would be a very good idea.
Right, ok, its on the list, today I am:
Listening to some music to check my hearing before listening to some music Eating lots of snacks to check my taste before lunch
Anything else?
Doing a test live video to check your camera is working properly before a job interview video.
The logic there being that a crash during the former avoids a crash during the latter. I don’t think that analogy transfers very successfully to driving sixty miles on public highways.
Comments
Colour me surprised.
Unless he provides proof via GPS or whatever else, that allegation remains.
We can all enjoy watching the discomfort of politicians on this. But ultimately, most will acknowledge "He did it for his family. As would I."
Unless of course neither he nor his wife have any friends, as opposed to work associates.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
https://twitter.com/idilsukan/status/1264963194357010432
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1265159179876143105?s=20
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him.
Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll.
I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
For example my club Chelsea could help lower league clubs local to them, not the bigger clubs such as QPR, Brentford and Fulham but Wimbledon. Not sure how it would work, maybe loan them players but continue to pay the wages themselves, help out in any way they can.
In the above case of Hartlepool, perhaps Newcastle could help them in some way
Believe me, this is playing incredibly badly.
Regulation still has some role. For example we could catch up with the rest of the world and introduce quarantine for international travellers as so many other have done since February. We need the capacity to isolate someone infected whose behaviour risks infecting others. Other than that lets bring this whole sorry show to an end.
I think its reasonable to ask family to help with looking after a potentially sick child, I don't think its reasonable to ask or expect a work associate to do so.
Who’s llying here? The Durham Police? They have changed their story themselves regarding what was said or not said to Cummings (Jr or Sr)? The witness to the 19 April trip to Durham? Clearly Cummings denies this trip, which was always reported as being witnessed by an unattributable source anyway, and when we only have Cummings word on this alleged mobile phone data. Gove? This morning he said Mary Wakefield may not have had C-19 when they left London - flatly contradicting both her and her husband. How can papers be expected to keep their story straight when the people they report on keep changing theirs to suit the circumstance?
Cummings ? Can we expect him to retract his claim that he misrepresented his 2019 blog piece on pandemics as mentioning SARS when he retrospectively changed it in April 2020 to do so? I won’t hold my breath.
As to the Spectator article, why did she feel the need to write it in that way? Why was she trying to hide the truth? And given his professed concern for da kidz, will he apologise for driving his own when he may not have had the eyesight to do so? Any errors by the Mirror and Guardian pale into insignificance compared to the outright untruths and negligent actions of Cummings.
Hell...it doesn’t matter. He’s kept his job which, for all of us who think this government are a bunch of charlatans that should be replaced as early as possible (sadly that is not until 2024), that is a good thing. I need to relax and just let you people keep digging.
As for the Barnard Castle journey, nope there were a lot of suitable places far closer than Barnie.
However, this weekend we have witnessed Boris lose his USP and allow Cummings to damage his government
In my opinion it is over for both of them but I am not sure just when
Boris should take paternity leave at best and if I was betting I would put 2021 as his resignation/retirement
And agree about the announcements; almost seems a change of policy.
If he had spent two hours ringing round, and nobody could help, then he might have had a case. But on his version of events, it is literally incredible that he thought that was the only way out of his dilemma.
Again, we come back to ‘he wanted a nice house.’ Can understand that. Who wouldn’t, given the chance? But (a) that’s not legal and (b) he’s repeatedly tried to cover it up because he clearly knows that.
If this happened to me, I'd be round to my neighbours next door, his ideas just seem farcical.
When the second wave comes as it inevitably will with all this premature celebration, then Boris' star will descend.
The announcements were possibly brought forward by a couple of days but that would probably actually be better as it gives businesses more time to adapt.
It’s pretty clear that Dominic is the effective Prime Minister, and indeed sees himself as such.
Presumably there will be at some point, otherwise he wouldn't be making such claims. Would be interesting to see the reasoning.
https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1265185119926706181?s=19
Who the hell is running govt comms policy?
Oh wait...
Interesting take on it.
If you're prepared to leave young children on your neighbours when there's family available then good for you. Not everyone is the same.
And they decided that if Dom doesn't need to follow the rules they don't either.
Lockdown is finished, Quarantine is finished, when things need to be locked down again a large proportion of the population are going to bunk down while the rest will wilfully ignore the rules.
Boris screwed up at the weekend, in September / October I suspect he will discover just how badly he screwed up.
The idea there was nobody available closer to him is ridiculous, especially when he is at the top of Government.
It's so ludicrous it stinks of making up a story to fit a narrative.
Okay. So it started when Dom became ill a day or so later. Say, the 1st or 2nd of April.
-Adds 14 days to 1/4/20-
Hmm. That makes Barnard Castle even worse - Mary was out during the 14 day clock that started when someone she was living with (Dom) started to display symptoms.
But then again, it was her birthday and it was a lovely day, so it didn't count, right?
Listening to some music to check my hearing before listening to some music
Eating lots of snacks to check my taste before lunch
Anything else?
I have a sister with two young children. She lives 90 miles away in Stroud. Unlike Cummings, she is in a very high risk group being both asthmatic and disabled. Her mother in law and our father are similarly in vulnerable categories.
Let’s say she and her husband fell ill, and couldn’t look after the children. What would she do?
Well, I’m guessing first port of call would be the brother in law. But he has a very cramped house, so might not be able to help. Next, she might try the godparents. Then, she’s got a work colleague nearby. Finally, there are at least two acquaintances from church who might rally round.
Only if none of them could help, for whatever reason, would she turn to me. And under those circumstances, yes, I think I would get the Beast out of slumber in the garage, drive to Stroud, pick them up and bring them to a Cannock. And I also think Staffordshire Police, who are pretty sensible, would wave me on with the proviso that we should all isolate very strictly for 14 days.
But nobody could say that was a rational first option. Which is what Cummings is effectively claiming here.
I am a Brexiteer Tory and have had, so far, a much more comfortable and fortunate lockdown than most - I have been lucky so far. But for the first time in ages my support for the Conservatives is very heavily qualified.
And I notice that his support among many ministers is heavily qualified too. And my Tory MP remains in a state of omerta.
What are your friends saying?
If a 17 year old relative was happy to be available for childcare I'd be grateful for that. 17 year old girls can be very responsible childminders and relatives especially so.
Ultimately if you don't take personal responsibility then its your loss but unless you want a Police State or involve the army like Spain or Italy there isn't much that can be done.
Even if they were ill with suspected Coronavirus?
Don't you find it amusing that after our discussions last week where you thought the rules were clear and people should just use common sense and how could anyone be confused and I thought that there was a lacuna between the law and the guidance and the rules and that the government's elision of this would confuse people and come to no good...has now confused people and come to no good?
Rifling through my favourite automotive archive footage during lockdown, I was reminded of a Rover Group video from the 1980s. The late Tony Pond covers the TT course in a Rover 827 Vitesse (yes a Rover 827!) averaging a shade under a 100mph for the entire run. Pond even gets the power steering fluid to boiling point! It is on YouTube, I just searched Tony Pond, Rover, TT and all 15 minutes plus of the run are shown. It is remarkable drive which one would be hard to beat with something newer and more sophisticated.
What I find so preposterous is that in London of all places, in his job, he couldn't find anyone. You can't walk 5m in London without seeing anyone else (perhaps different in lockdown albeit), so the idea nobody was available to help is just untrue to me.
Of course the comeback is that he would have spread the disease - but he seems to have put a lot more people in danger with his long trip and random trip to a castle on his wife's birthday.
The point about 'associates' is that just maybe the Cummings don't have what I and would expect you, would describe as friends; people outside our work circle with whom we mix for the pleasure of their company.
The single most important thing as lockdown is relaxed is that anyone with symptoms of respiratory infection stays at home.
A second pandemic wave could cost the country tens of thousands of deaths, and many more billions of pounds.
The example Cummings set - and the government handling of it - has sent out the worst possible message if they are interested in preventing such a thing.
I could not give a damn about Cummings one way or the other. But I care deeply about the future of this country, and his entirely unrepentant demeanour is utterly toxic.
By the details provided by Cummings he was perhaps less than 8 hours from this scenario. It was astonishingly reckless behaviour that put his family in unnecessary danger and demonstrates extraordinarily bad judgement.
Hopefully the plan works, there's tens of thousands of jobs depending on it.
To me, I don't think he exhausted all reasonable options.