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.
Piers cares only about his own role in creating Twitter 'trends'.
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's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
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.
His Son did go to hospital right, with his wife?
My theory is Cummings went to the hospital too but that will never be proven, for fair enough reasons.
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's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
Before you walk to the car remember to check your legs first!
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?
AFC Wimbledon are definitely in Wimbledon.
Ah, tx.
AFC Wimbledon currently play in Kingston but are they building a new ground in Wimbledon.
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.
To be fair, would you leave your children with Michael Gove or Priti Patel? I believe Dom on that one!
There's a lot of noise around the Cummings' affair, encouraged by both the Guardian/Mirror who have stories to sell and Cummings/the government who want to deflect from the real concerns. The key points as I see them:
1. Senior official broke quarantine rules. SOP is that they resign. Cummings hasn't. 2. This means that "Do I say, not do as I do" or "One rule for the elite; one rule for the plebs" apply. Now, either lockdown and quarantine with their very intrusive restrictions on personal movement are necessary to prevent mass death, or they are not. Which is it? 3.The advisor decides; the leader follows. Cummings has control over Johnson.
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?
No. Because I thought the rules were clear and people should use their own common sense and I'm not going to judge Cummings for using his own common sense in the best interests of his family exactly as I was saying everyone should do last week.
Its the muppets who expected one rule to apply for every single scenario with no common sense getting involved who are the ones confused.
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.
yeah, "mandatory" is wrong, but is it just "advice" if monitored and enforced by police?.
The story appears to be fizzling out, the Mail have now lost interest. But incredible how it lead all the news for nearly 5 days and Cummings remained through the eye of the storm. Almost unprecedented.
The worrying thing for the media is Twitter makes them feel important, but Cummings reaction and trust levels with the public mean this is potentially the weakest they have ever been. I'm sure they didn't expect this level of resistance from Dom, but if they don't claim his scalp they are going to look rather toothless in future political 'scandals'.
I think Dom is well off enough, has enough contacts and enough friends such that in the extremely unlikely event of both him and his wife being hospitalised transport for their 4 year old to live with their niece could and would have been arranged.
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.
On his own admission, he didn’t even explore them.
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.
Family come before friends.
And if I exhausted my family in close vicinity I would ask friends.
That is what any reasonable person would do.
I have family in Scotland, are you seriously suggesting it would be reasonable for me to drive 550 miles if I exhausted my nearby family? You don't think I should ask close-by friends instead, or call 999?
'Coronavirus lockdown: Scots' concerns over UK response
A survey for BBC Scotland suggested that a majority of people thought Boris Johnson and UK ministers had handled the pandemic "fairly" or "very" badly...
A total of 82% of respondents said Ms Sturgeon had handled the outbreak "fairly" or "very" well, to 8% "fairly" or "very" badly, giving her a net approval rating of +74. The Scottish government's score was +67.
Meanwhile 30% of those who took part said the prime minister was handling the outbreak "fairly" or "very" well, compared to 55% "fairly" or "very" badly - a net approval rating of -25. The UK government's overall rating was -17.
The NHS in Scotland was given a +90 approval rating for its handling of the crisis, while care homes were given a net score of +8, with 40% saying they were responding "well" overall, to 32% "badly".'
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.
To be fair, would you leave your children with Michael Gove or Priti Patel? I believe Dom on that one!
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's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
Before you walk to the car remember to check your legs first!
If you've not been walking for weeks because of an illness then testing your legs first before you go for a long walk is what anyone sane would do.
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's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
+1 - I could go to Barnie as it's a 25 minute drive or so, but Durham, Bishop and Richmond are all equidistant and nicer.
The advisor decides; the leader follows. Cummings has control over Johnson.
Tim Shipman implies in his book that Gove stabbing Johnson in the back in 2016 was in relation to a demand to have Cummings as Number 10 Chief of Staff.
In all of this I wonder just how many politicians and journalists are very worried that their own actions during covid are seen as pure and unblemished.
See Varadkar flouted the rules in Ireland yesteday
Boris mishandled this, and with Cummings failure to resign is the biggest gift they could have bestowed on their many political foes and they are obviously exploiting this gift
Just a word of caution, do not go over the top rather than just wait and watch as events unfold over the months
Breaking
Douglas Ross junior minister has resigned over Cummings
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.
Where's your evidence that some or all of those young people are breaking quarantine after infection?
Or are you trying the same old tired conflation of lockdown and quarantine?
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.
It's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
Before you walk to the car remember to check your legs first!
If you've not been walking for weeks because of an illness then testing your legs first before you go for a long walk is what anyone sane would do.
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.
If the Government cannot support an industry that is 80% based in the UK, then it will get what it deserves.
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.
Piers cares only about his own role in creating Twitter 'trends'.
The impotent fury of the outraged on Twitter not getting their man is the one redeeming feature of this sorry tale for me.
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.
Piers cares only about his own role in creating Twitter 'trends'.
The impotent fury of the outraged on Twitter not getting their man is the one redeeming feature of this sorry tale for me.
That's a bizarre reading of it. Do you really think Cummings is home and hosed?
In any case, it's always a challenge to come up with a story that can fool others. Cummings, intelligently, has recognised the impossibility in his scenario and provided one that can allow his adherents (well, some of them) to fool themselves.
Giving the people the tools to fool themselves is always far easier, after all.
The problem is that it's so weak that the non-adherents are unfooled and angry still - and the adherents are puzzled. "Look, he's explained" "It's all a witch hunt." "I don't care if he did something wrong, he's one of us and you lot are all of them."
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.
Piers cares only about his own role in creating Twitter 'trends'.
The impotent fury of the outraged on Twitter not getting their man is the one redeeming feature of this sorry tale for me.
That's a bizarre reading of it. Do you really think Cummings is home and hosed?
Should we really care? Whilst all this verbal tennis between the government and the media continues both have taken their eyes off the ball.
The story appears to be fizzling out, the Mail have now lost interest. But incredible how it lead all the news for nearly 5 days and Cummings remained through the eye of the storm. Almost unprecedented.
The worrying thing for the media is Twitter makes them feel important, but Cummings reaction and trust levels with the public mean this is potentially the weakest they have ever been. I'm sure they didn't expect this level of resistance from Dom, but if they don't claim his scalp they are going to look rather toothless in future political 'scandals'.
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.
Where's your evidence that some or all of those young people are breaking quarantine after infection?
Or are you trying the same old tired conflation of lockdown and quarantine?
That was the most disturbing part about the press conference, neither Dom nor the media seemed to grasp the difference between quarantine and lockdown or appreciate the whopping difference in health implications between breaching the two.
Mr. Sandpit, F1 seems to have a very sensible approach. It'd be dumb to not reach some sort of agreement, given they're deliberately isolating themselves as much as possible.
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.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
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.
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.
It's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
Before you walk to the car remember to check your legs first!
If you've not been walking for weeks because of an illness then testing your legs first before you go for a long walk is what anyone sane would do.
Had Cummings not been able to see for weeks?
He'd not driven for weeks due to illness.
Going on a half hour drive before going on a cross country drive is only logical.
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.
They. Had. Family. In. London.
Family who'd offered childcare? How do you know that? Who had offered childcare and when?
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.
They brought Covid from London and took it to a Durham hospital.
They absolute most fundamental point of quarantine was broken.
Quite frankly we're now well and truly into "Mind your own f***ing business" territory. People trying to nitpick who drives and who family members are etc is not news.
Or judges that there is nothing to be gained by his intervention. We will see.
The point remains that one of the most powerful men in government has flouted the advice to stay at home if displaying symptoms - the single most important piece of advice if we are to control the pandemic. And has refused even to express regret.
See Varadkar flouted the rules in Ireland yesteday
That's not true.
The change in the rules in Ireland - groups of four can meet in the open air - was an invitation to meet people for picnics. Just because one official talked a bit of nonsense about going straight home after exercise doesn't change 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.
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.
They. Had. Family. In. London.
Family who'd offered childcare? How do you know that? Who had offered childcare and when?
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.
Piers cares only about his own role in creating Twitter 'trends'.
The impotent fury of the outraged on Twitter not getting their man is the one redeeming feature of this sorry tale for me.
That's a bizarre reading of it. Do you really think Cummings is home and hosed?
Unless something new comes out I think that he is staying. The PM still finds him useful. So much so that he has been willing to take an extraordinary amount of flak to keep him. That is the PM's choice, and by PM I do not mean Piers Morgan.
Mr. Sandpit, F1 seems to have a very sensible approach. It'd be dumb to not reach some sort of agreement, given they're deliberately isolating themselves as much as possible.
There's also a lot of (virus) testing of F1's technical people.
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's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
Before you walk to the car remember to check your legs first!
If you've not been walking for weeks because of an illness then testing your legs first before you go for a long walk is what anyone sane would do.
Had Cummings not been able to see for weeks?
He'd not driven for weeks due to illness.
Going on a half hour drive before going on a cross country drive is only logical.
The RCP averages above (though missing Ohio, North Carolina, even Georgia where Biden is also ahead in some recent polls) probably re-establish Florida as likely the most important swing state at this point. Biden needs all of Clinton's 2016 states plus Florida plus 1 other to win, I'm not sure that instead winning all of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is any easier. Anyway all of these look like they are going to be close.
The relatively good news for Biden is that out of the states Clinton won the only ones that might be close are New Hampshire and Nevada, so far as I can see. And Nevada looks like quite a long-shot for Trump, while New Hampshire only has 4 electoral college votes so Biden can often afford to lose it.
Quite frankly we're now well and truly into "Mind your own f***ing business" territory. People trying to nitpick who drives and who family members are etc is not news.
Yes we are - and when the next time the Government needs to control this virus people are going to "Mind their own f***ing business" and do what the f*** they like.
In 2 minutes on Sunday Boris destroyed any chance of any second wave being containable.
Mr. Sandpit, F1 seems to have a very sensible approach. It'd be dumb to not reach some sort of agreement, given they're deliberately isolating themselves as much as possible.
They're spending an awful lot of time and money putting together a plan, which I expect will end up as a model for other returning sports.
They literally have a billion reasons to have an F1 season happen this year, and are now at the stage of trying to convince governments of their plans such that a calendar of events can be published.
They've had to revisit a lot of the business plans for certain events, based on the fact that there will be no crowd present, but are getting agreements in place with circuits and promoters.
They also released this last week, perhaps the best PR video possible, discussing the huge efforts in time and money that many F1-related people put into medical equipment research and manufacture, at a time when it was thought to be critical to the outcome of the pandemic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMjqQ8eyBCU
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.
They. Had. Family. In. London.
Family who'd offered childcare? How do you know that? Who had offered childcare and when?
Quite frankly we're now well and truly into "Mind your own f***ing business" territory. People trying to nitpick who drives and who family members are etc is not news.
You're currently posting at an average of one post every 2 minutes. Tbh that's not really giving the impression that any of this 'is not news'.
A famed moralist one said "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.". He also said something about Samaritans that I always thought was a bit passive aggressive towards Samaritans.
Nevertheless, another chap, further east, a few centuries before said "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Someone else, down in Arabia, expressed similar sentiments a few centuries later when he said "Seek for mankind that of which you are desirous for yourself"
Others of a more athiestic bent have echoed such sentiments. Nothing, not even family, comes before your duty not to harm, or risk harm, to your fellow man. Otherwise you start having concentric circles of concern up to and invluding the volk. The only individual I can think of who disagrees is Ayn Rand who, I am sure we can all agree, taks complete cobblers.
As a result of considering the available evidence offered me by a number of moral philosophers down the centuries, I have come to the tentative conclusion the mere convenience of your childcare arrangements does not trump a duty to protect lives from either (i) infection from a deadly virus or (ii) driving while visually impaired.
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.
They. Had. Family. In. London.
Family who'd offered childcare? How do you know that? Who had offered childcare and when?
Are you telling me that their family in London wouldn't have looked after their kid if they'd both been hospitalised or become otherwise incapacitated? (Which didn't actually happen, anyway). Some family. Most families with young children also have a close circle of friends from NCT, nursery, local mother-toddler groups etc, you would be surprised how close these relationships can be. It beggars belief they had no emergency options available close to home (even I can't believe they are such awful people that they have no close friends).
Labour being sensible as I think it would have been a tactical error to join
I agree. Starmer should maintain his detached 'more in sorrow than anger' vibe whereby he appears driven not by a visceral desire to claim the head of Cummings but by concerns around the integrity of this government and its messaging.
Quite frankly we're now well and truly into "Mind your own f***ing business" territory. People trying to nitpick who drives and who family members are etc is not news.
Yes we are - and when the next time the Government needs to control this virus people are going to "Mind their own f***ing business" and do what the f*** they like.
In 2 minutes on Sunday Boris destroyed any chance of any second wave being containable.
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.
They. Had. Family. In. London.
Family who'd offered childcare? How do you know that? Who had offered childcare and when?
He did not ask anyone in London for help, because he wanted an excuse to go to Durham.
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.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
That's true - to control spread you need to identify those [people|actions] that spread the most. But R isn't supposed to do that, it's a measure of the overall situation and the lumpiness is irrelevant for that. If R > 1 then trouble ahead (how quickly depending how much > 1). If R < 1 then things are going to get better.
R is a useful measure of what it measures. It might be that R doesn't do what you'd like it to do. It's a bit like saying GDP growth figures are useless to assess the economy because even in a recession there are some people making fortunes.
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.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
Has there ever been a disease where a husband does not infect his wife yet one person can infect 100s just by being vaguely near them? I wonder is there is any science yet as to what it is within someone that makes them a super spreader.
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.
Where's your evidence that some or all of those young people are breaking quarantine after infection?
Or are you trying the same old tired conflation of lockdown and quarantine?
That was the most disturbing part about the press conference, neither Dom nor the media seemed to grasp the difference between quarantine and lockdown or appreciate the whopping difference in health implications between breaching the two.
As was predicted by many here yesterday, the media screwed up by not having a simple and coherent question to ask DC - preferring to either ask him if he was evil and should resign, or focus on minutiae of when and where he was moving around.
Quite frankly we're now well and truly into "Mind your own f***ing business" territory. People trying to nitpick who drives and who family members are etc is not news.
It's a pandemic and he was instrumental in creating the rules. "Mind your own f***ing business" simply does not apply here.
Quite frankly we're now well and truly into "Mind your own f***ing business" territory. People trying to nitpick who drives and who family members are etc is not news.
You're currently posting at an average of one post every 2 minutes. Tbh that's not really giving the impression that any of this 'is not news'.
Because I'm currently online on a site that's a hobby of mine to visit with plenty of people saying things I disagree with.
What do you propose I do? If none of us posted here there'd be no site worth visiting. I'm pretty sure the posts I disagree with outnumber my posts by order of magnitude.
Quite frankly we're now well and truly into "Mind your own f***ing business" territory. People trying to nitpick who drives and who family members are etc is not news.
LOL
The whole of the government's regulatory regime has been predicated on defining rules for just who you can and can't drive or be with.
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.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
Again, you are not following the science. No scientist is claiming that it's all about 'super spreader' individuals. Rather they are speculating that it's a combination of someone actively shedding large mounts of virus (for whatever reason*), and the location or circumstances in which they do so.
*That might be related to the activity they are engaged in - singing; shouting; vigorous exercise etc - or the current state of their infection, or (less likely) that they are an individual who produces an unusual amount of virus.
Chasing mythical individuals is of far less importance than limiting situations (large gatherings in enclosed spaces, for example), and isolating anyone who is infected (which is where Cummings comes in).
If people are still pretending not to understand the guidance about self-isolation, then they're lying. I suggest people stop feeding the trolls.
The guidance is that no one - including small children - should leave their home once there has been an infection there.
If exceptional circumstances arise, exceptional action may need to be taken. But if what Cummings did were reasonable then the guidance would simply not apply to any household containing small children.
That's such a ludicrous proposition that anyone making it should be ashamed of either their stupidity or their mendacity.
See Varadkar flouted the rules in Ireland yesteday
That's not true.
The change in the rules in Ireland - groups of four can meet in the open air - was an invitation to meet people for picnics. Just because one official talked a bit of nonsense about going straight home after exercise doesn't change 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.
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.
They. Had. Family. In. London.
Family who'd offered childcare? How do you know that? Who had offered childcare and when?
It. Doesn't. Matter.
They. Were. Supposed. To. Stay. At. Home.
Unless they had reason to leave home.
Would you let a 17 year old you see once or twice a year for say 2 hours a time look after your 4 year old for a week.
The excuse doesn't wash and everyone knows it.
As I said come September / November as wave 2 hits Boris protecting Cummings allows everyone to ignore any future rules. Sorry, did that apply to us?
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.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
Has there ever been a disease where a husband does not infect his wife yet one person can infect 100s just by being vaguely near them? I wonder is there is any science yet as to what it is within someone that makes them a super spreader.
I suspect that we might find that a lot of viruses in fact operate like this. Some people just seem to emit clouds of the virus which presumably means that they have allowed it to multiply out of control within their own system. It definitely needs research. It would have a significant effect on the way we fight such viruses.
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.
I'd be interested in hearing from our legal experts on what the law has to say about the position of someone who undertakes the care of a sick child when the parents are both incapacitated.
In an emergency of course one would do what one could, but the possible comebacks are quite frightening for one who has never been a parent.
Mr. Sandpit, F1 seems to have a very sensible approach. It'd be dumb to not reach some sort of agreement, given they're deliberately isolating themselves as much as possible.
This does seem entirely sensible.
The government has a complicated message to get across about reopening the economy. Some reopening is sensible/essential - but it has made a very poor start in explaining the reasoning.
A famed moralist one said "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.". He also said something about Samaritans that I always thought was a bit passive aggressive towards Samaritans.
Nevertheless, another chap, further east, a few centuries before said "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Someone else, down in Arabia, expressed similar sentiments a few centuries later when he said "Seek for mankind that of which you are desirous for yourself"
Others of a more athiestic bent have echoed such sentiments. Nothing, not even family, comes before your duty not to harm, or risk harm, to your fellow man. Otherwise you start having concentric circles of concern up to and invluding the volk. The only individual I can think of who disagrees is Ayn Rand who, I am sure we can all agree, taks complete cobblers.
As a result of considering the available evidence offered me by a number of moral philosophers down the centuries, I have come to the tentative conclusion the mere convenience of your childcare arrangements does not trump a duty to protect lives from either (i) infection from a deadly virus or (ii) driving while visually impaired.
Why would I think Ayn Rand talks cobblers? She's one of the greatest modern moral philosophers and speaks a lot of sense. Ayn Rand is brilliant, everyone should read Atlas Shrugged.
Comments
Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
My theory is Cummings went to the hospital too but that will never be proven, for fair enough reasons.
The "no taxis" thing seems like nonsense too.
1. Senior official broke quarantine rules. SOP is that they resign. Cummings hasn't.
2. This means that "Do I say, not do as I do" or "One rule for the elite; one rule for the plebs" apply. Now, either lockdown and quarantine with their very intrusive restrictions on personal movement are necessary to prevent mass death, or they are not. Which is it?
3.The advisor decides; the leader follows. Cummings has control over Johnson.
PP/Betfair 11/4 go, 1/4 stay
Ladbrokes 3/1 go, 1/5 stay
Starsports 11/4 go, 2/9 stay
Its the muppets who expected one rule to apply for every single scenario with no common sense getting involved who are the ones confused.
The worrying thing for the media is Twitter makes them feel important, but Cummings reaction and trust levels with the public mean this is potentially the weakest they have ever been. I'm sure they didn't expect this level of resistance from Dom, but if they don't claim his scalp they are going to look rather toothless in future political 'scandals'.
Anyway, I have work to do. Later.
That is what any reasonable person would do.
I have family in Scotland, are you seriously suggesting it would be reasonable for me to drive 550 miles if I exhausted my nearby family? You don't think I should ask close-by friends instead, or call 999?
'Coronavirus lockdown: Scots' concerns over UK response
A survey for BBC Scotland suggested that a majority of people thought Boris Johnson and UK ministers had handled the pandemic "fairly" or "very" badly...
A total of 82% of respondents said Ms Sturgeon had handled the outbreak "fairly" or "very" well, to 8% "fairly" or "very" badly, giving her a net approval rating of +74. The Scottish government's score was +67.
Meanwhile 30% of those who took part said the prime minister was handling the outbreak "fairly" or "very" well, compared to 55% "fairly" or "very" badly - a net approval rating of -25. The UK government's overall rating was -17.
The NHS in Scotland was given a +90 approval rating for its handling of the crisis, while care homes were given a net score of +8, with 40% saying they were responding "well" overall, to 32% "badly".'
https://tinyurl.com/yaafayms
Personally I blame The National for brainwashing the Scottish public.
Edit: just noticed that this was taken before Cumgate.
Those saying he broke lockdown rules and should resign so far is much higher than when the story broke originally .
Gove now telling the public they were confused about what the rules are is just showing yet more contempt for people.
Sensible IMHO
See Varadkar flouted the rules in Ireland yesteday
Boris mishandled this, and with Cummings failure to resign is the biggest gift they could have bestowed on their many political foes and they are obviously exploiting this gift
Just a word of caution, do not go over the top rather than just wait and watch as events unfold over the months
Breaking
Douglas Ross junior minister has resigned over Cummings
Or are you trying the same old tired conflation of lockdown and quarantine?
https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1264628511983230978
https://twitter.com/Douglas4Moray/status/1265196839231533057/photo/1
A resignation.
https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1265156033531523073
Cummings, intelligently, has recognised the impossibility in his scenario and provided one that can allow his adherents (well, some of them) to fool themselves.
Giving the people the tools to fool themselves is always far easier, after all.
The problem is that it's so weak that the non-adherents are unfooled and angry still - and the adherents are puzzled. "Look, he's explained"
"It's all a witch hunt."
"I don't care if he did something wrong, he's one of us and you lot are all of them."
Bring your family.
Labour being sensible as I think it would have been a tactical error to join
Mr. Sandpit, F1 seems to have a very sensible approach. It'd be dumb to not reach some sort of agreement, given they're deliberately isolating themselves as much as possible.
https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1265123212318425088
Going on a half hour drive before going on a cross country drive is only logical.
They absolute most fundamental point of quarantine was broken.
We will see.
The point remains that one of the most powerful men in government has flouted the advice to stay at home if displaying symptoms - the single most important piece of advice if we are to control the pandemic. And has refused even to express regret.
That is utterly unacceptable.
The change in the rules in Ireland - groups of four can meet in the open air - was an invitation to meet people for picnics. Just because one official talked a bit of nonsense about going straight home after exercise doesn't change that.
They. Were. Supposed. To. Stay. At. Home.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52806086
The relatively good news for Biden is that out of the states Clinton won the only ones that might be close are New Hampshire and Nevada, so far as I can see. And Nevada looks like quite a long-shot for Trump, while New Hampshire only has 4 electoral college votes so Biden can often afford to lose it.
In 2 minutes on Sunday Boris destroyed any chance of any second wave being containable.
They literally have a billion reasons to have an F1 season happen this year, and are now at the stage of trying to convince governments of their plans such that a calendar of events can be published.
They've had to revisit a lot of the business plans for certain events, based on the fact that there will be no crowd present, but are getting agreements in place with circuits and promoters.
They also released this last week, perhaps the best PR video possible, discussing the huge efforts in time and money that many F1-related people put into medical equipment research and manufacture, at a time when it was thought to be critical to the outcome of the pandemic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMjqQ8eyBCU
Nevertheless, another chap, further east, a few centuries before said "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Someone else, down in Arabia, expressed similar sentiments a few centuries later when he said "Seek for mankind that of which you are desirous for yourself"
Others of a more athiestic bent have echoed such sentiments. Nothing, not even family, comes before your duty not to harm, or risk harm, to your fellow man. Otherwise you start having concentric circles of concern up to and invluding the volk. The only individual I can think of who disagrees is Ayn Rand who, I am sure we can all agree, taks complete cobblers.
As a result of considering the available evidence offered me by a number of moral philosophers down the centuries, I have come to the tentative conclusion the mere convenience of your childcare arrangements does not trump a duty to protect lives from either (i) infection from a deadly virus or (ii) driving while visually impaired.
R is a useful measure of what it measures. It might be that R doesn't do what you'd like it to do. It's a bit like saying GDP growth figures are useless to assess the economy because even in a recession there are some people making fortunes.
I wonder is there is any science yet as to what it is within someone that makes them a super spreader.
What do you propose I do? If none of us posted here there'd be no site worth visiting. I'm pretty sure the posts I disagree with outnumber my posts by order of magnitude.
Well done Ross
The whole of the government's regulatory regime has been predicated on defining rules for just who you can and can't drive or be with.
And now you say "mind your own business".
Phil you're having a shocker here, mate.
No scientist is claiming that it's all about 'super spreader' individuals. Rather they are speculating that it's a combination of someone actively shedding large mounts of virus (for whatever reason*), and the location or circumstances in which they do so.
*That might be related to the activity they are engaged in - singing; shouting; vigorous exercise etc - or the current state of their infection, or (less likely) that they are an individual who produces an unusual amount of virus.
Chasing mythical individuals is of far less importance than limiting situations (large gatherings in enclosed spaces, for example), and isolating anyone who is infected (which is where Cummings comes in).
https://twitter.com/LloydAMelville/status/1265012129498828808?s=19
The guidance is that no one - including small children - should leave their home once there has been an infection there.
If exceptional circumstances arise, exceptional action may need to be taken. But if what Cummings did were reasonable then the guidance would simply not apply to any household containing small children.
That's such a ludicrous proposition that anyone making it should be ashamed of either their stupidity or their mendacity.
The excuse doesn't wash and everyone knows it.
As I said come September / November as wave 2 hits Boris protecting Cummings allows everyone to ignore any future rules. Sorry, did that apply to us?
In an emergency of course one would do what one could, but the possible comebacks are quite frightening for one who has never been a parent.
Good morning, everybody.
The government has a complicated message to get across about reopening the economy. Some reopening is sensible/essential - but it has made a very poor start in explaining the reasoning.