politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Motes and beams. Leading a response to a pandemic without mora
Comments
-
A simple yes would have sufficed.Essexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
And of course, that's assuming that the current version of the risible and ever-changing story put forward by the pair is the gospel truth, which seems implausible.0 -
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.2 -
QUARANTINEBrom said:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8361403/Ex-Labour-spin-doctor-Alastair-Campbell-breaks-social-distancing-rules-speedo-man-selfie.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK
Proof that the Cummings story was more about a personal vendetta for some than any breach of the lockdown.1 -
"I wouldn't be doing my job if I shuffled the problem onto the Cabinet Secretary"
LOL0 -
Johnson says he has seen "the evidence" on Cummings.
0 -
Well, for some the hatred towards him / Cummings is 100% Brexit, but yes, Tory Bear pointing out all the Remainers on the panel ahead of time, is as I say just "getting excuses in early".Big_G_NorthWales said:
The Cummings saga is not a brexit issueFrancisUrquhart said:
Getting the excuses in early.....TGOHF666 said:0 -
It's the frigging Cab Sec's job to oversee the cabinet and civil service code.MikeL said:"I wouldn't be doing my job if I shuffled the problem onto the Cabinet Secretary"
LOL2 -
The Cummings saga is not a Brexit issue but Brexit is an available excuse for why people are being mean to Dominic and that excuse seems to be being used (in part) to justify his retention.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well, for some the hatred towards him / Cummings is 100% Brexit, but yes, Tory Bear pointing out all the Remainers on the panel ahead of time, is as I say just "getting excuses in early".Big_G_NorthWales said:
The Cummings saga is not a brexit issueFrancisUrquhart said:
Getting the excuses in early.....TGOHF666 said:0 -
There are far better ways of checking out your eyesight, Philip, so it is unfortunate for the defendant that coincidentally it was on his wife's birthday, coincidentally happened to finish up at a local tourist spot and coincidentally they had to get out because someone felt sick.Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
Unlikely to stand up in a Court of Law, Philip.0 -
I have listened to the Welsh minister today who is demanding furlough payments continue to October and beyond even though they seem intent on keeping Wales in lockdown for much longer than England. I expect the same to happen in ScotlandRochdalePioneers said:Now Stephen Crabb is having to correct the PM that his comments on what we are allowed to do is only in England...
This may well be a big story in the next six months0 -
Clear tactic this afternoon to be hinting / leaking all loosening lockdown measures to distract from everything else.TGOHF666 said:0 -
Great sport this, the Liaison Committee.1
-
So would it be alright with you if the boy had been taken ill in London and Mary Wakefield had gone to hospital with him there?Pulpstar said:
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.0 -
Get in Yvette!!!0
-
Why couldn't one of the close family members (that the Cummings family had travelled 260 miles to be adjacent to in case of just such an emergency!) accompany the lad?Essexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
Wasn't that the whole purpose of being in Durham in the first place?1 -
I hold no brief for Mr T, but there have been occasions in the past, and no doubt will be again, when I have taken a short trip...... 'round the block' ........ to see how I feel before driving a long distance. Usually with someone with me, although not with a small child in the car.TOPPING said:
LOL!Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
You genuinely think that it is sensible to take a half hour drive to see if you're up to taking a three hour drive?
That must be one of the most (unintentionally I presume) funny things I've read on PB. And of course heard from a senior government advisor.0 -
Johnsons starting to get tetchy.0
-
It is not a Brexit issue, it is a right or wrong issue.eek said:
The Cummings saga is not a Brexit issue but Brexit is an available excuse for why people are being mean to Dominic and that excuse seems to be being used (in part) to justify his retention.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well, for some the hatred towards him / Cummings is 100% Brexit, but yes, Tory Bear pointing out all the Remainers on the panel ahead of time, is as I say just "getting excuses in early".Big_G_NorthWales said:
The Cummings saga is not a brexit issueFrancisUrquhart said:
Getting the excuses in early.....TGOHF666 said:
Two extreme ERG members, Stephen Baker and Laurence Robertson, have both expressed their dissatisfaction over Cummings. There are probably other of a Brexit persuasion who also ain't happy.0 -
He'll be "looking into" ?! shouldn't the 'alert level' be a matter of best estimate of scientific truth rather than something the PM decides from day to day. Will he be looking into whether tommorow will be 20 degrees and sunny too ?TGOHF666 said:
I hope he's paraphrasing and the actual level will be a decision of SAGE but I have my doubts.1 -
What were you checking for out of interest?OldKingCole said:
I hold no brief for Mr T, but there have been occasions in the past, and no doubt will be again, when I have taken a short trip...... 'round the block' ........ to see how I feel before driving a long distance. Usually with someone with me, although not with a small child in the car.TOPPING said:
LOL!Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
You genuinely think that it is sensible to take a half hour drive to see if you're up to taking a three hour drive?
That must be one of the most (unintentionally I presume) funny things I've read on PB. And of course heard from a senior government advisor.0 -
Yes, obviously declaring the suspect Covid nature of the illness to protect the paramedics and admissions staff.Essexit said:
So would it be alright with you if the boy had been taken ill in London and Mary Wakefield had gone to hospital with him there?Pulpstar said:
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.0 -
Banking that police will find nothing probably due to lack of evidence.Scott_xP said:0 -
Andy Byford has been appointed the new commissioner of Transport for London.
Mr Byford, 54, who was previously president and chief executive officer of New York City Transit Authority, will begin his role on 29 June.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-528188280 -
The thing is that neither has Denmark or Germany or Slovakia or any other European country that has move on from lockdown. Apart from the state of Georgia, where they were cavalier in the way that they re-opened to an extent even Trump commented on, there has been little sign of second waves.Mexicanpete said:
A second wave? According to the PB Brains Trust a second wave looks unlikely because Switzerland has not experienced one. Move along, nothing to see!TOPPING said:
Let's say that previously @noneoftheabove didn't go to the park. Let's say that his park can hold 1,000 people comfortably maintaining social distancing. Let's say that 30,000 people as a result of Dom's actions think fuck it I'm off down the park.Philip_Thompson said:
Good. That's progress. Glad some good has come out of all this.noneoftheabove said:
It depends what you mean. I shall follow the laws and whats needed to stop the virus spreading but nonsensical things like I can be in a park surrounded by people I dont know, but not by people I do know? Or I can be in a park but not a big garden? No, I shall no longer bother with such advice.Richard_Nabavi said:Hmm, the government's handling of this has undoubtedly been a total disaster, but the moral responsibility argument doesn't end there. If it is indeed the case that people are going to die because the public are (quite reasonably) disgruntled with the PM and his sidekick, then we are admitting that personal pique amongst the public outweighs their responsibility to behave in a way which minimises deaths. We are also exonerating opposition politicians, the police, the media, doctors, and others from their responsibility to point out that anger at Cummings is not an excuse for irresponsible behaviour. It's not as though the coverage has exactly been free of partisan glee.
So perhaps we should go back to being grown ups, who can despise Cummings and Boris, whilst simultaneously recognising that social distancing, quarantines and regulations are there to save lives and should still be followed. This shouldn't be hard, really.
What then?
There are a few hotspots that emerge but with good tracking and tracing that is all that they become.
Whether any of the 4 countries of the UK will have good tracking and tracing and whether the public will play their part is open to debate but the reality is there is only really one way to find out.0 -
It's logical to go for a drive to confirm you are in a fit state to drive.Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
Going for a drive doesn't mean you have to get out and go for a walk half way through the end of the drive (when you were supposed to remain local). Every time I've taken the car out for a run (you have to, to ensure the battery doesn't drain fully and brakes don't seize up) it's been from home, drive around a bit and then straight back home.
But I know that nothing anyone says will change your viewpoint that your personal desires trumps protecting the rest of the population.0 -
Definitely a Brexit issue. Look at Alastair Campbell disobeying the rules today but getting angry at Cummings.Peter_the_Punter said:
It is not a Brexit issue, it is a right or wrong issue.eek said:
The Cummings saga is not a Brexit issue but Brexit is an available excuse for why people are being mean to Dominic and that excuse seems to be being used (in part) to justify his retention.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well, for some the hatred towards him / Cummings is 100% Brexit, but yes, Tory Bear pointing out all the Remainers on the panel ahead of time, is as I say just "getting excuses in early".Big_G_NorthWales said:
The Cummings saga is not a brexit issueFrancisUrquhart said:
Getting the excuses in early.....TGOHF666 said:
Two extreme ERG members, Stephen Baker and Laurence Robertson, have both expressed their dissatisfaction over Cummings. There are probably other of a Brexit persuasion who also ain't happy.0 -
"Brexit educates the senses, calls into disrepute the political will, makes imperfect the unwritten constitution, brings Tories into such swift and close collision in critical moments that Leaver measures Remainer."BluestBlue said:
Indeed. Also Emerson: 'When you strike the king, you must kill him.'MarqueeMark said:
Eventually, the bigger story of the Cummings episode is how fucked the BBC are going to be as a result of the way they have played it.Andy_JS said:
Remember, Beeb: "dig two graves".....0 -
I very much don't want to go down this road. For example, I wouldn't when it comes to the late lockdown. That cost lives too but the difference there is I am sure Johnson was doing his best in a difficult situation, driven primarily by the national interest. Indeed I was warming to the guy - albeit from a chilly base - and enjoying the sensation. As I have posted before, I like to have respect for whoever is my PM. It feels much better that way. And I was getting there. The video after he came out of hozzy, for example, was great. Eloquent, sincere, and oh so very human. The sort of speech May could never have pulled off. Ditto Starmer. So since then I've been inclined to cut him slack if I can. But this has been egregious from him, this last week, and so me and "Boris" are back to square one. Which I'm sad about. I truly mean that.BluestBlue said:
You really want to go down that road? Then I'll just quote myself:kinabalu said:Mmm. Indeed so. And one is queasy about saying this but it is certain that Johnson's praising of the breaking of the rules by his Chief Advisor will lead to less risk avoidance from the public and as a consequence our Covid-19 death toll will be higher than it otherwise would have been. Or to put it another way, come Christmas, because of how our craven vacuous PM has behaved over this last week, there will be a non-trivial number of people who will be lying cold in their grave rather than sitting down to turkey and all the trimmings. Indefensible really.
'And if we want to follow the dark logic of some critics that Cummingsgate has weakened the lockdown and will cost lives, then it follows incontrovertibly that in choosing to publish the story, the Guardian and Mirror deliberately chose to risk thousands of lives for the sake of trying (and failing) to destroy their political opponent.'
'Which would make their scoop the most irresponsible piece of journalism in modern times.'
Really indefensible.
As for your comparison to the papers, sorry but it simply does not work. Firstly, it's their job to report things like this. And secondly, how could they know that rather than protect the government's messaging by demanding an apology from DC for his rule breaking, Johnson would choose instead to praise him. "He acted as he saw fit as a husband and father. I will not mark him down for that." Nobody - not even you - could have seen that cumming.1 -
Not surprising given Cooper going full witch.rottenborough said:Johnsons starting to get tetchy.
0 -
Johnson now giving old advice - only go out when you have to go to work or shop. Nope, that was changed a couple of weeks back...0
-
Yes. Next question.Essexit said:
So would it be alright with you if the boy had been taken ill in London and Mary Wakefield had gone to hospital with him there?Pulpstar said:
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.0 -
Exactly - 'round the block', not half an hour down the road with wife and small child, landing by chance at a local tourist spot. We're not mugs ffs.OldKingCole said:
I hold no brief for Mr T, but there have been occasions in the past, and no doubt will be again, when I have taken a short trip...... 'round the block' ........ to see how I feel before driving a long distance. Usually with someone with me, although not with a small child in the car.TOPPING said:
LOL!Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
You genuinely think that it is sensible to take a half hour drive to see if you're up to taking a three hour drive?
That must be one of the most (unintentionally I presume) funny things I've read on PB. And of course heard from a senior government advisor.0 -
Dublin Airport
@DublinAirport
·
1h
Apparently, the pilot is testing his eyesight just to make sure he’ll be ok for a transatlantic flight in a day or two. Sorry, that’s obviously not the case. It’s collecting information for a mapping software company.1 -
Does SAGE even bother to meet now that the entire strategy has been blown to pieces.Pulpstar said:
He'll be "looking into" ?! shouldn't the 'alert level' be a matter of best estimate of scientific truth rather than something the PM decides from day to day. Will he be looking into whether tommorow will be 20 degrees and sunny too ?TGOHF666 said:
I hope he's paraphrasing and the actual level will be a decision of SAGE but I have my doubts.
Seems there is sod all lockdown in my local few streets today. Road very busy. Tons of people coming and going to each other's houses, families popping in, chatting in the gardens, smell of a barbeque as we get into early evening.0 -
If she declared that to the paramedics in Durham (and we don't know whether or not she did), surely the decision to take her was on them, and presumably the precautions were taken.Foxy said:
Yes, obviously declaring the suspect Covid nature of the illness to protect the paramedics and admissions staff.Essexit said:
So would it be alright with you if the boy had been taken ill in London and Mary Wakefield had gone to hospital with him there?Pulpstar said:
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.0 -
cheers BarnierCarlottaVance said:0 -
The only people making Cummings about Brexit so far as I can see are the absolute maddest Brexiteers.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Claire Fox. You can read up about Living Marxism, and perhaps reconsider your vote.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm not sure what genocide denier you're referring to but yes Theresa May quit so I'm happy. The rest as they say is history.
Comparisons with Germany are insane, this was not a meaningful election to choose a government. It was a protest election to a parliament we are no longer a part of and should have already left before the vote was held. I treated that election with all the dignity it deserved.
Or you can bluster on, and we will all know your true moral character.0 -
In fairness and in hindsight yes, that probably would have been better. But people whose four year-olds are being taken to hospital are not generally known for highly rational thought.Foxy said:
Why couldn't one of the close family members (that the Cummings family had travelled 260 miles to be adjacent to in case of just such an emergency!) accompany the lad?Essexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
Wasn't that the whole purpose of being in Durham in the first place?0 -
The last occasion was when I'd had an operation on my back. Could I put my left foot hard down on the clutch. Yes I could, The previous was after I'd had labyrinthitis, which affects the balance. On that occasion I went with a driving instructor who said I was fine.TOPPING said:
What were you checking for out of interest?OldKingCole said:
I hold no brief for Mr T, but there have been occasions in the past, and no doubt will be again, when I have taken a short trip...... 'round the block' ........ to see how I feel before driving a long distance. Usually with someone with me, although not with a small child in the car.TOPPING said:
LOL!Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
You genuinely think that it is sensible to take a half hour drive to see if you're up to taking a three hour drive?
That must be one of the most (unintentionally I presume) funny things I've read on PB. And of course heard from a senior government advisor.0 -
To be honest if this becomes an issue again it will only boost government support. Not sure I see No 10s logic here.CarlottaVance said:
"If we're forced to lose Cummings, which a majority of Leavers want, then next we'll be fighting a Brexit extension, which a majority of Leavers are on our side for. Please don't make us move to a fight where public opinion is better for us."0 -
First useful question from Greg Clarke- why are we at 2m, most of Europe 1.5m and WHO 1.0.
Now can hardly answer question on Track n'Trace quarantine contact is compulsory or voluntary.0 -
It is that fact that Cummings has got away with it with Johnson's blessing that is weakening the lockdown. The journalists certainly can't be blamed for that. It would have been reasonable to assume that once it had been highlighted that Cummings had broken the quarantine requirements that he would have been sacked.BluestBlue said:
Nicely put. And if we want to follow the dark logic of some critics that Cummingsgate has weakened the lockdown and will cost lives, then it follows incontrovertibly that in choosing to publish the story, the Guardian and Mirror deliberately chose to risk thousands of lives for the sake of trying (and failing) to destroy their political opponent.Richard_Nabavi said:Hmm, the government's handling of this has undoubtedly been a total disaster, but the moral responsibility argument doesn't end there. If it is indeed the case that people are going to die because the public are (quite reasonably) disgruntled with the PM and his sidekick, then we are admitting that personal pique amongst the public outweighs their responsibility to behave in a way which minimises deaths. We are also exonerating opposition politicians, the police, the media, doctors, and others from their responsibility to point out that anger at Cummings is not an excuse for irresponsible behaviour. It's not as though the coverage has exactly been free of partisan glee.
So perhaps we should go back to being grown ups, who can despise Cummings and Boris, whilst simultaneously recognising that social distancing, quarantines and regulations are there to save lives and should still be followed. This shouldn't be hard, really.
Which would make their scoop the most irresponsible piece of journalism in modern times.0 -
The British Prime Minister tells Greg Clark he is powerless to change the social distancing from two meters to one because that is what some unelected unaccountable committee tell him. And on no greater justification than that's what they 'feel is right at the moment' . Scientific justification came there none.
FFS Johnson get a grip. For many businesses this is vital. Make a decision.1 -
Mr. Quincel, I did wonder, think it was on the other thread, if backbenchers who want Cummings ought might threaten to rebel on extension in order to get it.
Depends how angry they are.0 -
If it’s guidance with no legal status what business is it of councils?Brom said:
I'm surprised pubs are opening on a Saturday. I would have expected a Monday would be better to ensure everything is working. However I'm sure the breweries and councils will send people round to check the correct measures are in place.RobD said:
Independence day!Anabobazina said:Mail Online is saying Saturday 4 July for pub reopening.
Where is it getting this date from?
I tried to do the same the other day too. Only @DavidL has bitten.AlastairMeeks said:I appreciate that it's more fun talking about Dominic Cummings but I'm disappointed I haven't been able to move debate on, just as the government wishes. What metrics is the government using for lifting lockdown? It hasn't articulated them at all yet and it does seem rather important.
We’ll just have to keep plugging away!0 -
Oh, you're no fun. Don't you know that Cummings is the Typhoid Annie de nos jours? He put literally millions of people at risk by, er driving directly to Durham in his car. Where's your sense of outrage? Get a pitchfork and a burning brand and join the rest of the Remainer Establishment in marching on Downing Street immediately.....Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.0 -
Bolded the bit I especially agree with here.DavidL said:Maybe, just maybe, the government looked at the deficit for April and thought, holy shit, we have to stop this before the entire country goes bust. I'd really like to think so. I agree with Alastair that there seems an element of panic about the removal of restrictions now but so there bloody well should be.
For me, the issues the government face are the reopening of the economy, the wind down of the excellent furlough scheme, the financial help for particular industries such as the French did yesterday with their car industry, the absolute crisis in our hospitality and tourism industries, the disaster for Universities who have grown fat on far eastern fees, the chronic failure to develop either an App or a method of tracing in the last 2.5 months, the speed with which tests are being turned around, even now the capacity to test, I could go on all day, it is terrifying.
Cummings is not even a deckchair on the Titanic which we are arguing about throwing overboard as the iceberg rips an ever bigger hole in the ship of state and the pathetic, irrational, disproportionate and frankly mad obsession with Cummings shows so much of what is wrong with this country today. People should grow up. There is plenty to be angry about, plenty to be genuinely worried about.1 job in Whitehall is not even close to making the list.
Have you told Johnson?0 -
Precisely why people carrying infection should not be travelling around the country, breaching quarantine...Essexit said:
In fairness and in hindsight yes, that probably would have been better. But people whose four year-olds are being taken to hospital are not generally known for highly rational thought.Foxy said:
Why couldn't one of the close family members (that the Cummings family had travelled 260 miles to be adjacent to in case of just such an emergency!) accompany the lad?Essexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
Wasn't that the whole purpose of being in Durham in the first place?2 -
I do rather think that Johnson's lack of clarity isn't so much a tactic to protect Cummings as a symptom of the fact he isn't at all on top of his brief.
He's got no sodding idea what the current rules actually are, and can't answer even Greg Clark's relatively friendly questions in a clear way.2 -
Boris absolutely hopeless at this. Dear God. All over the shop on rules/laws/guidelines on contact tracing.
Embarrassing.1 -
That's simple It's compulsory, unless..CarlottaVance said:First useful question - why are we at 2m, most of Europe 1.5m and WHO 1.0.
Now can hardly answer question on Track n'Trace quarantine contact is compulsory or voluntary.
1) you created the rules so they don't apply to you (only everyone else)
2) your personal judgement is that you would prefer to be somewhere nicer..
0 -
He has never been one for detail, but I think covid is still really effecting him. He can't even do the soft ball questions.SirNorfolkPassmore said:I do rather think that Johnson's lack of clarity isn't so much a tactic to protect Cummings as a symptom of the fact he isn't at all on top of his brief.
He's got no sodding idea what the current rules actually are, and can't answer even Greg Clark's relatively friendly questions in a clear way.
Unless he gets better (or if this is max of Boris abilities now), the men in grey suits will be along next year.2 -
-
How did you feel at the Londoners decamping to second homes in South Devon at the end of March? Did it matter to you whether they were carrying infection or not?MarqueeMark said:
Oh, you're no fun. Don't you know that Cummings is the Typhoid Annie de nos jours? He put literally millions of people at risk by, er driving directly to Durham in his car. Where's your sense of outrage? Get a pitchfork and a burning brand and join the rest of the Remainer Establishment in marching on Downing Street immediately.....Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.0 -
Paramedics are going to act the same way in London and Durham. Do you not understand the huge difference though. If noone with the virus within London travels to Durham, there is no possible way the virus reaches Durham.Essexit said:
If she declared that to the paramedics in Durham (and we don't know whether or not she did), surely the decision to take her was on them, and presumably the precautions were taken.Foxy said:
Yes, obviously declaring the suspect Covid nature of the illness to protect the paramedics and admissions staff.Essexit said:
So would it be alright with you if the boy had been taken ill in London and Mary Wakefield had gone to hospital with him there?Pulpstar said:
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.
NHS staff by and large don't have a choice about whether or not they come into contact with the virus, hence all the PPE. With the best will in the world a paramedic in London or Durham could get infected through the Cummings' family action but the virus was already rampant through London at that point so adding 1 infection to the pool simply doesn't matter as much as introducing to a low infected place. THIS really, really, really was precisely why travel around the country to second homes etc was explicitly banned in the guidance (I am not sure of the law)
I can't believe I'm having to explain this, @Foxy is a medic and might be able to help you out more on this if you need the fact that travelling around with the virus is a horrendously poor idea.0 -
Sadly, it is the one aspect of driving that you can safely test without actually driving. If he had said he wasn't 100% about his gear-changing abilities, that would be different because you have to drive to find out, and (icing on the cake) there is not a simple, open and shut, strict liability offence of driving with uncorrected gear changing ability.Peter_the_Punter said:
There are far better ways of checking out your eyesight, Philip, so it is unfortunate for the defendant that coincidentally it was on his wife's birthday, coincidentally happened to finish up at a local tourist spot and coincidentally they had to get out because someone felt sick.Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
Unlikely to stand up in a Court of Law, Philip.
What worries me most about all this is the claim that he has a towering intellect compared to the people (like the PM) who surround him.0 -
So why are Baker, Robertson and many other strongly pro-Brexit people lining up on the wrong side? I think it is because they think Cummings was wrong. So do I. So do most people, if the polls are anything to go by.Brom said:
Definitely a Brexit issue. Look at Alastair Campbell disobeying the rules today but getting angry at Cummings.Peter_the_Punter said:
It is not a Brexit issue, it is a right or wrong issue.eek said:
The Cummings saga is not a Brexit issue but Brexit is an available excuse for why people are being mean to Dominic and that excuse seems to be being used (in part) to justify his retention.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well, for some the hatred towards him / Cummings is 100% Brexit, but yes, Tory Bear pointing out all the Remainers on the panel ahead of time, is as I say just "getting excuses in early".Big_G_NorthWales said:
The Cummings saga is not a brexit issueFrancisUrquhart said:
Getting the excuses in early.....TGOHF666 said:
Two extreme ERG members, Stephen Baker and Laurence Robertson, have both expressed their dissatisfaction over Cummings. There are probably other of a Brexit persuasion who also ain't happy.
That suggests it's being seen as a right v wrong issue, and I'm sure that's healthy. Viewing it through the prism of Brexit is unhealthy because it trivialises it.0 -
Labour MP criticises Tory PM SHOCKER!Scott_xP said:0 -
Thanks. Presumably the clutch conundrum was solved before you started the engine? Quite high stakes exercise, I would have thought although no idea how to address it otherwise.OldKingCole said:
The last occasion was when I'd had an operation on my back. Could I put my left foot hard down on the clutch. Yes I could, The previous was after I'd had labyrinthitis, which affects the balance. On that occasion I went with a driving instructor who said I was fine.TOPPING said:
What were you checking for out of interest?OldKingCole said:
I hold no brief for Mr T, but there have been occasions in the past, and no doubt will be again, when I have taken a short trip...... 'round the block' ........ to see how I feel before driving a long distance. Usually with someone with me, although not with a small child in the car.TOPPING said:
LOL!Philip_Thompson said:
I think it's logical before you go for a long cross country drive if you've just recovered from illness to take a half hour drive to see that you're up to the pressures of driving.rcs1000 said:
In all your comments, you seem to pretend there was only one beach of regulations, not three or more.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Forget the trips (plural) between London and Durham, and tell me how the Castle Bernard sojourn was in the rules.
I believe that's what Cummings meant but not what he said. The way it was phrased was awful but the logic I understood.
You genuinely think that it is sensible to take a half hour drive to see if you're up to taking a three hour drive?
That must be one of the most (unintentionally I presume) funny things I've read on PB. And of course heard from a senior government advisor.0 -
I think that's right. With Cooper's questions, it felt rather strongly as if he didn't want to answer as it would incriminate Cummigs. That may be so, but it's also possible he isn't on top of ANY of it. It's sad to see in many ways, and worrying.FrancisUrquhart said:
He has never been one for detail, but I think covid is still really effecting him. He can't even do the soft ball questions.SirNorfolkPassmore said:I do rather think that Johnson's lack of clarity isn't so much a tactic to protect Cummings as a symptom of the fact he isn't at all on top of his brief.
He's got no sodding idea what the current rules actually are, and can't answer even Greg Clark's relatively friendly questions in a clear way.
Unless he gets better (or if this is max of Boris abilities now), the men in grey suits will be along next year.1 -
When one enters the land of fairytales, it's unwise to presume anything.Essexit said:
If she declared that to the paramedics in Durham (and we don't know whether or not she did), surely the decision to take her was on them, and presumably the precautions were taken.Foxy said:
Yes, obviously declaring the suspect Covid nature of the illness to protect the paramedics and admissions staff.Essexit said:
So would it be alright with you if the boy had been taken ill in London and Mary Wakefield had gone to hospital with him there?Pulpstar said:
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.
But one can only wonder at what the NHS staff were told, if this symptomatic mother and son were left to their own devices when it came to getting home again - someone apparently having to phone round to try to get a taxi, and as no taxis were available the symptomatic father having to break self-isolation to drive out and fetch them.
Scarcely reassuring, if that's standard NHS practice. Scarcely more reassuring if it's all just a pack of lies dreamed up by the Cummings family.0 -
Johnson is desperately unimpressive. He genuinely has no idea about the policy of the government he is supposed to lead.0
-
0
-
I am clear Cummings should have resigned.
But Alastair's piece is just so much poppycock.
Guidelines are guidelines. Laws are laws. Unless and until the Government passes specific laws with specific penalties for transgressing those laws then all Government guidance is open to interpretation.
Cummings was wrong to do what he did because as someone in a position of authority he should have been leading by example and because in not doing so he has made it seem as if the guidance actually doesn't matter. Of course it does. But the idea that there was no interpretation involved until Cummings performed his idiocy is just humbug.
If there are points at which the Government thinks it really is vital that its guidance is followed - such as the 14 day quarantine for new arrivals - then they should pass it into law. If they chose not to do that then people will indeed interpret it - or just ignore it - because that is the nature of our system of governance and law. If something is not explicitly forbidden then it is allowed.0 -
The quarantine question was a trap that he tettered on the edge of.CarlottaVance said:First useful question from Greg Clarke- why are we at 2m, most of Europe 1.5m and WHO 1.0.
Now can hardly answer question on Track n'Trace quarantine contact is compulsory or voluntary.0 -
1 -
One law for them one law for us.MarqueeMark said:
Oh, you're no fun. Don't you know that Cummings is the Typhoid Annie de nos jours? He put literally millions of people at risk by, er driving directly to Durham in his car. Where's your sense of outrage? Get a pitchfork and a burning brand and join the rest of the Remainer Establishment in marching on Downing Street immediately.....Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.0 -
He was never great, but post-covid he appears to operate at Corbyn level.SouthamObserver said:Johnson is desperately unimpressive. He genuinely has no idea about the policy of the government he is supposed to lead.
0 -
He is being Boris but that is when he had his USPTOPPING said:Boris absolutely hopeless at this. Dear God. All over the shop on rules/laws/guidelines on contact tracing.
Embarrassing.
I expect post a likely no deal at the end of the year he may well stand down0 -
When did we go from three-and-a-half to four?TGOHF666 said:0 -
So presumably Maitliss will be resigning for breaking impartiality guidelines?TGOHF666 said:Beeb in reverse gear.
https://twitter.com/bbcnewspr/status/1265666465308573696?s=210 -
It is quite a bland acknowledgement of reciept of the MPS letter, just saying the door is open until July 1st.Quincel said:
To be honest if this becomes an issue again it will only boost government support. Not sure I see No 10s logic here.CarlottaVance said:
"If we're forced to lose Cummings, which a majority of Leavers want, then next we'll be fighting a Brexit extension, which a majority of Leavers are on our side for. Please don't make us move to a fight where public opinion is better for us."
It is quite clear that such a request would require both sides agreement, by implication the government.0 -
-
AlastairMeeks said:
So I've just crested through the 30,000 comment barrier. I do have a life, honest.
- and does Errol Brown apply? 0 -
I dislike Claire Fox. I don't support her, never have. She holds no elected position in this country and that's in no small part due to my vote and the millions of others who voted like me.Mango said:
Claire Fox. You can read up about Living Marxism, and perhaps reconsider your vote.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm not sure what genocide denier you're referring to but yes Theresa May quit so I'm happy. The rest as they say is history.
Comparisons with Germany are insane, this was not a meaningful election to choose a government. It was a protest election to a parliament we are no longer a part of and should have already left before the vote was held. I treated that election with all the dignity it deserved.
Or you can bluster on, and we will all know your true moral character.
So I'm content with that. I would never vote for Claire Fox to Westminster but thankfully she isn't elected at all today.1 -
Exactly DavidL why do you think Boris has the pathetic, irrational, disproportionate and frankly mad obsession with Cummingskinabalu said:
Bolded the bit I especially agree with here.DavidL said:Maybe, just maybe, the government looked at the deficit for April and thought, holy shit, we have to stop this before the entire country goes bust. I'd really like to think so. I agree with Alastair that there seems an element of panic about the removal of restrictions now but so there bloody well should be.
For me, the issues the government face are the reopening of the economy, the wind down of the excellent furlough scheme, the financial help for particular industries such as the French did yesterday with their car industry, the absolute crisis in our hospitality and tourism industries, the disaster for Universities who have grown fat on far eastern fees, the chronic failure to develop either an App or a method of tracing in the last 2.5 months, the speed with which tests are being turned around, even now the capacity to test, I could go on all day, it is terrifying.
Cummings is not even a deckchair on the Titanic which we are arguing about throwing overboard as the iceberg rips an ever bigger hole in the ship of state and the pathetic, irrational, disproportionate and frankly mad obsession with Cummings shows so much of what is wrong with this country today. People should grow up. There is plenty to be angry about, plenty to be genuinely worried about.1 job in Whitehall is not even close to making the list.
Have you told Johnson?1 -
He's the MP for that well known Labour constituency of TUNBRIDGE WELLS.ozymandias said:
Labour MP criticises Tory PM SHOCKER!Scott_xP said:2 -
My money's on 'pack of lies' but then I gave up on the guy when he spun us the Castle fairy story.Chris said:
When one enters the land of fairytales, it's unwise to presume anything.Essexit said:
If she declared that to the paramedics in Durham (and we don't know whether or not she did), surely the decision to take her was on them, and presumably the precautions were taken.Foxy said:
Yes, obviously declaring the suspect Covid nature of the illness to protect the paramedics and admissions staff.Essexit said:
So would it be alright with you if the boy had been taken ill in London and Mary Wakefield had gone to hospital with him there?Pulpstar said:
And here's the EnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeEssexit said:
The lad was assessed over the phone and 999 decided to send an ambulance out. He could have been sent on his own but that seems a cruel thing to do to a four year-old. I would however be interested to know if the paramedics were made aware of Mary Wakefield's illness (assuming she was still symptomatic at that point).AlastairMeeks said:
You mean, apart from the trip into the hospital.Essexit said:
Given that they didn't actually come into contact with anyone either on the way there or back (including Cummings' parents), they could not have infected County Durham with COVID-19. Even if what they did was a technical breach of the rules, surely the key question is did they risk speeding up transmission of the virus? And it doesn't look like they did.DougSeal said:
False equivalency klaxon. False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
They were infected with a deadly virus - something your false equivalency doesn't take into account. Leaving the house meant that others could catch it. Unlike in a fire, there were alternatives to leaving the house up to and including calling social services. While I accept that calling social services not ideal, particularly not to the policital elite, it is temporary and not deadly, WHICH IS WHAT INFECTING COUNTY DURHAM WITH COVID-19 IS FFS. How hard can this be to understand? They may have killed someone to avoid sending their child to a place of safety outside their family - something plenty of very good parents do and have done since time began.
point of not travelling about the country when you suspect you might have Covid-19.
But one can only wonder at what the NHS staff were told, if this symptomatic mother and son were left to their own devices when it came to getting home again - someone apparently having to phone round to try to get a taxi, and as no taxis were available the symptomatic father having to break self-isolation to drive out and fetch them.
Scarcely reassuring, if that's standard NHS practice. Scarcely more reassuring if it's all just a pack of lies dreamed up by the Cummings family.0 -
Is this because Leave MPs lack the attention span for committee work?TGOHF666 said:3 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_BryantPulpstar said:
He's the MP for that well known Labour constituency of TUNBRIDGE WELLS.ozymandias said:
Labour MP criticises Tory PM SHOCKER!Scott_xP said:
The Welsh Tunbridge Wells?
0 -
noneoftheabove said:
There was childcare! The father was capable of a 350 mile drive without a stop. I dont think Id think that was safe at any time let alone driving a stressed family after an extremely stressful week at work. He must have been in excellent health and fresh.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed and having a young infant with no childcare is harmful. QED it is reasonable to leave the home to get childcare.Freggles said:
The regulations specifically allow you to leave home in order to prevent injury.Philip_Thompson said:I'm wondering how many people speaking about the instruction to stay at home would have done so if their fire alarm was going off and the building was being engulfed in flames.
Using your own personal judgement is what any sentient intelligent person should do. People banging on as if there's one rule for every situation don't just insult our intelligence they're insulting their own.
Very specific aren't they?
Of course he could look after his child. They have family in London and are rich enough it would be trivial to arrange childcare at short notice if needed.
Has there been a single child in the country who has had a serious accident because their parents had covid?
At best he acted on irrational fear. Far more likely natural selfishness.
In a nutshell we were all asked to make sacrifices for the sake of everyone else, Cummings said sod that I'm doing what's best for me. That is why he is being hammered2 -
0
-
Bojo`s lost his mojo.0
-
.
Finally refused to publish blatant lies from the most senior politician in the US without flagging them as dubious ?CarlottaVance said:
Outrageous !1 -
He means, Greg Clark, Greg Clark asked the question. Bryant tweeted it.ozymandias said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_BryantPulpstar said:
He's the MP for that well known Labour constituency of TUNBRIDGE WELLS.ozymandias said:
Labour MP criticises Tory PM SHOCKER!Scott_xP said:
The Welsh Tunbridge Wells?0 -
The BBC has the integrity to admit when it got it wrong. Boris Johnson's government on the other hand.....CarlottaVance said:Good.
Replies are something else...
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsPR/status/1265666465308573696?s=204 -
Well, it certainly is now. We’ve gone from being the Germans to being the French, with a side order of Derbyshire police being the Russians, all in a few weeks due to the PM’s frankly slightly worrying dependency on one person.Richard_Tyndall said:If there are points at which the Government thinks it really is vital that its guidance is followed - such as the 14 day quarantine for new arrivals - then they should pass it into law. If they chose not to do that then people will indeed interpret it - or just ignore it - because that is the nature of our system of governance and law. If something is not explicitly forbidden then it is allowed.
(For the avoidance of doubt, that is a reference to his fine old Soviet joke:
In America everything is permitted, except what is prohibited.
In Germany everything is prohibited, except what is permitted.
In France everything is permitted, even when it is prohibited.
In Russia everything is prohibited, even when it is permitted.)1 -
I have to say that the PM's grasp of detail is exceptionally impressive.
But not in a good way.3 -
Lockdown is now breaking down in a chaotic manner. It is obvious that the government is not in control of events any more.Cyclefree said:
If it’s guidance with no legal status what business is it of councils?Brom said:
I'm surprised pubs are opening on a Saturday. I would have expected a Monday would be better to ensure everything is working. However I'm sure the breweries and councils will send people round to check the correct measures are in place.RobD said:
Independence day!Anabobazina said:Mail Online is saying Saturday 4 July for pub reopening.
Where is it getting this date from?
I tried to do the same the other day too. Only @DavidL has bitten.AlastairMeeks said:I appreciate that it's more fun talking about Dominic Cummings but I'm disappointed I haven't been able to move debate on, just as the government wishes. What metrics is the government using for lifting lockdown? It hasn't articulated them at all yet and it does seem rather important.
We’ll just have to keep plugging away!
Might as well be a free for all now. the devil take the hindmost.0 -
So Maitliss fired or forced to resign then?Nigel_Foremain said:
The BBC has the integrity to admit when it got it wrong. Boris Johnson's government on the other hand.....CarlottaVance said:Good.
Replies are something else...
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsPR/status/1265666465308573696?s=200 -
Not really. To a large degree, he was always this bad. It's just that it's not being edited, there's no laugh track and his audience is sober.Stocky said:Bojo`s lost his mojo.
4 -
Quick poll of Cummings supporters. Do any of you believe his story about testing his eyes? Want to know whether we're dealing with idiots or hacks. Thanks.0
