Covid-19

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Tall Paul » Sat May 23, 2020 9:30 am

Grumps wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 6:33 am
Similar to defending Alistair Campbell
What's the lead singer of UB40 done now?
This user liked this post: Greenmile

jackmiggins
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
Been Liked: 197 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jackmiggins » Sat May 23, 2020 9:37 am

If he and wifey were infected, there is a reasonable chance that their child was too. Taking him/her to any other household is clearly against the rules, never mind travelling 300 miles to do so (probably also had to fill with petrol on the way). Disgraceful behaviour and demonstrates disrespect and stupidity. Unfortunately, there will probably be many more of the glitterati that have also broken the rules that they have set.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by taio » Sat May 23, 2020 10:40 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 9:12 am
Hi Billy, don't you think these are three different circumstances: Scottish CMO, making two trips to her second home - please don't go to second homes was the rule; Ferguson - please maintain social distance with other households was the rule. Cummings - self-isolate if have symptoms, no travel except for essentials and medical purposes. I don't think we know Cummings 4 year old son, we don't need to do. If the young lad's mother and father are both suffering from covid-19 symptoms are we saying that it wasn't essential to get him to a place where he can be looked after - whether this is his grandparents, or as we are now hearing, his aunt and uncle? Are we saying he should have made the trip to Durham on his own? Maybe his Dad was well enough to make the drive, but also aware that he may not be a day or two later.
I'm sure there'll be more to come out on this story. But if what's being reported is true there's really no defence. Would be a good opportunity to get shut of the tosser in any case. On the face of it and based on what's being reported your defence of him is exceptionally weak.
This user liked this post: Greenmile

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Tall Paul » Sat May 23, 2020 10:44 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 9:12 am
Hi Billy, don't you think these are three different circumstances: Scottish CMO, making two trips to her second home - please don't go to second homes was the rule; Ferguson - please maintain social distance with other households was the rule. Cummings - self-isolate if have symptoms, no travel except for essentials and medical purposes. I don't think we know Cummings 4 year old son, we don't need to do. If the young lad's mother and father are both suffering from covid-19 symptoms are we saying that it wasn't essential to get him to a place where he can be looked after - whether this is his grandparents, or as we are now hearing, his aunt and uncle? Are we saying he should have made the trip to Durham on his own? Maybe his Dad was well enough to make the drive, but also aware that he may not be a day or two later.
No, it's do not leave your home for any reason.

Image
Last edited by Tall Paul on Sat May 23, 2020 10:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
These 2 users liked this post: Zlatan Greenmile

JohnMcGreal
Posts: 2206
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
Been Liked: 1344 times
Has Liked: 438 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by JohnMcGreal » Sat May 23, 2020 10:44 am

I think this case is a good measure of just how far gone some people are, with their almost slavish devotion to this Vote Leave government. They're so invested in these people that they've completely lost any sense of judgment, to the point where they will attempt to defend the indefensible, and make themselves look ridiculous in the process.

Julia Hartley-Brewer is certainly on the fanatical end of that spectrum, and will always try to defend the likes of Cummings wherever possible. But even she can't bring herself to defend this, because it's indefensible.

For most people, this isn't a left / right or remain / leave argument. It's simply about blatant hypocrisy and arrogance, which ought to make Cummings' position untenable.

The precedent has already been set, where Neil Ferguson and Catherine Calderwood resigned (rightly) for their own hypocritical and rule breaking actions. Cummings has committed a worse offence than either of those, and is in a more senior and influential position. He has to resign, or Johnson has to sack him. But I won't hold my breath for either of those things happening.
These 8 users liked this post: Swizzlestick Bordeauxclaret Steve-Harpers-perm BurningBeard TVC15 CombatClaret bfcjg longsidepies

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1938 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Sat May 23, 2020 10:46 am

It must be reassuring for the government to know they can basically do what they want and know people will queue up to defend them.

Might be why they’ve made such a mess of the whole crisis, they probably think what’s the point in putting the hard yards in.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Tall Paul » Sat May 23, 2020 10:48 am

I'm sure he was just using common sense.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by taio » Sat May 23, 2020 10:48 am

JohnMcGreal wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 10:44 am
I think this case is a good measure of just how far gone some people are, with their almost slavish devotion to this Vote Leave government. They're so invested in these people that they've completely lost any sense of judgment, to the point where they will attempt to defend the indefensible, and make themselves look ridiculous in the process.

Julia Hartley-Brewer is certainly on the fanatical end of that spectrum, and will always try to defend the likes of Cummings wherever possible. But even she can't bring herself to defend this, because it's indefensible.

For most people, this isn't a left / right or remain / leave argument. It's simply about blatant hypocrisy and arrogance, which ought to make Cummings' position untenable.

The precedent has already been set, where Neil Ferguson and Catherine Calderwood resigned (rightly) for their own hypocritical and rule breaking actions. Cummings has committed a worse offence than either of those, and is in a more senior and influential position. He has to resign, or Johnson has to sack him. But I won't hold my breath for either of those things happening.
Let's see how this plays out and what the real story is, but if it's as reported they shouldn't wait for him to resign - they should just sack him.

Hipper
Posts: 5681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:33 pm
Been Liked: 1175 times
Has Liked: 918 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Hipper » Sat May 23, 2020 10:51 am

Manna for the government's political opponents. Getting him sacked however will only really be political point scoring. He's not an MP after all. It will make it more difficult but he will surely be able to get access to the PM and continue to 'advise'.

As Paul asks, what should he have done in his circumstances? It's not about 'complying with the law' or other such guidelines. It's about making measured judgements of his particular situation based on the laws or guidelines, something we all should be doing. Rather then look at what these guidelines say he shouldn't be doing, let's look at what they say he could do in his situation.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by taio » Sat May 23, 2020 10:53 am

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 10:44 am
No, it's do not leave your home for any reason.

Image
Of course someone can leave home for medical purposes. But that wouldn't, in my view, cover what Cummings has done if the story is correct.

jrgbfc
Posts: 8420
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2097 times
Has Liked: 336 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jrgbfc » Sat May 23, 2020 10:54 am

If Cummings were to go they'd be no one to run the government.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by taio » Sat May 23, 2020 10:55 am

Hipper wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 10:51 am
Manna for the government's political opponents. Getting him sacked however will only really be political point scoring. He's not an MP after all. It will make it more difficult but he will surely be able to get access to the PM and continue to 'advise'.

As Paul asks, what should he have done in his circumstances? It's not about 'complying with the law' or other such guidelines. It's about making measured judgements of his particular situation based on the laws or guidelines, something we all should be doing. Rather then look at what these guidelines say he shouldn't be doing, let's look at what they say he could do in his situation.
Not travel to Durham on public transport. Plenty of better options.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by taio » Sat May 23, 2020 10:55 am

jrgbfc wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 10:54 am
If Cummings were to go they'd be no one to run the government.
What a load of absolute sh1te.

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1868 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Sat May 23, 2020 10:56 am

Michael Gove has pointed out on Twitter what he did was not a crime. This is correct but neither did Neil Ferguson or Catherine Calderwood who both had to resign.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Sat May 23, 2020 11:09 am

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 10:44 am
No, it's do not leave your home for any reason.

Image
There's the bit after that, which says those with children in the house won't be able to abide by All the rules/guidelines.... It's so woolly it probably gives a get out

The SNP Westminster leader was suggesting this morning on tv, that he could have put his child into care!!

Like I've said, if he's broken the rules sack him, but it might just be he hasn't broken any.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Covid-19

Post by tiger76 » Sat May 23, 2020 11:22 am

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 10:56 am
Michael Gove has pointed out on Twitter what he did was not a crime. This is correct but neither did Neil Ferguson or Catherine Calderwood who both had to resign.
Precisely i really don't see how the government can defend his stupidity above all else,if he doesn't stand down or is forced to resign he'll be a millstone around their necks in the coming months,this behaviour just sums up the attitude of the elite,the guidelines clearly don't apply to them only to the plebs.

jackmiggins
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
Been Liked: 197 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jackmiggins » Sat May 23, 2020 11:22 am

What he did wouldn’t be in question normally. These aren’t normal times though, and he unquestionably flouted the rules applied to the plebs.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Sat May 23, 2020 11:31 am

I haven't seen every article on the matter, but what are the sensible alternatives being suggested, which he could have done regarding the welfare of his child?

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Covid-19

Post by FactualFrank » Sat May 23, 2020 11:38 am

I think they should try out this new track and trace app to see if they can locate Boris.
This user liked this post: cblantfanclub

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Covid-19

Post by tiger76 » Sat May 23, 2020 11:40 am

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:38 am
I think they should try out this new track and trace app to see if they can locate Boris.
Who? :lol:

ksrclaret
Posts: 6804
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2488 times
Has Liked: 760 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by ksrclaret » Sat May 23, 2020 11:40 am

I’m more concerned at the news that he’s passed on half of his alleles to another human. That surely goes against his idea of eugenics.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10840
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5517 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by TheFamilyCat » Sat May 23, 2020 11:46 am

Grumps wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:31 am
I haven't seen every article on the matter, but what are the sensible alternatives being suggested, which he could have done regarding the welfare of his child?
The same that everyone else self isolating with symptoms did.
This user liked this post: Greenmile

ksrclaret
Posts: 6804
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2488 times
Has Liked: 760 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by ksrclaret » Sat May 23, 2020 11:52 am

taio wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 10:55 am
What a load of absolute sh1te.
Lighten up taio. He could always be furloughed or redeployed. :lol:

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1179 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Jakubclaret » Sat May 23, 2020 11:54 am

Grumps wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:09 am
There's the bit after that, which says those with children in the house won't be able to abide by All the rules/guidelines.... It's so woolly it probably gives a get out

The SNP Westminster leader was suggesting this morning on tv, that he could have put his child into care!!

Like I've said, if he's broken the rules sack him, but it might just be he hasn't broken any.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52782913
He hasn't, he's operated within the lockdown rules.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Sat May 23, 2020 11:58 am

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:46 am
The same that everyone else self isolating with symptoms did.
Which was?
Do you really think that nobody else took their kids out of the house, and let a relative look after them?
If he was doing it for the benefit of his child, I have a little sympathy, it's not like your married lover coming round for a bit of nookie

keith1879
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:28 pm
Been Liked: 262 times
Has Liked: 363 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by keith1879 » Sat May 23, 2020 11:58 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 9:12 am
Hi Billy, don't you think these are three different circumstances: Scottish CMO, making two trips to her second home - please don't go to second homes was the rule; Ferguson - please maintain social distance with other households was the rule. Cummings - self-isolate if have symptoms, no travel except for essentials and medical purposes. I don't think we know Cummings 4 year old son, we don't need to do. If the young lad's mother and father are both suffering from covid-19 symptoms are we saying that it wasn't essential to get him to a place where he can be looked after - whether this is his grandparents, or as we are now hearing, his aunt and uncle? Are we saying he should have made the trip to Durham on his own? Maybe his Dad was well enough to make the drive, but also aware that he may not be a day or two later.
That looks like a measured post which I expect from Paul. We will never know the full truth I expect but I would be rather shocked if there was nobody in London who could look after the child and that includes Dominic and his wife. We are constantly told that for most people this is a mild disease and that it rarely affects children significantly.
I can recall occasions when my wife and I were both ill with 4 children to look after....or that I was away from home and she was ill and basically we just had to muddle through. The idea of driving 250 miles would have been idiotic.
The fact that Cummings is a key member of an administration telling people to do exactly the opposite of what he did makes it worse.
The fact that Downing Street clearly sought to keep it secret makes it even worse.
The fact that the police say that they interviewed him and Downing Street say they didn't makes it even worse.
The fact that nothing will happen to him is appalling.
This user liked this post: longsidepies

TVC15
Posts: 8211
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3321 times
Has Liked: 601 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by TVC15 » Sat May 23, 2020 11:58 am

I assumed that the rule was that they should have self isolated as a family.
The grey area seems to be the medical reasons one that if both parents were too ill to look after the child - which I suppose there could be a small chance of both of them being too ill, both at the same time yet not quite ill enough for either to be admitted too hospital, but not so ill that one of them could not manage a 300 plus mile drive in his car, but too ill to get out of their beds to look after their child....but just about well enough to get to the car etc etc......
beginning to sound like one of Boris’ speeches isn’t it ?!!
Last edited by TVC15 on Sat May 23, 2020 12:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: keith1879

Swizzlestick
Posts: 3977
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
Been Liked: 1503 times
Has Liked: 577 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Swizzlestick » Sat May 23, 2020 12:01 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:46 am
The same that everyone else self isolating with symptoms did.
And considering he was well enough to drive 300 miles, you can probably surmise he was ok to look after his son. And I’m sure even Dominic Cummings had people nearby who could help out if both parents became so incapacitated that they couldn’t care for him.

Whole thing stinks - they’ve tried to cover it up, failed, and now defending the indefensible, at a time when people haven’t been able to see their parents, attend family funerals or properly say goodbye to loved ones.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10840
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5517 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by TheFamilyCat » Sat May 23, 2020 12:14 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:58 am
Which was?
Do you really think that nobody else took their kids out of the house, and let a relative look after them?
If he was doing it for the benefit of his child, I have a little sympathy, it's not like your married lover coming round for a bit of nookie
I don't know if other people did it or not and it's not really the point. The thing is, he had no need to and was part of the administration that made the guidelines that he then didn't follow.

If he had symptoms and suspected that he had the virus, the chances are the kid would have had it so he was potentially causing more spread.

Stay at home
Protect the NHS
Save lives

Or

Go to Durham
Put more lives at risk
Give the NHS more, avoidable, cases to deal with.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by dsr » Sat May 23, 2020 12:17 pm

keith1879 wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:58 am
The fact that the police say that they interviewed him and Downing Street say they didn't makes it even worse.
The police don't say they interviewed him. They say they spoke to the owner of the property but the self-isolating person was in another part of the house.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Sat May 23, 2020 12:18 pm

keith1879 wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:58 am
We are constantly told that for most people this is a mild disease and that it rarely affects children significantly.
If that is the excuse that the child was ok staying with him and his wife, then hopefully the same reasoning can be used to send the children back to school
Yet I seem to be seeing the opposite view from the unions, and some parents

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Sat May 23, 2020 12:21 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:14 pm
I don't know if other people did it or not and it's not really the point.
It actually is the point, when you say he should have done what everybody else did.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Covid-19

Post by tiger76 » Sat May 23, 2020 12:24 pm

He'll be gone in the next week,even if he and his wife needed help with childcare was it really justifiable to drive the best part of 300 miles?

And if the PM insists he retains his post,then it's incumbent on the said PM to explain why that should be the case.Maybe there was a legitimate reason for Mr Cummings and his families movement,but as it stands it's hard to see what that reason could have been.

Swizzlestick
Posts: 3977
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
Been Liked: 1503 times
Has Liked: 577 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Swizzlestick » Sat May 23, 2020 12:24 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:18 pm
If that is the excuse that the child was ok staying with him and his wife, then hopefully the same reasoning can be used to send the children back to school
Yet I seem to be seeing the opposite view from the unions, and some parents
There’s a strawww maaaan, waiting in the skyyy

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by taio » Sat May 23, 2020 12:26 pm

ksrclaret wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:52 am
Lighten up taio. He could always be furloughed or redeployed. :lol:
Nah, furloughing or temp redeployment are good things for those not able to do their normal job - too good for Cummings.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Sat May 23, 2020 12:26 pm

Swizzlestick wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:24 pm
There’s a strawww maaaan, waiting in the skyyy
Have you missed the bit where I've said he should be sacked, if he's broken the guidelines?

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10840
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5517 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by TheFamilyCat » Sat May 23, 2020 12:35 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:21 pm
It actually is the point, when you say he should have done what everybody else did.
Conveniently ignoring the bigger picture.

I see you think he did no wrong; that's your right, I'll just leave it there.

Claretnick
Posts: 569
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:41 am
Been Liked: 214 times
Has Liked: 191 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Claretnick » Sat May 23, 2020 12:42 pm

This is the regulation that applied to all of us at the time Cummings made his journey;

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020 ... ion/6/made

None of the listed reasonable excuses to leave the place where you live seem to apply.

Two people who were working with Government resigned their posts for failing to observe the above regulations, why is anything different for Cummings. Also begs the question why so many cabinet members are rushing to the defence of an non-elected Whitehall mandarin?

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Sat May 23, 2020 12:46 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:35 pm
Conveniently ignoring the bigger picture.

I see you think he did no wrong; that's your right, I'll just leave it there.
I've never said he's done nothing wrong, but if the guys going to get sacked, like him or loathe him, let's actually see if he has done anything wrong

The passage below, taken from the official government advice on self isolating with children, might be his get out of jail card.....

Keep following this advice to the best of your ability, however, we are aware that not all these measures will be possible.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by dsr » Sat May 23, 2020 12:48 pm

keith1879 wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 11:58 am
That looks like a measured post which I expect from Paul. We will never know the full truth I expect but I would be rather shocked if there was nobody in London who could look after the child and that includes Dominic and his wife. We are constantly told that for most people this is a mild disease and that it rarely affects children significantly.
Remember we are talking about 31st March here. Anything that was said in April and May isn't relevant to Cummings' decision.

The big question is, what at that time was the correct thing to do? It's been suggested that he should have put the child into "care". It's been suggested that he should have handed it over to one of the neighbours who would have been ready and willing to take in a 4 year old child with probable deadly disease. It's been suggested that he wasn't ill with the implication that he should have known he wasn't going to be. And it's been suggested (by Cummings' own actions) that the best option was to go to his extensive family farm and occupy one of the spare houses there in isolation.

What should he have done?

CombatClaret
Posts: 4381
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1825 times
Has Liked: 929 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by CombatClaret » Sat May 23, 2020 12:49 pm

Claretnick wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:42 pm
Also begs the question why so many cabinet members are rushing to the defence of an non-elected Whitehall mandarin?
And the best the can do is "If you people really cared for your family, you'd have broken the rules too."

TVC15
Posts: 8211
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3321 times
Has Liked: 601 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by TVC15 » Sat May 23, 2020 1:01 pm

dsr wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:48 pm
Remember we are talking about 31st March here. Anything that was said in April and May isn't relevant to Cummings' decision.

The big question is, what at that time was the correct thing to do? It's been suggested that he should have put the child into "care". It's been suggested that he should have handed it over to one of the neighbours who would have been ready and willing to take in a 4 year old child with probable deadly disease. It's been suggested that he wasn't ill with the implication that he should have known he wasn't going to be. And it's been suggested (by Cummings' own actions) that the best option was to go to his extensive family farm and occupy one of the spare houses there in isolation.

What should he have done?
Self isolate as a family ?
It would be very long odds that both parents were too ill at exactly the same time to look after their child bearing in mind the proportion of people who only get mild symptoms.
And longer odds that they were too ill to look after a child and not ill enough to be admitted to hospital.
And even longer odds that one of them was just about well enough to undertake a 300 mile trip.

Claretnick
Posts: 569
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:41 am
Been Liked: 214 times
Has Liked: 191 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Claretnick » Sat May 23, 2020 1:01 pm

dsr wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:48 pm
Remember we are talking about 31st March here. Anything that was said in April and May isn't relevant to Cummings' decision.

The big question is, what at that time was the correct thing to do? It's been suggested that he should have put the child into "care". It's been suggested that he should have handed it over to one of the neighbours who would have been ready and willing to take in a 4 year old child with probable deadly disease. It's been suggested that he wasn't ill with the implication that he should have known he wasn't going to be. And it's been suggested (by Cummings' own actions) that the best option was to go to his extensive family farm and occupy one of the spare houses there in isolation.

What should he have done?
I respectfully suggest you read the regulation that applied to all of us when Mr Cummings and his family travelled 250+ miles to Durham. Does the law apply to all citizens or not?

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1868 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Sat May 23, 2020 1:01 pm

Odd how his wife didn’t mention they’d travelled to Durham in her article for The Spectator last month.

bfcjg
Posts: 13151
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:17 pm
Been Liked: 5000 times
Has Liked: 6715 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by bfcjg » Sat May 23, 2020 1:05 pm

Tabloid headline writers dream.
Cummings and goings.
Cumming to an end
Cumming to a job centre near you.
This user liked this post: longsidepies

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5201 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Devils_Advocate » Sat May 23, 2020 1:11 pm

OK, I've done the maths. On Dom's A1 tour he will have stopped at:

Baldock Roadchef
Grantham North Moto
Barnsdale Bar, Ex Little Chef

In layman's terms that's: 5 Urinals, 1 Chod Bin, 10 Fruit Machines, 4 Monsters, a BK touchscreen, and a grabber claw game. Its an R score of 9.

cblantfanclub
Posts: 416
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:11 pm
Been Liked: 117 times
Has Liked: 305 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by cblantfanclub » Sat May 23, 2020 1:12 pm

dsr
"suggested that he should have handed it over to one of the neighbours who would have been ready and willing to take in a 4 year old child with probable deadly disease."

He seemed fully prepared to hand the child with the "probable deadly disease" to his parents, who I presume were elderly (or sister when he gets his story straight)

Over dramatising I think.

How did everybody else manage? For me it emphasises how this government has little understanding of ordinary folk and their problems. People with the same problem managed without a farm with a spare house on it and without all the other resources he could command. One rule.......
This user liked this post: Greenmile

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by martin_p » Sat May 23, 2020 1:17 pm

dsr wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:48 pm
Remember we are talking about 31st March here. Anything that was said in April and May isn't relevant to Cummings' decision.

The big question is, what at that time was the correct thing to do? It's been suggested that he should have put the child into "care". It's been suggested that he should have handed it over to one of the neighbours who would have been ready and willing to take in a 4 year old child with probable deadly disease. It's been suggested that he wasn't ill with the implication that he should have known he wasn't going to be. And it's been suggested (by Cummings' own actions) that the best option was to go to his extensive family farm and occupy one of the spare houses there in isolation.

What should he have done?
If his parents (or sister) were looking after the child they should have been the ones doing the travelling, not two infected people and their child.
Last edited by martin_p on Sat May 23, 2020 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Granny WeatherWax
Posts: 2785
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 3:20 pm
Been Liked: 711 times
Has Liked: 88 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Granny WeatherWax » Sat May 23, 2020 1:17 pm

Wow. All senior cabinet members tweeting similar defences of Cummings. What a terrible, hypocritical and dishonest government we have. Horrifying.
This user liked this post: Bordeauxclaret

keith1879
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:28 pm
Been Liked: 262 times
Has Liked: 363 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by keith1879 » Sat May 23, 2020 1:18 pm

dsr wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 12:17 pm
The police don't say they interviewed him. They say they spoke to the owner of the property but the self-isolating person was in another part of the house.
Fair comment....but this is what the police said.
"In line with national policing guidance, officers explained to the family the guidelines around self-isolation and reiterated the appropriate advice around essential travel."
and this is what Downing Street said
"At no stage was he or his family spoken to by the police about this matter, as is being reported."

Both statements cannot be correct.

Locked