Dominic Cummings alleged breach of lockdown rules discussion

[Bletchleyite]

The lockdown was never going to hold indefinitely.

It wasn't, but he's made it end rather quicker.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I kinda agree that his actions are indirectly going to lead to many more deaths, and that is atrocious on Cummings's[1] part . But I would kinda hesitate about ascribing blame entirely to him. Remember, the people who subsequently break social distancing while using Cummings as an excuse are really the people who will more directly be responsible for those likely deaths, and we shouldn't absolve those people of the blame.

[1] As a total aside, I've just realised I'm not quite sure how the grammar works for turning a name that ends in 's' into a possessive.

You can save your thankses, mine's a Banks's!

I *think* it'd be "Cummings' part" but then I thought I read elsewhere that that only applies to a plural possessive (e.g. "the brothers' house") so the famous Wolves brewery are actually right.

On your actual point, you are correct, but fundamentally if a Government wants people to do as they're told there are two ways to do it - one involves guns, the other involves not being a hypocrite.

 

[squizzler]

Interesting reports today that of the two witnesses who claimed to have seen Dominic Cummings breaking the lockdown, one had broken the lockdown himself by driving 250 miles to see his daughter and the other has confessed to making up his story for a joke!

Three wrongs don't make a right of course, but it just goes to show you can't always believe what you read in the press!

I somehow doubt that smearing the witnesses will get anything close to putting the genie back in the bottle. More likely it will alienate the Mail readership who, whatever we think of them, aren't stupid and are bound t see this cynical U-turn in coverage for what it is.

In fact surely this will encourage an even more cavalier attitude to government orders since it suggests that in fact everybody else was excursioning merrily all through April.

 

[Tetchytyke]

broken the lockdown himself by driving 250 miles to see his daughter

No, he went to collect her from temporary accommodation and bring her home. This is, and always has been, entirely within the rules. "Moving house where necessary" is specifically included as a legitimate reason to travel.

But The Sun never let the facts get in the way of a good smear.

 

[Harpers Tate]

...because Cummings didn't follow his civic duty.

Does he realise he has potentially killed thousands by his actions and his following arrogance?

As I have said before in fact it is not Cummings' actions that lead to anything significant (in terms of disease spread) - any more so than similar actions that have no doubt occurred with hundreds, possibly thousands of other people. It is the actions of the Media in reporting and persisting with this story, for almost a week now, that placed it and keeps it in view. If they had a single gram of "public interest" they would all have suppressed it for a greater good. Simply - if we did not know about it (just as we don't know about the undoubted many others) then "we" would not be "angry", "we" would never have seen the "green light" and so on. And again - IF somebody who has seen this news then chooses to "break the rules" (because "he did it so why can't I") and in so doing causes another to become infected, it is THEY who are responsible - not Cummings.

 

[Djgr]

As I have said before in fact it is not Cummings' actions that lead to anything significant (in terms of disease spread) - any more so than similar actions that have no doubt occurred with hundreds, possibly thousands of other people. It is the actions of the Media in reporting and persisting with this story, for almost a week now, that placed it and keeps it in view. If they had a single gram of "public interest" they would all have suppressed it for a greater good. Simply - if we did not know about it (just as we don't know about the undoubted many others) then "we" would not be "angry", "we" would never have seen the "green light" and so on. And again - IF somebody who has seen this news then chooses to "break the rules" (because "he did it so why can't I") and in so doing causes another to become infected, it is THEY who are responsible - not Cummings.

Well it's a point of view but I don't think many people share it. I certainly don't.

 

[Darandio]

As I have said before in fact it is not Cummings' actions that lead to anything significant (in terms of disease spread) - any more so than similar actions that have no doubt occurred with hundreds, possibly thousands of other people. It is the actions of the Media in reporting and persisting with this story, for almost a week now, that placed it and keeps it in view. If they had a single gram of "public interest" they would all have suppressed it for a greater good. Simply - if we did not know about it (just as we don't know about the undoubted many others) then "we" would not be "angry", "we" would never have seen the "green light" and so on. And again - IF somebody who has seen this news then chooses to "break the rules" (because "he did it so why can't I") and in so doing causes another to become infected, it is THEY who are responsible - not Cummings.

If you are happy with this government lying, sweeping things under the carpet and taking you for a ride then crack on. I don't share that view.

 

[BJames]

As I have said before in fact it is not Cummings' actions that lead to anything significant (in terms of disease spread) - any more so than similar actions that have no doubt occurred with hundreds, possibly thousands of other people. It is the actions of the Media in reporting and persisting with this story, for almost a week now, that placed it and keeps it in view. If they had a single gram of "public interest" they would all have suppressed it for a greater good. Simply - if we did not know about it (just as we don't know about the undoubted many others) then "we" would not be "angry", "we" would never have seen the "green light" and so on. And again - IF somebody who has seen this news then chooses to "break the rules" (because "he did it so why can't I") and in so doing causes another to become infected, it is THEY who are responsible - not Cummings.

And as I have said before, I don't think there are many people in this country (possibly yourself excluded) that want the government to be able to get away with cover ups. Why should be not know about it? It's important that we trust the government and "not knowing about it" is not equal to trusting the government more. As the two posters above, I don't share your view either.

Oh, and just to reiterate again - it wouldn't have mattered how much it had been exposed if he had done the respectable thing of apologising at the very least, or when the heat began to turn on him, resigning.

 

[Harpers Tate]

If you are happy with this government lying, sweeping things under the carpet and taking you for a ride then crack on. I don't share that view.

No, it's not my view; nor have I ever expressed such a view.

Why should be not know about it?

Because "people" are thereby responding by deeming it OK to break the rules. THAT will be the cause of any increase in spread of the virus; not what Cummings himself did. I use the term "greater good" here - it would have been for the greater good had the masses never found out. This is not a political matter; the pandemic doesn't care about politics and governments. And the press should have thought about that before going to town with it in order to sell newspapers/TV audiences/Advterts/whatever.

 

[Mogster]

As I have said before in fact it is not Cummings' actions that lead to anything significant (in terms of disease spread) - any more so than similar actions that have no doubt occurred with hundreds, possibly thousands of other people. It is the actions of the Media in reporting and persisting with this story, for almost a week now, that placed it and keeps it in view. If they had a single gram of "public interest" they would all have suppressed it for a greater good. Simply - if we did not know about it (just as we don't know about the undoubted many others) then "we" would not be "angry", "we" would never have seen the "green light" and so on. And again - IF somebody who has seen this news then chooses to "break the rules" (because "he did it so why can't I") and in so doing causes another to become infected, it is THEY who are responsible - not Cummings.

Yes there’s the irony. The media blast Cummings for encouraging people to break the lockdown while by breaking and perpetuating the story it’s the media that have caused the behavior they are criticising. If, as the left wing media suggest, he really is responsible for thousands of deaths then surely the media are irresponsible for breaking a story that isn’t in the public interest before lockdown has been lifted.

I really can’t imagine that many people are modifying their behavior on the basis of the Cummings story. I find the concept ridiculous. I do think people are just tired of the lockdown to the point where lockdown fatigue has set in . I always thought May would be a cutoff and really that’s proved to be true. I do think it’s better to ease the restrictions now to see how things go rather than trying to maintain them. The last thing we want is the sort of lockdown protests and riots that have been seen in other countries, but not widely reported here.

 

[Djgr]

Yes there’s the irony. The media blast Cummings for encouraging people to break the lockdown while by breaking and perpetuating the story it’s the media that have caused the behavior they are criticising. If, as the left wing media suggest, he really is responsible for thousands of deaths then surely the media are irresponsible for breaking a story that isn’t in the public interest before lockdown has been lifted.

I really can’t imagine that many people are modifying their behavior on the basis of the Cummings story. I find the concept ridiculous. I do think people are just tired of the lockdown to the point where lockdown fatigue has set in . I always thought May would be a cutoff and really that’s proved to be true. I do think it’s better to ease the restrictions now to see how things go rather than trying to maintain them. The last thing we want is the sort of lockdown protests and riots that have been seen in other countries, but not widely reported here.

It's not the left wing media though. It's all media including the Mail and Telegraph.
The twisting in your arguments is painful to read.

 

[greyman42]

...because Cummings didn't follow his civic duty.

Does he realise he has potentially killed thousands by his actions and his following arrogance?

I don't think the Cummings situation has anything to do with the hordes on the beaches etc. It is simply down to the weather.

 

[scotrail158713]

No, it's not my view; nor have I ever expressed such a view.

You did say this however

If they had a single gram of "public interest" they would all have suppressed it for a greater good. Simply - if we did not know about it

I’d agree with the other posters on this

 

[HSTEd]

I don't think the Cummings situation has anything to do with the hordes on the beaches etc. It is simply down to the weather.

That and people are finally realising exactly what it is they've been signed up for.

The original plan was a three month lockdown..... it's not going to be over in three months.

 

[Busaholic]

Yes there’s the irony. The media blast Cummings for encouraging people to break the lockdown while by breaking and perpetuating the story it’s the media that have caused the behavior they are criticising. If, as the left wing media suggest, he really is responsible for thousands of deaths then surely the media are irresponsible for breaking a story that isn’t in the public interest before lockdown has been lifted.

I really can’t imagine that many people are modifying their behavior on the basis of the Cummings story. I find the concept ridiculous. I do think people are just tired of the lockdown to the point where lockdown fatigue has set in . I always thought May would be a cutoff and really that’s proved to be true. I do think it’s better to ease the restrictions now to see how things go rather than trying to maintain them. The last thing we want is the sort of lockdown protests and riots that have been seen in other countries, but not widely reported here.

Please provide the evidence for your claim that the 'left wing media' suggest Cummings is responsible for thousands of deaths.

 

[45107]

Please provide the evidence for your claim that the 'left wing media' suggest Cummings is responsible for thousands of deaths.

Also (for Mogster), what is deemed “left wing media”.
The only one I am aware of is The Morning Star.
The Mirror and Guardian may be left leaning but I wouldn’t consider them left wing.

 

[Mogster]

It's not the left wing media though. It's all media including the Mail and Telegraph.
The twisting in your arguments is painful to read.

It wasn’t the DM and Telegraph that broke the story though was it? The print media in general have a long standing beef with Cummings over the way he “manages” them. Cummings has long been the arch enemy of the BBC and plots their downfall. The media increasingly want to be making the news rather than reporting on it, Cummings pushes back against this.

Then of course there’s Brexit, Cummings is the enemy of remain, both right and left, from the left he seems to be viewed as dangerous enough to require action.

The media and political issues surrounding the Cummings situation are far more complex than his lockdown breach. The way the media have managed to demonise Cummings over this simple issue is quite impressive, and a bit scary, let’s not pretend this has much to do with covid though.

I don’t agree with Andy Burnham too often but he was correct when he described the Cummings situation as a “Westminster Issue” and said it had detracted from the governments important public health message. Spot on.

 

[BJames]

No, it's not my view; nor have I ever expressed such a view.
Because "people" are thereby responding by deeming it OK to break the rules. THAT will be the cause of any increase in spread of the virus; not what Cummings himself did. I use the term "greater good" here - it would have been for the greater good had the masses never found out. This is not a political matter; the pandemic doesn't care about politics and governments. And the press should have thought about that before going to town with it in order to sell newspapers/TV audiences/Advterts/whatever.

I respectfully disagree with your media point but I think the points have been covered above. This has just sped up the unravelling of the lockdown but it is in the public's interest to know, bearing in mind that we are a democracy and cover ups are not acceptable regardless of the situation.

It wasn’t the DM and Telegraph that broke the story though was it? The print media in general have a long standing beef with Cummings over the way he “manages” them. Cummings has long been the arch enemy of the BBC and plots their downfall. The media increasingly want to be making the news rather than reporting on it, Cummings pushes back against this.

Then of course there’s Brexit, Cummings is the enemy of remain, both right and left, from the left he seems to be viewed as dangerous enough to require action.

But him being the enemy shows again that there's an issue here, since he's supposed to be a political advisor, quiet and not drawing undue attention to himself. Anyway, it doesn't matter who broke the story, whoever had found out about it would have broken the story, it just happened to be a joint investigation with the Guardian and the Mirror.

The media and political issues surrounding the Cummings situation are far more complex than his lockdown breach. The way the media have managed to demonise Cummings over this simple issue is quite impressive, and a bit scary, let’s not pretend this has much to do with covid though.

I don’t agree with Andy Burnham too often but he was correct when he described the Cummings situation as a “Westminster Issue” and said it had detracted from the governments important public health message. Spot on.

But so many other senior figures have resigned over lesser breaches than this. He is the rule maker. He can't be the rule breaker too or everyone will just do the same.

Burnham's right that it's a Westminster Issue - an issue they've chosen not to respond to, which has partially or largely (depending on your opinion on how much this has impacted people's views) detracted from the government's important public health message - because of the loss of integrity and trust in the government. Important to note that Harries followed Van Tam today in an implicit criticism of his actions.

 

[Tetchytyke]

they had a single gram of "public interest" they would all have suppressed it for a greater good.

"Media should have covered up criminal activity of unelected official in order to protect a Prime Minister".

Well, it's certainly a view...

The way the media have managed to demonise Cummings over this simple issue is quite impressive, and a bit scary, let’s not pretend this has much to do with covid though.

How dare the media in a free country demonize an unelected official by, er, *checks notes*, accurately and truthfully reporting what he had done.

It wasn’t the DM and Telegraph that broke the story though was it?

The Telegraph were the ones to break the story about Professor Neil Ferguson, though.

And it was the Sunday Times, owned by that notorious Communist Rupert Murdoch, who reported Cummings saying it was "too bad" if pensioners die of Covid.

But yes, it's all a conspiracy.

Burnham's right that it's a Westminster Issue - an issue they've chosen not to respond to, which has partially or largely (depending on your opinion on how much this has impacted people's views) detracted from the government's important public health message - because of the loss of integrity and trust in the government.

In and of itself, what Cummings did was not crime of the century. I don't think anyone thinks it is. The problem is that the story comes at a time when it is abundantly clear that the government are not in control of the situation and are trying to rush their way out of lockdown.

When the people are already starting to perceive you as clueless, the last thing you want to do is then also appear to be arrogant and ignorant. When the Daily Star can land cheap shots against you, and make you a figure of fun as they did last week with their front page, things are bad. And the Daily Star, stable mate of the Express, is not a lefty paper.

Whether it has a long-term effect, given it is four years to the election, remains to be seen. But when you get tarnished, when you lose that underlying trust, it's hard work to buff your image back up.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I don't think the Cummings situation has anything to do with the hordes on the beaches etc. It is simply down to the weather.

I think blaming the media or the weather for the rise in numbers now deciding the rules don’t apply to them is a total failure to grasp the enormity of Cummings’ actions.
What rankles most with even those who give him the benefit of the doubt over the Durham trip is the 50-mile return trip to Barnard Castle and his ridiculous ‘justification’ for it.
Let’s imagine my boss kept banging on about not drinking alcohol at work, and then I spotted him swigging from a bottle of whisky concealed in his office. I tell a couple of colleagues and they tell others the same, and for the next couple of weeks people throughout the company start ignoring policy and start drinking at work. Are you really trying to say those who now breach company policy are doing so *solely* because the office grapevine said it’s ok or because alcohol is in plentiful supply and on special offer locally ? No, it’s because those that made the rules have set an appalling example and made people extremely angry at the hypocrisy of the boss’s behaviour. That is why there is now mass disregarding of the rules !!!

(and yes I do know that Dominic Cummings is not our boss. He does seem to wield astonishing influence over government policy, though)

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Whether it has a long-term effect, given it is four years to the election, remains to be seen. But when you get tarnished, when you lose that underlying trust, it's hard work to buff your image back up.

Given that the Tories have, historically, tended to be the party of choice for the majority of those aged over 45, the ‘Cummings effect’ could have a bearing on the outcome of the next election.
If people deciding the rules don’t apply to them results in a second wave of infections, and lots of people in the older age groups die, then their younger relatives may well think those in power in 2020 were responsible for the premature death of a loved one.