Enforcement of the new rules on social distancing, unnecessary journeys etc.

[nlogax]

Well I can safely say that Cummings has killed the lockdown.

No, I sincerely doubt that Cummings is the focal point of most people's attention or conversations. His rule-breaking will be a small part of a much wider bit-by-bit erosion of the lockdown which has been happening since before the easing commenced in England.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, I sincerely doubt that Cummings is the focal point of most people's attention or conversations. His rule-breaking will be a small part of a much wider bit-by-bit erosion of the lockdown which has been happening since before the easing commenced in England.

You've got a point there. What seems to be happening in England is that the population, on the background of basically no enforcement (there aren't enough Police for that in most places), is loosening bit by bit, then the Government are easing the law to allow them to do what they were already doing, then it continues to loosen bit by bit again.

 

[thejuggler]

It is worth stating that BBC news this morning reports a complete denial over the fact there was a second visit.

Which will lead to two possible scenarios.

That is the stance, it won't change and the story fizzles out. If it is completely untrue (the initial comment was the story was 'inaccurate') I'm sure there will be a complaint and potentially legal action.

Or

The papers have given No 10 a chance to clarify the position, as this hasn't happened they now produce the evidence which shows what they said was true. A reporter has said it has taken weeks to pull this story together, so they may have much more information and evidence of what they said is true. I'm sure there is plenty of CCTV in the area he was said to have visited.

 

[Djgr]

No, I sincerely doubt that Cummings is the focal point of most people's attention or conversations. His rule-breaking will be a small part of a much wider bit-by-bit erosion of the lockdown which has been happening since before the easing commenced in England.

Cummings is the straw on the camel's back.

 

[Huntergreed]

You've got a point there. What seems to be happening in England is that the population, on the background of basically no enforcement (there aren't enough Police for that in most places), is loosening bit by bit, then the Government are easing the law to allow them to do what they were already doing, then it continues to loosen bit by bit again.

The leadership and clarity from Westminster ever since BJ got knocked by COVID has been absolutely appalling. Any government should be taking this time to reassure the public, demonstrate confident leadership and think rationally about how to best proceed and minimise damage to the country. Our government seem to be doing the exact opposite, they’re sending out vague, unclear messages, hiding away from the public view, and thinking irrationality, blowing the risk of the virus out of proportion (one look at Scotland’s exit strategy demonstrates just how much effort is going into the suppression of this virus over protecting our economy and way of life). How much longer can it be before at least someone opens their eyes and realised that there’s much more to worry about than just this virus.

 

[Djgr]

No, I sincerely doubt that Cummings is the focal point of most people's attention or conversations. His rule-breaking will be a small part of a much wider bit-by-bit erosion of the lockdown which has been happening since before the easing commenced in England.

Well you must move in different circles to me on and off-line, because I have barely seen such anger.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The leadership and clarity from Westminster ever since BJ got knocked by COVID has been absolutely appalling.

I am wondering if Bojo is actually suffering severe post-viral syndrome (e.g. fatigue) and thus isn't in a position to lead anything. If so, he should step down, either temporarily or permanently. In this exceptional situation, nominating someone to take over pending a leadership election in say 6 months' time would be the way to go. Raaaaaab?

 

[philosopher]

I am wondering if Bojo is actually suffering severe post-viral syndrome (e.g. fatigue) and thus isn't in a position to lead anything. If so, he should step down, either temporarily or permanently. In this exceptional situation, nominating someone to take over pending a leadership election in say 6 months' time would be the way to go. Raaaaaab?

I think from Boris’s perspective, resigning on health grounds could be a good move. Even though his premiership will have been short, he will have achieved his central objective of getting Brexit done while avoiding the need to deal with the rest of the pandemic and subsequent economic fallout. Thus it might avoid his legacy being tarnished further.

 

[BJames]

No, I sincerely doubt that Cummings is the focal point of most people's attention or conversations. His rule-breaking will be a small part of a much wider bit-by-bit erosion of the lockdown which has been happening since before the easing commenced in England.

I agree partly as the lockdown really is starting to unravel. But a lot of my friends who have very little interest in politics have been talking politics to me over the last day with the Cummings revelation. People are not happy to be told they have to do something when the person who has been important in advising this has done the exact opposite. It's made the unenforced lockdown even more unenforcable (if that's even possible).

 

[3141]

I think from Boris’s perspective, resigning on health grounds could be a good move. Even though his premiership will have been short, he will have achieved his central objective of getting Brexit done while avoiding the need to deal with the rest of the pandemic and subsequent economic fallout. Thus it might avoid his legacy being tarnished further.

An additional advantage would be that the economic fallout from brexit could be blamed on the covid 19 pandemic instead of its real cause. But I think he has such huge self-belief and ambition to be Prime Minister that he'll believe he can overcome any problems.

 

[3141]

You mean for publishing a factual piece of information that the government decided not to share about an unelected advisor in our democratic society?

Ianno87 in #1436 asserted that people will die needlessly as a result of what Cummings did in March, when we didn't know about it. If that's true, then yes, the papers that published the story two months later are responsible for the situation in which, now they know about it, some people might go out and infect others, when they would otherwise not have done. "In our democratic society" the editors should have thought of that. On the other hand, maybe Ianno87 was exaggerating.

And if the second set of allegations are true?

The subsequent trips would be much harder to defend.

On the one hand we have people claiming that Cummings has killed off the lockdown. Of course there'll be some who say "Well if he can break the rules so can I," but most people will understand that the rules are there for a reason and that reason isn't changed just because D. Cummings made a journey (or even more than one) that he shouldn't.

On the other hand, we have people saying that the government has scared the pants off everybody so now they're all too frightened to go back to work or send their children to school.

I wonder how the second issue has been coped with in Spain, where they were hardly allowed out at all and therefore should have been even more terrified when the restrictions were eased.

 

[BJames]

Ianno87 in #1436 asserted that people will die needlessly as a result of what Cummings did in March, when we didn't know about it. If that's true, then yes, the papers that published the story two months later are responsible for the situation in which, now they know about it, some people might go out and infect others, when they would otherwise not have done. "In our democratic society" the editors should have thought of that. On the other hand, maybe Ianno87 was exaggerating.

I'm not saying all the reporting is perfect. But the papers have a duty to report the situation to the general public. Would you really rather that we didn't know about these kind of things going on? I think the integrity of the government is jeopardised when you learn that the most senior unelected person in the UK is making these decisions off his own back. Plus of course the second and any subsequent trips which go beyond indefensible for someone in his position.

 

[philosopher]

On the other hand, we have people saying that the government has scared the pants off everybody so now they're all too frightened to go back to work or send their children to school.

I wonder how the second issue has been coped with in Spain, where they were hardly allowed out at all and therefore should have been even more terrified when the restrictions were eased.

I think here it was the advertising that scared everyone not so much the restrictions. The initial adverts where not that frightening. However in April they stepped up the messaging by showing an intensive care ward in the TV ads and putting the stay home message in a threatening looking yellow and red warning sign. The implication of the advertising was that if you did not stay home you would up seriously ill. This is what I think scared people.

I am not sure what messaging they put out in Spain, but I suspect there they were relying more on the restrictions and associated punishments rather than the threat of the disease to keep people at home. Therefore when the lockdown ended the Spanish may not have been so scared.

 

[3141]

I'm not saying all the reporting is perfect. But the papers have a duty to report the situation to the general public. Would you really rather that we didn't know about these kind of things going on? I think the integrity of the government is jeopardised when you learn that the most senior unelected person in the UK is making these decisions off his own back. Plus of course the second and any subsequent trips which go beyond indefensible for someone in his position.

I'm not convinced by the idea that the papers have a "duty" to report the situation to the general public. The Mirror and the Guardian would have co-operated over this story for the political impact it was likely to have. Since two months had already gone by, suppose that they'd held off for a year and then published it. Then it wouldn't have any impact on the lockdown (I'm assuming we're out of that by then!). I do think that the most important issue right now is maintaining effective steps to control this virus, and in that context we definitely could have managed without knowing about Cummings's trip. At least, I could have managed, but there are some who, like the Mirror and the Guardian, attach a greater importance to embarrassing the government. Incidentally, if he didn't make the decision "off his own back", but consulted Boris before he went, that would jeopardise the integrity of the government much more, and I expect the Mirror and the Guardian are working on that.

 

[nlogax]

You've got a point there. What seems to be happening in England is that the population, on the background of basically no enforcement (there aren't enough Police for that in most places), is loosening bit by bit, then the Government are easing the law to allow them to do what they were already doing, then it continues to loosen bit by bit again.

Yep. I've suspected for some time that the government adjusting / softening lockdown restrictions is more of a response to try and catch up with what people are already doing. This will continue, in England at least.

For what it's worth I don't think Cummings will be fired or forced to resign. As it is he semi-runs the government and I think senior Conservative figures - Johnson included - don't possess the cojones that's apparently needed to rid him from Whitehall. He'll weather the storm and hunker down until the press and party rage passes.

(how many minutes until I'm proven incorrect?)

 

[Darandio]

I'm not convinced by the idea that the papers have a "duty" to report the situation to the general public. The Mirror and the Guardian would have co-operated over this story for the political impact it was likely to have. Since two months had already gone by, suppose that they'd held off for a year and then published it. Then it wouldn't have any impact on the lockdown (I'm assuming we're out of that by then!). I do think that the most important issue right now is maintaining effective steps to control this virus, and in that context we definitely could have managed without knowing about Cummings's trip. At least, I could have managed, but there are some who, like the Mirror and the Guardian, attach a greater importance to embarrassing the government. Incidentally, if he didn't make the decision "off his own back", but consulted Boris before he went, that would jeopardise the integrity of the government much more, and I expect the Mirror and the Guardian are working on that.

I'm sure many want to know. I certainly do, I want to know when those running the country are lying, cheating and covering up. Forget all the bluster and semantics on social media about it not mattering because Cummings isn't an MP, the man is running the country and looking at his nonchalant reaction yesterday, boy does he know it and he believes he's untouchable. He should be held to account for his actions.

As for whether there is any impact from his actions, that ship has long sailed due to the constant incompetence of this government. It's already impacted and spiralling out of control.

 

[Busaholic]

Boris Johnson breaks his omarta to chair today's press feeding - a mere three hours ago Robert Genrick was due to preside over the roasting (someone in government has a perverted sense of humour!) So what Churchillian gesture will Johnson make to keep the faithful on board? I won't even bother putting the champers on ice, because I'd be more than gobsmacked if Johnson DOESN'T announce Cumming's going, because if he doesn't his P.M.ship is over. The Tories usually get rid of their flotsam and jetsam much quicker than Labour, recognising they took far too long over May.

 

[infobleep]

Doesn't necessarily mean a formal social services intervention. They can offer services like parenting tuition for specific things, like (for example) managing siblng rivalry.

True it doesn't but they need to be contacted at last.

I see Dominic Cummings has gone to 10 Downing Street. Obviously Boris Johnson felt the reason Mr Cummings had to attend was essential and Mr Cummings couldn't do whatever it is remotely.

Video conferencing is very good these days. Obviously you need a reasonable speed on your Internet to be able to make use of it. Bit sure how fast the speed needs to be though for it to work.

 

[thejuggler]

If he doesn't go more questions will be asked, including" Mr Johnson were you aware of these trips and did you give any permission for him to go?".

 

[nlogax]

There we go. As it stands Cummings is going nowhere.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There we go. As it stands Cummings is going nowhere.

So Bojo is now discredited as well. He just doesn't get it, does he?

If the children were felt to be at risk, his parents should have come to collect them. But then the children could have spread COVID to them!

 

[Scotrail12]

This govt is just getting worse and worse. WHY is Cummings not gone? At least BoJo actually showed up for a change.

Absolutely disgusting that there is one rule for them and another for us commoners.

 

[scotrail158713]

If Cummings was well enough to drive 250 miles, then he’s well enough to look after his children. Quite how the whole government doesn’t get that I don’t know.

 

[nlogax]

So Bojo is now discredited as well. He just doesn't get it, does he?

This govt is just getting worse and worse. WHY is Cummings not gone?

Johnson is absolutely scared stiff of firing him. I really think it's that simple and absurd.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Johnson is absolutely scared stiff of firing him. I really think it's that simple and absurd.

As in Bojo thinks he can't cope without him? Could well be...

 

[Scotrail12]

Johnson is absolutely scared stiff of firing him. I really think it's that simple and absurd.

Seems as if Cummings may have something on Johnson.

I don't care about what action the government is taking (I heard that there was something to do with schools), but the fact that we've been sacrificing our lives and money for the last 2 months yet his crew can do what they want is what really gets on my nerve. I can't trust this lot any more, not worth following the rules if they are going to disregard them themselves!

 

[BJames]

I would say this is shocking. But I am not surprised in the slightest. At least he has the nerve to hold the briefing himself, but can't wait for the journalists' questions! They're not going to be so quick to pass this over.

 

[BJames]

Seems as if Cummings may have something on Johnson.

I don't care about what action the government is taking (I heard that there was something to do with schools), but the fact that we've been sacrificing our lives and money for the last 2 months yet his crew can do what they want is what really gets on my nerve. I can't trust this lot any more, not worth following the rules if they are going to disregard them themselves!

Yes it's entirely possible. Ferguson went quickly as did Calderwood. Why is this so different?

 

[scotrail158713]

Johnson is absolutely scared stiff of firing him. I really think it's that simple and absurd.

Agreed. Either that or Cummings knows something that the government doesn’t want us to know.

 

[Cowley]

Johnson is absolutely scared stiff of firing him. I really think it's that simple and absurd.

I agree. I should imagine that not only does Boris see him as some kind of guru, but Cummings no doubt knows a lot of things that the government would rather not come out.
Add to that the fact that ‘fronting it out/nothing to see here’ seems to be the way that things are increasingly done these days I’d have been more astonished if he’d actually gone.