Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To not understand the outrage at Dominic Cummings?

999 replies

Wow123 · 25/05/2020 08:08

Please don’t flame me for this. I’m not posting this to be controversial. I am someone who always tries to see the good in people which has been to my detriment at time’s in the past so I’m very well aware that maybe I’m missing something here and being too kind when he possibly doesn’t deserve it.

My understanding is that Dominic Cummings is saying that he only returned to Durham on one occasion which was because he had fears about potentially being unable to look after his child if him and his wife both ended up too unwell with Covid. I can understand the logic in that.

I appreciate the government advice at that stage was to stay home but if he genuinely didn’t have anyone to help with his son, then I can understand his fears and that he was trying to put his child first as any parent would.

My understanding is that a matter of days after, the government did clarify that travelling in the event of needing support with children if you had caught covid was an exceptional circumstance and that travel in that instance was acceptable.

I personally live hundreds of miles from family and don’t have anyone I could ask for help in the local area was I to become unwell with Covid so this does resonate with me.

I understand that there were sightings of Dominic Cummings on other dates in Durham which indicate that he travelled back up there. If this is true, I definitely agree that he needs to be sacked, but at this stage, there is no proof of this.

Am I missing something here?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
MarshaBradyo · 25/05/2020 16:20

Wrinklin can you c&p the rule you’re talking about here

Rosebud21 · 25/05/2020 16:22

OP, are you Cumming's PR gauging the questions they'll need to answer later....

milveycrohn · 25/05/2020 16:24

The truth is the people were obeying the lockdown more strictly than the guidance allowed, and the police enforcing the rules too strictly. Ie. The police were originally saying you can only buy essential items - not Easter eggs, for example. I was so annoyed by this, I immediately went out and bought some. Remember that police officer who said he was going to check shopping? But was later chastised door it.
The definition of being allowed out to exercise is another. I went out for a walk around the park, but was quite taken aback to discover other family members going for 10 mile walks, 20 mile cycle rides and runs everyday. They referred me to the Gov website with the guidance on it.
Sure enough, these things were allowed.

DressingGownofDoom · 25/05/2020 16:24

'I also think its a disgrace that a 13yo's funeral is even being mentioned in the same thread ... its completely irrelevant. Yes the boys parents should have been able to go to hospital with him and go to his funeral ... but the fact that some over-zealous interpretation of the guidance prevented that does not make D.C.'s completely unrelated behaviour any more wrong.'

Over zealous!! The instruction was stay at home, police were out on the streets stopping everyone, fining them and sending them back home. The parents would not have been allowed into the hospital to see their son, they put the fear of god into us about this virus. You can't change the message and the rules after the event has occurred, you just can't.

milveycrohn · 25/05/2020 16:26

Also, if you remember Mike Hancock was quite shocked to hear about dying patients not allowed visits from relatives, and he made a point of changing the rules to allow this.

SharonasCorona · 25/05/2020 16:28

@wrinklin

I also think its a disgrace that a 13yo's funeral is even being mentioned in the same thread ... its completely irrelevant. Yes the boys parents should have been able to go to hospital with him and go to his funeral ... but the fact that some over-zealous interpretation of the guidance prevented that does not make D.C.'s completely unrelated behaviour any more wrong.

Are you wilfully ignoring the point which is that Cummings’ mother said to the press yesterday that Cummings’ decision was informed by the death of his uncle?

The reason Ismail Abdulwahab is mentioned is because his family were not permitted to see their son or attend his funeral and yet Cummings family are asking us to excuse Cummings.

I suggest you re-assess where the disgrace is.

C8H10N4O2 · 25/05/2020 16:28

Would you be happy then if DC held up his hands and apologised then?

I've already said that if he had fessed up, said it was a misjudgement at a difficult time then he would have ridden it out.

There are at least three stories about Cummings currently.

  1. Breaking the lockdown law for people showing symptoms and required to isolate (clearly reiterated by Boris only one day beforehand). Additionally how many trips he actually made. This could well be closed off as above. However if he does that now he makes liars of most of the cabinet and the damage to the public health message is already done.

  2. Continual breaches of SPAD rules, which are only exacerbated by the bonkers idea of a press conference from No10 (should have been at his own home or somewhere neutral to be in the code of conduct).

  3. The ongoing background story of why an unelected and unaccountable individual is being given control of budgets of hundreds of millions of tax payers money for his pet projects and why so many companies he is connected to are getting eight and nine figure business awards without going to tender (one of the companies based in the north coincidentally conducting business whilst he was up there). Most projects involving personal data and exempted from the normal privacy regulations. I'm largely aligned with David Davis on that one, not exactly a loony lefty.

wrinklin · 25/05/2020 16:31

@MarshaBradyo see here: www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-home-guidance/stay-at-home-guidance-for-households-with-possible-coronavirus-covid-19-infection#if-you-are-living-with-children

It says "If you are living with children: Keep following this advice to the best of your ability, however, we are aware that not all these measures will be possible."

MarshaBradyo · 25/05/2020 16:33

Thanks Wrinklin

He’s on. What is that noise?!

C8H10N4O2 · 25/05/2020 16:37

It says "If you are living with children: Keep following this advice to the best of your ability, however, we are aware that not all these measures will be possible."

It also says "updated 18th May"

Horsemad · 25/05/2020 16:37

Body language...

Horsemad · 25/05/2020 16:39

Keeps rubbing his left arm - is he having a heart attack? Probably stressed enough...

Ulver · 25/05/2020 16:40
  1. The ongoing background story of why an unelected and unaccountable individual is being given control of budgets of hundreds of millions of tax payers money for his pet projects and why so many companies he is connected to are getting eight and nine figure business awards without going to tender (one of the companies based in the north coincidentally conducting business whilst he was up there). Most projects involving personal data and exempted from the normal privacy regulations. I'm largely aligned with David Davis on that one, not exactly a loony lefty.

Exactly

ScarfLadysBag · 25/05/2020 16:40

That children advice has been unchanged since March 17 (the furthest back Way Back Machine goes for that page).

ScarfLadysBag · 25/05/2020 16:42

(Not that I support DC in any way as the man is gigantic knob)

HaudYerWheeshtYaWeeBellend · 25/05/2020 16:44

It also says "updated 18th May"

This advise has remained unchanged since start of lockdown.

C8H10N4O2 · 25/05/2020 16:46

That children advice has been unchanged since March 17 (the furthest back Way Back Machine goes for that page)

Then the previous days' conferences were giving out incorrect advice? There was a specific reinforcement of the "stay home for 7 days whatever" at this time (I was sharing my deliveries with a neighbour in exactly this situation who was advised not to travel when she enquired).

SharonasCorona · 25/05/2020 16:47

Does Mary not drive?

Horsemad · 25/05/2020 16:47

Arrogant, arrogant arrogant.

Strangerthantruth · 25/05/2020 16:50

Who wants to play bingo now ticking off all the "facts" above which are actually inventions.

ScarfLadysBag · 25/05/2020 16:51

@C8H10N4O2 No idea, all I am saying is that that line about it being difficult to follow the measures with children has always been there since the page began. I don't think any of the advice given at conferences directly contradicted that, did it? It just wasn't mentioned.

In addition, at that time the advice was also that you could leave the house to exercise even if SI with symptoms. We just discussed this on another thread as a some people had no memory of that, but there's a screenshot of government website saying so.

sleepingpup · 25/05/2020 16:52

'behaved reasonably'

Robert Peston "just trips that broke the rules"

AgentCooper · 25/05/2020 16:53

In all honesty I’m far less outraged at what he did than the fact that it’s seemingly ok for him but not for the rest of us. All those families who missed their loved ones’ last moments. That’s what makes me sick.

Strangerthantruth · 25/05/2020 16:56

This is farcical that this bloke is sitting there with these journos turning up one by one to ask their overwrought questions.

He's broken the rooooooooools, it's a national meltdown.

Piggywaspushed · 25/05/2020 16:57

I too am confused by Mary's inability to drive her husband anywhere who had a medical expert who told him he was fine to go out and about while plainly still displaying symptoms.

Swipe left for the next trending thread