Cummings apologists

[runrunrunrunt]

If it was okay for him to travel for childcare then why were people fined for travelling to get childcare?

"My elderly auntie was very distressed after a visit from the police. Because my mum went round to help her up after a fall. They came and told her there had been reports that she had visitors. There was no apology , when she explained. No 'i see, sorry we had to visit....that's entirely within the guidelines.' She was told 'take this as a friendly warning'. She was very very upset."
That is down to the police. They were basically telling your auntie they didn't believe her. Really bad on their behalf but we have seen instances of police having behaved badly.

It is very difficult for the police. If they arrived at your aunt's and could not tell she had fallen then how can she prove one way or another that she did? I would have hoped they would have just apologised and said they have to follow through on reports and it isn't that they disbelieve her. I would telephone and explain how upset she has been.

Not relevant to this discussion though.

He decided to take the virus from a place with a high infection rate to a place which, at the time, had a low infection rate.

He then took the virus into a local hospital, exposing the staff and patients.

He should have stayed in London for this reason, although I accept that people are fallible and maybe he made a mistake.

The severity of mistakes is relative. This happens to be a very serious mistake, which has lead to clear contraventions to the Code of Conduct that advisors must follow.

Whether or not he broke the lockdown rules is moot. He has demonstrably broken the Code of Conduct, and therefore must go.

If he doesn't have the decency to resign (lest his actions reflect on the Prime Minister who he's supposed to be there to support) then he ought to be fired.

Johnson is free to hire another advisor if he needs one.

"Yeah, it is wrong. But cry me a fucking river. Cummings, with his Brexit sloganeering, was the one who created this society, the one that’s so divided and hate-filled that people now think it’s ok to heckle public figures in the street, and surround their house."
We all, collectively, create society. We are all individually responsible for our own behaviour and reactions and decisions. No-one but ourselves can make us hate-filled. We have choices and we each choose how to behave.

Cummings did not make me vote leave in the EU referendum. I did that based on my own views.
Do you think every one or even most of the 52% of those who voted to leave the EU in the referendum don't have their own minds? People don't vote because of slogans. I can't even recall what slogans you are referring to because they obviously meant so little to me. I cast my vote on the issues that mattered to me.

People don't vote because of slogans

Even a cursory glance at the history of politics and marketing shows that this is demonstrably untrue.

Brexit is a distraction from the issue.

He took the virus to a place with a low infection rate and then exposed hospital staff. He has also breached the advisors Code of Conduct.

Everything else is moot.

"He decided to take the virus from a place with a high infection rate to a place which, at the time, had a low infection rate."
He drove to a property on his father's estate without stopping. He did not mix with any family members whilst there. He walked on his father's estate one day and saw some people in the distance. He did not infect anyone unless you know differently to all the experts on how people come to be infected.

"He then took the virus into a local hospital, exposing the staff and patients."
How? He did not go into a hospital.

His wife and child went in an emergency ambulance to hospital and stayed overnight. I would be extremely surprised if he did not tell the staff that he suspected he was suffering Covid-19 when they attended the address where he was staying. Hospitals do not just let in patients in willy nilly. A & E is split into Covid and Non-Covid routes and the paramedics would be directed accordingly. The staff would be wearing appropriate PPE.

DC drove to the hospital the next day to pick up his wife and child. He did not get out of the car. No staff or patients were exposed to the virus by DC.

@NotEverythingIsBlackandWhite of course that means he exposed the hospital staff. Are his wife and children immune? Do they not have the capability of carrying it? Can you hear yourself 🙄

He did not infect anyone

1. Prove it
2. I never claimed he had. I did claim that he carried the virus from a place with a high infection rate, to a place with a low infection rate, breaking the rules that were specifically put in place to stop that from happening.

What I'm saying is fact. What you are saying is pure conjecture.

How? He did not go into a hospital.

Erm... Think about it...

Would you like to refute that he's broken the code of conduct his office is supposed to abide by?

NotEverythingIsBlackandWhite

This is his wife's article
“Getting the Coronavirus does not bring clarity” by Mary Wakefield, The Spectator, 23rd April 2020
www.spectator.co.uk/article/getting-coronavirus-does-not-bring-clarity

It was free to view, I read it at the time, it's now conveniently behind a paywall!

And no, until Cummings is held accountable for his actions, we absolutely shouldn't be moving on. And his PR people trying to recast him as a victim now that the lies/denials/rewriting of history haven't worked does nothing to change the facts of the case or the need for public officials to be held responsible for their choices.

NotEverythingIsBlackandWhite

Its very relevant to the conversation the police were acting within the ketter of the law left vulnerable old thinking they cant reach out for support because of DC slogans, and and communication. The police were acting within the givernements guidelines.

Not aure you understand how this website works, but its not for you to decide whats allowed on a thread or not.

However, someone who knows the rules inside our can manipulate them....and lie to make his story fit and that's ok.

Thats the whole point of this. The government, using the police to enforce have made people believe they can not do certain things. That their freedoms need to be restricted, for good reason. But actually, now they are saying thats all bollocks and actually you coild have done loads of stuff, we asked you not to.

If you cant recognise the hypocrisy and connected issues. Or the reason this is a big problem, then there isnt much point talking to you.

His wife and child went in an emergency ambulance to hospital and stayed overnight. I would be extremely surprised if he did not tell the staff that he suspected he was suffering Covid-19 when they attended the address where he was staying. Hospitals do not just let in patients in willy nilly.

Given that you shouldnt even go supermarket shopping with your spouse and child, why were all three of them there?

Also you are missing the point about the hospital.

His wife or his child needing medical assistance means the medical staff were exposed.

They used an ambulance. They took up resources in another area. Potentially exposing staff.

This is exactly why we were told do not travel to second homes. Because of the strain it could put on the services in those areas.

Supposing he'd had a car breakdown or been involved in a crash. The roadside recovery teams, medics, police would all have been dealing unnecessarily with CV+ people.

If there was a reasonable answer on all this, I think we'd have heard it by now. Seems to me they can't find a way to make it sound acceptable no matter how hard they try.

People don't vote because of slogans
Seriously?! That’s just about the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. If no-one votes (or buys, or consumes) based on a slogan, someone had better tell political parties and the entire advertising industry that they’ve been doing it all wrong for at least 150 years! All that money they could have saved! (And by the way, the best adverts and slogans are the ones you don’t even know are influencing you. So I wouldn’t be so sure if I were you.)

@Miljea. He is not a public figure. He is an advisor.
The rules allowed for exceptional circumstances, as stated by the guidelines on the Gov web.

"He then took the virus into a local hospital, exposing the staff and patients."
The paramedics would have made a valid judgement, whether to take that child to hospital or not. I hate the way any sort of hospital outside London is made out to be the tiniest of places and out in the sticks, with no ppe.. We are talking about Durham here, a university town. Hospitals up and down the country will have had covid patients, just like in London, and have coped perfectly well. That child had every right to go to that hospital, if he needed to .

My dads family is from Durham. I know exactly whats its like. People were not meant to be travelling to where they dont live for a reason. But it doesn't apply to him.

They didnt need to go there. There were lots of options available to him.

Everyone has exceptional circumstances given enough time to think of one.

The fact is, he did it more than once. He broke the rules several times and all were exceptional circumstances?

I can't find any reports of any individual people being fined for accessing childcare? Anyone got any links? Or anyone here that was fined? If people were fined then that's not on, obviously, but I can't find any cases where they were.

@Trevsadick

"Not aure you understand how this website works, but its not for you to decide whats allowed on a thread or not."
Have you mixed me up with someone else? I haven't said anything abut what is allowed or not allowed on a thread.

@NotEverythingIsBlackandWhite you think that everyone exists in their own little bubble and none of us are influenced in any way? You don't think we are influenced by advertising, media, religion, public figures, celebrities etc? You don't think that cultural norms are shaped by these factors? How do you explain different cultural norms in different countries? You can't seriously believe any of what you've written. It's just complete nonsense.

@Trevsadick
"They didnt need to go there. There were lots of options available to him."
Explain the "lots" of options he had.

"The fact is, he did it more than once.He broke the rules several times and all were exceptional circumstances?"
What did he do more than once?

Literally cannot believe people are defending him.

The 'rule' (which definitely wasn't made clear at the time but hey ho) was that is the safeguarding of a child is likely to become an issue then apparently you can break lockdown. The safeguarding of that child was not an issue at the time he drove to Durham, it was not an exceptional circumstance. If it was, then every single fucking parent who has contracted Covid would essentially be allowed to break lockdown. What if everyone drove across the country 'just in case' both parents became so incapacitated that the safety of their child was at risk? It's total horseshit!

If he was genuinely worried about it, the he could have made arrangements for the 17 year old niece (the one who is in the low risk category and therefore fine to mix with infectious people) to come to London and help them out. Had they made the arrangements prior, then in the event of an absolute emergency where the safety of the child genuinely was at risk, the niece could have been in London within hours.

Everyone has exceptional circumstances given enough time to think of one.

Exactly.

And no, I don't think people should 'move on'. The utter contempt that this government has shown for the public on this issue is disgusting.

Moving on is EXACTLY what they want us to want. Moving on will get him off the hook and. Keep him his job. I for one will not be moving on. I've written to my MP and I'll continue to do what I can to ensure that we do not move on.

Precisely.

Explain the "lots" of options he had.

The same options every 2 parent household has had when they, pitentially have covid. The same options 2 parenta families have when they are having their lives made miserable by nightmare neighbours.

More choices than single parents have in those situations.

What did he do more than once?

Broke the rules. Using the 'you can break these guidlines in exceptional circumstances' is just a cop out.

Driving to the castle to test his eyesight waa not essential. Driving to Durham wasn't essential, it was his preferred choice.