RugbyRebels

What's the exact version of events? I've read several different tales now?

Digby wrote:Two odd things that Cummings like Calderwood and then Ferguson fucked up in spectacular fashion breaking the rules they were setting, but then the second odd thing compounding the situation around Cummings is the government digging in to protect someone who clearly doesn't deserve but being summarily fired. Both aspects are disappointing and neither should have happened

Speaks volumes about the reliance Boris has on Cummins.

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:Two odd things that Cummings like Calderwood and then Ferguson fucked up in spectacular fashion breaking the rules they were setting, but then the second odd thing compounding the situation around Cummings is the government digging in to protect someone who clearly doesn't deserve but being summarily fired. Both aspects are disappointing and neither should have happened

Speaks volumes about the reliance Boris has on Cummins.

That just adds to a perception problem when Cummings is being treated differently.

Banquo wrote:What's the exact version of events? I've read several different tales now?

Given several different stories have emanated from Cummings, his wife, No.10, various cabinet members and a number of leaks/briefings it's hard to know. None of them seem to justify his actions, not in his case and especially not in the face of what's been asked of others

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:What's the exact version of events? I've read several different tales now?

Given several different stories have emanated from Cummings, his wife, No.10, various cabinet members and a number of leaks/briefings it's hard to know. None of them seem to justify his actions, not in his case and especially not in the face of what's been asked of others

Ok. Last version I read was that he went 200+ miles with his wife and child to a dwelling unoccupied by anyone else so that they could be sure of someone being able to shop for them, but that they didn't meet up with anyone- but that does seem a tad far-fetched frankly. Not sure I'd want any public money spent investigating it tbh, but as elsewhere its about perception as much as anything.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:What's the exact version of events? I've read several different tales now?

Given several different stories have emanated from Cummings, his wife, No.10, various cabinet members and a number of leaks/briefings it's hard to know. None of them seem to justify his actions, not in his case and especially not in the face of what's been asked of others

Ok. Last version I read was that he went 200+ miles with his wife and child to a dwelling unoccupied by anyone else so that they could be sure of someone being able to shop for them, but that they didn't meet up with anyone- but that does seem a tad far-fetched frankly. Not sure I'd want any public money spent investigating it tbh, but as elsewhere its about perception as much as anything.

And even if it's all perception problem we'd still ned to believe that within London, and within walking distance of family members, and with one presumes access to staff a chief aide the PM and a reasonably well known media figure couldn't get food delivered.

It's not really all perception though, Mary Wakefield was ill and should have been staying at home, Dominic by some reports was starting to feel ill others not but had been exposed and should have been staying at home. If they'd been involved in an accident en route, had their car broken down they were setting out on an unnecessary journey that could have infected others. If as per some reports Cummings himself was fine there was no need for the journey, if he was feeling bad he was increasing the risk of driving 250 odd miles.

They might have needed some help with the child, this wasn't the way to solve that problem.

The notion that the Cummings couldnt have acquired any assistance they required while living in London seems pretty ludicrous to me. These are well connected, highly paid people who could have easily made suitable arrangements if they were laid so low they couldn't offer any childcare. Heck, they could even have asked the sister to come down and collect the child if they thought he would be better off out of London.
They didnt NEED to travel up to Durham.

Spectator going with perception as the problem, but still concluding he has to go

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why ... ssion=true

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Given several different stories have emanated from Cummings, his wife, No.10, various cabinet members and a number of leaks/briefings it's hard to know. None of them seem to justify his actions, not in his case and especially not in the face of what's been asked of others

Ok. Last version I read was that he went 200+ miles with his wife and child to a dwelling unoccupied by anyone else so that they could be sure of someone being able to shop for them, but that they didn't meet up with anyone- but that does seem a tad far-fetched frankly. Not sure I'd want any public money spent investigating it tbh, but as elsewhere its about perception as much as anything.

And even if it's all perception problem we'd still ned to believe that within London, and within walking distance of family members, and with one presumes access to staff a chief aide the PM and a reasonably well known media figure couldn't get food delivered.

It's not really all perception though, Mary Wakefield was ill and should have been staying at home, Dominic by some reports was starting to feel ill others not but had been exposed and should have been staying at home. If they'd been involved in an accident en route, had their car broken down they were setting out on an unnecessary journey that could have infected others. If as per some reports Cummings himself was fine there was no need for the journey, if he was feeling bad he was increasing the risk of driving 250 odd miles.

They might have needed some help with the child, this wasn't the way to solve that problem.

Hence far-fetched. But we are all guessing. Likely he chose poorly.

fivepointer wrote:The notion that the Cummings couldnt have acquired any assistance they required while living in London seems pretty ludicrous to me. These are well connected, highly paid people who could have easily made suitable arrangements if they were laid so low they couldn't offer any childcare. Heck, they could even have asked the sister to come down and collect the child if they thought he would be better off out of London.
They didnt NEED to travel up to Durham.

Probably, hence far-fetched. But as above, we are all guessing.

Per YouGov, 52% think Cummings should resign. Makes TS Eliot’s poetry look like the work of a dyslexic primary school kid.

Mellsblue wrote:Per YouGov, 52% think Cummings should resign. Makes TS Eliot’s poetry look like the work of a dyslexic primary school kid.

If we could get a big enough story like this here it could yet save Dom from doing the decent thing

"A group of 40 churchgoers who attended a service after lockdown was eased in Germany earlier this month have contracted coronavirus, health officials say.

Six of those infected were taken to hospital. The service was held on 10 May at a Baptist church in the city of Frankfurt.

Church officials say they followed social distancing rules and disinfected the building ahead of the service. They have now reverted to online worship."

Mellsblue wrote:Per YouGov, 52% think Cummings should resign. Makes TS Eliot’s poetry look like the work of a dyslexic primary school kid.

Did 48% think he should go into a quiet room with a bottle of whisky and a Webley?

It burns to be agreeing with Piers Morgan so often.
Puja

Piers Morgan is right.

Now I need to wash my hands.

My brain hurts

The Guardian clearly had more than they originally published, and having waited for various government ministers to stupidly defend the indefensible have started in on round 2 of Cummings and his travels

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:I'm just remembering the time when I had a 1 year old and a 3 year old and both my wife and I had norovirus and flu at the same time. They watched a fuck of a lot of BabyTV in high chairs and ate baked beans for dinner, but they were never in any danger. It's perfectly possible to do - not fun, but possible.

Puja

Agreed. His child is 3-4 so whilst challenging, it’s possible to look after them whilst ill. Different case if they are so ill they need hospital care of course but my missis and I have caught stomach bugs before now and have managed to care for son of a similar age.

I definitely wouldn’t be travelling to elderly parents and risking infecting them.

Agreed. It's ridiculous to assume in advance that both parents would become so ill - simultaneously - that they couldn't look after a single child of that age. And if the worst case actually happened, I think maybe some assistance would be found so the chief advisor to the PM and his family didn't die of starvation in their London house.

Hypocrisy and arrogance in equal measure. With a side-helping of corruption if he gets away with it.

Puja wrote:It burns to be agreeing with Piers Morgan so often.

FB_IMG_1590259364347.jpg

Puja

Broken clocks, twice a day, etc.

Reports of a 2nd trip now.

OK here's the game. Starmer gets 6 questions at PMQs which are sadly not for almost 2 weeks. Does he all questions based on Cummings? If so what are your 6 (or fewer)?

1. Has Mr. Cummings offered to resign? If so, has his resignation been accepted? If not, what consequences can he expect for his behaviour?

2. With the over 33,000+ deaths, does the Prime Minister believe he and the relevant members of his cabinet received adequate advice? Does he stand by the decisions made earlier? If so, why? If not, what would have been done differently?

3. What relief is being, and will be, offered to low-to-middle income earners who have either lost their employment or have been furloughed? Is what is currently being offered adequate? If so, why? If not, what further measures will be provided to support those who have been made even more vulnerable?

4. There have been recent reports of far right groups using the current pandemic as an opportunity to further their agenda, and the United Kingdom has provided more than its share of individuals that have signal boosted such ideologies such as Mrs Louise Mensch, Mr Markus Meecham, Mr Carl Benjamin and Mr Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. What actions will the government take in order to provide protections for individuals and members of marginalised communities, be it women, LGBTQ individuals, racial and ethnic minorities, and so on, who are targeted by such individuals for harassment?

5. Does the Prime Minister feel that the current public disagreement between cabinet members and key scientific advisors is helping the current crisis?

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Reports of a 2nd trip now.

I thought we were up to 3 now? 2 to Durham from London, and one to Barnard Castle, on a day that just so happens - complete coincidence, to be his mother's 71st birthday. I say coincidence, because we "know" that Dom didn't meet his mother whilst staying in her house. Mind, we also "know" that the police both did, and didn't, talk to anyone at the house.

Its also come out that, far from being unable to source food or any form of help in London (because that was always believable), his brother-in-law lives 2 streets away in London, as does his chief aide (I think it was chief aide)

As for questions in parliament, I wouldn't waste more than 1 - conservatives are doing a good job of splitting themselves over this already, no need to risk uniting them by adding his own attack. Just one question along the lines of "many of your cabinet colleagues have defended Mr Cummings' illegal trips to Durham on the principal that in doing so, he was just being a 'good parent'. Could Mr Johnson please confirm whether he agrees with his colleagues that other members of the public who decided to abide by travel limitations were doing so because they are 'bad parents'"

Throw a bomb, and leave it there. It boxes Boris I to either defending Cummings, Gove et al - and calling the electorate 'bad parents', or he sides with the electorate, and dumps on Cummings, and the cabinet cheerleaders.

Leaves 5 questions for other issues (including extending self-employed income support in line with furloughed workers' support, and probably bringing in company directors in there too - though I personally have less sympathy there)