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.
While I'm sympathetic to his family circumstances, he broke the exact rules that everyone else was adhering to. People died alone in hospitals and in their homes because their families weren't visiting on the understanding that it was against the rules. That this prick should first make those rules then knowingly break those rules is unconscionable. There is, of course, not a single drop of conscience in our cabinet, so whether it's unconscionable or not is neither here nor there.
Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk
It was so much easier to blame Them. It was bleakly depressing to think They were Us. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
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
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.
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
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: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.
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.
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."
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
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.
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)?
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
5. Does the Prime Minister feel that the current public disagreement between cabinet members and key scientific advisors is helping the current crisis?
