2 minutes ago, vogie said:

But that is the point David, it appears to be an all party make it up as you go along, but in Doms case he chose his family which I'm sure most of us would have done, families come before politics.

Most of the posters on here if they were honest would have done exactly the same thing, I know I would, I would have walked the 260 miles if I had to, and if you are a father you would have done so too.

I would have kept my son at home with me and got help in, not driven him 260 miles.

 

If he was feeling too unwell to look after his son, was he fit to drive that distance?

 

 

Just now, vogie said:

But that is the point David, it appears to be an all party make it up as you go along, but in Doms case he chose his family which I'm sure most of us would have done, families come before politics.

Most of the posters on here if they were honest would have done exactly the same thing, I know I would, I would have walked the 260 miles if I had to, and if you are a father you would have done so too.

But then the leaders should had made the rule for ALL parents to be allowed in such case …., not for the happy few bunch ….and also for the common people

5 minutes ago, vogie said:

But that is the point David, it appears to be an all party make it up as you go along, but in Doms case he chose his family which I'm sure most of us would have done, families come before politics.

Most of the posters on here if they were honest would have done exactly the same thing, I know I would, I would have walked the 260 miles if I had to, and if you are a father you would have done so too.

Which has no bearing on whether or not Cummings actions were in contravention of the lock down.

 

 

1 minute ago, david555 said:

But then the leaders should had made the rule for ALL parents to be allowed in such case …., not for the happy few bunch ….and also for the common people

I can only reiterate that Dom did what he thought was best, as surely you and I would have done, when it comes to families I'm afraid the rule book may go out of the window. I'm sure he didn't drive all that way so he could be a little nearer to the 'Angel of the North'

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

I can only reiterate that Dom did what he thought was best, as surely you and I would have done, when it comes to families I'm afraid the rule book may go out of the window. I'm sure he didn't drive all that way so he could be a little nearer to the 'Angel of the North'

And take the consequences of his actions as others did before him and resigned ….

1 minute ago, david555 said:

And take the consequences of his actions as others did before him and resigned ….

Taking care of your family is not a crime. To put it a different way if one of your family members was ill, or in a crisis, I am sure you wouldn't say 'I'd better not go see them because Boris says', you would be on the A1 faster than a rat up a drainpipe.

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

Taking care of your family is not a crime. To put it a different way if one of your family members was ill, or in a crisis, I am sure you wouldn't say 'I'd better not go see them because Boris says', you would be on the A1 faster than a rat up a drainpipe.

Taking care of your family is not an excuse for committing crimes.  

 

Until April 15 family members of dying of COVID-19 in UK hospitals were refused the chance to visit and say their last goodbyes.

 

 

20 minutes ago, david555 said:

But then the leaders should had made the rule for ALL parents to be allowed in such case …., not for the happy few bunch ….and also for the common people

They did on March 24th

However Dr Jenny Harries said at the daily Downing Street press briefing on 24 March that a small child could be considered “vulnerable”.

Clearly if you have adults who are unable to look after a small child, that is an exceptional circumstance. And if the individuals do not have access to care support - formal care support - or to family, they will be able to work through their local authority hubs.

Just now, vogie said:

Taking care of your family is not a crime. To put it a different way if one of your family members was ill, or in a crisis, I am sure you wouldn't say 'I'd better not go see them because Boris says', you would be on the A1 faster than a rat up a drainpipe.

You are dancing around the fact for which reason one break the law , you have to face the law , many had to let die a parent , or other family ember whiteout seeing them ….. what about them..... if they would break that law …. would they be excused ….? By you probably yes , but by the government with all their strong talk ,but not applicate it for themselves …?

The party of law and order.

19 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

They did on March 24th

However Dr Jenny Harries said at the daily Downing Street press briefing on 24 March that a small child could be considered “vulnerable”.

Clearly if you have adults who are unable to look after a small child, that is an exceptional circumstance. And if the individuals do not have access to care support - formal care support - or to family, they will be able to work through their local authority hubs.

_{If he was allowed why then now so much fuzz about …. the rules seems to change every passing day …..anyway I am sure a certain K.Starmer is preparing the "sectioning " of a PM already,... as before ….. looks like Boris found his politic executioner …..????}

43 minutes ago, sungod said:

I'm not defending Cummings, not a great fan. I'm defending his action as another parent.

 

 lets get one thing clear , he he broke guidelines , implemented by this Government .

      He must suffer from the consequences , of his actions ..

 

2 minutes ago, david555 said:

_{If he was allowed why then now so much fuzz about …. the rules seems to change every passing day …..anyway I am sure a certain K.Starmer is preparing the "section" of a PM already,... as before ….. looks like Boris found his politic executioner …..????}

Because most people forget about the small details, her statement was within 24 hrs of  Boris made the statement about lockdowns

3 minutes ago, elliss said:

 

 lets get one thing clear , he he broke guidelines , implemented by this Government .

      He must suffer from the consequences , of his actions ..

 

But He didn't as previously stated 

Within 24 hours, Dr Jenny Harries, the deputy chief medical officer for England, outlined possible exceptions to that rule, including how ill parents with a small child created “exceptional circumstances”.

At the Downing Street press conference on March 24 Dr Harries said parents who are ill and may not be able to look after a child created “exceptional circumstances” where family members could be called upon to help.

36 minutes ago, vogie said:

I can only reiterate that Dom did what he thought was best, as surely you and I would have done, when it comes to families I'm afraid the rule book may go out of the window. I'm sure he didn't drive all that way so he could be a little nearer to the 'Angel of the North'

So all those thousands of peopl who have been unable to spend time with their loved ones as they slipped away or been able to attend their funerals - they should have ignored the rules and done what they thought best for themselves? 

7 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

So all those thousands of peopl who have been unable to spend time with their loved ones as they slipped away or been able to attend their funerals - they should have ignored the rules and done what they thought best for themselves? 

People did attend funerals

As it stands, only immediate family members are allowed to attend funeral services.

Although this may vary from person to person, immediate family members generally refers to a parent, son or daughter, partner or spouse.

As a result of restrictions to how many people can attend a funeral service, you must check and confirm with your local council and funeral director as they may impose a limit on number of attendees.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11339842/funerals-coronavirus-lockdown/

I can  can only view the actions  of this "special" person to be an abuse of position in the face of the facts.

That his wife had already been identified as  infected and the  possibility that he and his child too were latent victims then to deposit the child with elderly carers in defiance of public announced recommendations does not convince me  his  "advisory" role or excuses in justification are particularly valid.

 

 

1 hour ago, vogie said:

But that is the point David, it appears to be an all party make it up as you go along, but in Doms case he chose his family which I'm sure most of us would have done, families come before politics.

Most of the posters on here if they were honest would have done exactly the same thing, I know I would, I would have walked the 260 miles if I had to, and if you are a father you would have done so too.

 

 May i suggest , contacting the emergency services , would have been a better option .

     They are the medical professionals , they know what they are talking about .

        Nuff said ...

 

One rule for the plebs and another rule for the elites eh?

We had Prince Charles traveling to Scotland while having symptoms of corona. But thats no problem.

We have Cummings driving hundreds of miles to his vulnerable parents house and its still no problem.

Sit on a park bench in the middle of a field? Oh thats a problem.

The guys on here defending the actions of Cummings should be ashamed. At what point does political affiliation transcend common sense and decency? Why are they above the law? 

Others have been forced to resign over far smaller transgressions.  

The main problem for Boris s if he throw Cummings under the bus ….most likely Cummings will pull Boris with him …,as he is the binding factor from all what this  bunch "cooked "…. 

 

Exciting times  to come 

I think that the government is actually trolling us all now. 

 

3 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

I can  can only view the actions  of this "special" person to be an abuse of position in the face of the facts.

That his wife had already been identified as  infected and the  possibility that he and his child too were latent victims then to deposit the child with elderly carers in defiance of public announced recommendations does not convince me  his  "advisory" role or excuses in justification are particularly valid.

The exact sequence is far from clear yet the gallows are already being erected. Cummings & plods version of events differ significantly from the nonsense being peddled for political gain & I for one have no idea where truth lies....and what's this about 'crime'?

17 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

So all those thousands of peopl who have been unable to spend time with their loved ones as they slipped away or been able to attend their funerals - they should have ignored the rules and done what they thought best for themselves? 

Forget about "all those thousands of people," what would you do, I think I can say without any fear of contradiction from you that if one or more of your family needed your help or guidance you of all people wouldn't say, 'sorry can't go, Boris said so. 

These threads have turned into a Boris bashing and a Dominic derision opportunity, but there again you are very unlikely to say anything positive about this government, and you never will.

A non story with the usual suspects still gabbin on about Brexit, 6 pages already.

Tens of thousands in the uk haven’t bothered at all with the so called lockdown regulations, regardless of political persuasions.

This Cummings fellow was probably right from the beginning with his herd mentality.

In short no laws broken, nobody injured, nothing to see, move along, next story please.

 

3 minutes ago, evadgib said:

The exact sequence is far from clear yet the gallows are already being erected. Cummings & plods version of events differ significantly from the nonsense being peddled for political gain & I for one have no idea where truth lies....and what's this about 'crime'?

Indeed the way the Conservative government has rallied around Cummings action is outrageously political. 

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Forget about "all those thousands of people," what would you do, I think I can say without any fear of contradiction from you that if one or more of your family needed your help or guidance you of all people wouldn't say, 'sorry can't go, Boris said so. 

These threads have turned into a Boris bashing and a Dominic derision opportunity, but there again you are very unlikely to say anything positive about this government, and you never will.

Most probably they also would break rules , but be very sure convinced that they have to get the punishment afterwards …… Cummings is trying to use his prerogatives  ,and that is disgusting to all the common people 

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Forget about "all those thousands of people," what would you do, I think I can say without any fear of contradiction from you that if one or more of your family needed your help or guidance you of all people wouldn't say, 'sorry can't go, Boris said so. 

These threads have turned into a Boris bashing and a Dominic derision opportunity, but there again you are very unlikely to say anything positive about this government, and you never will.

I am fortunate that neither I nor my family have experienced anything more than the shared inconvenience of lockdown, however each day we all see reports on the news of people who have endured such agonies of being unable to comfort their loved ones as they breathe their last or being unable to give them the dignified, comforting send off we all would wish for. But they accept it, stoically, because they recognise that the restrictions in place are for the greater good. 

 

This is not about bashing the government; it is about pointing out the rank hypocrisy of the government where they impose the cruelest of restrictions on the population at large yet they see fit to disregard their own message at will. 

2 minutes ago, david555 said:

Most probably they also would break rules , but be very sure convinced that they have to get the punishment afterwards …… Cummings is trying to use his prerogatives  ,and that is disgusting to all the common people 

At last you have agreed with me, halleluja. It is not "disgusting to all the common people" it is disgusting to those with a political agenda.

10 minutes ago, evadgib said:

The exact sequence is far from clear yet the gallows are already being erected. Cummings & plods version of events differ significantly from the nonsense being peddled for political gain & I for one have no idea where truth lies....and what's this about 'crime'?

lol. I think the events as outlined are no so open to much in the way of "versions". Granted the hype generated is likely to have political emphasis but as to crime ? If in  comparison  is there  any  lesser or greater crime than that of an individual of  no significance politically being laid out in a public place by British  Police for actions that in essence are equal ?

The nub of the issue is that it is another  case of  do as  "We" say, not as  we  do !

29 minutes ago, vogie said:

At last you have agreed with me, halleluja. It is not "disgusting to all the common people" it is disgusting to those with a political agenda.

Don't twist the facts ,..." if you done the crime ….do the time..."  is applicable in his case 

 

(To read in hyperbolic meaning way )