Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Cummings press conference – what’s your verdict?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Cummings press conference – what’s your verdict?
Yet the family were unable to complete the 30 minute drive to Barnard Castle without the need for a toilet stop
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
But unless new info emerges which it surely won't, he's done enough to hang on.
The local council leader is a friend of hers, so she's off to give him a bollocking.
VI and I, like James.
The law requires a reasonable excuse. He had one. That applies to everyone ... He must be treated the same as anyone else under the law.
Tragic circumstances, glad his child is safe after the hospital visit. Not a situation I'd wish on any parent.
Quite why the other is so awesome her merits such protection rather than nobly falling on his sword I do not know. I'd have thought it was a key adviser skill to know when your presence is not helping.
Cummings was tested and found wanting. That’s what people see, regardless of the details of whether or not what he did was actually illegal.
The flannelling and refusal to apologise just makes it worse.
Trouble is it left too many hostages to fortune. At best voters will now feel sorry for the man who broke all the guidelines they had to follow. At worst tomorrow's front pages will have a line-by-line analysis of which rules he broke in which order.
PBers who followed @stjohn's tip will have made enough to pay for tonight's fish and chips.
And it really isn't about Brexit, some of us have thought Dominic Cummings was a cock end when we first dealt with him, which preceded Brexit.
A 'till they drop' press conference straight out of the Arnie Vinick playbook.
Dom is safe. The media are found wanting, again.
Meanwhile the bottom line remains that everyone was told to stay at home, and people with the virus were additionally told not to leave their home.
"Just testing my eyesight."
Are about to become euphemisms for dissembling bollocks.
He may be a cock end but he's not telling immigrants to Go Home.
Without that, I think he would have got away with it.
Looking at the government website, it appears that versions of the advice prior to the most recent update are not there.
He is playing the 'reasonable excuse' card. Sorry, but someone in his position cannot be seen to be making excuses, reasonable or otherwise.
Was it reasonable though? I just ran it past Mrs PtP and asked her what she thought I would have done in his position on the day of the Durham trip. She got it in one. I would have told her to go to bed and stay there while I looked after the kid, tried to arrange a Test, and ring round my friends and relatives to see what help might be available in the event that I suddenly got the virus too. I would most certainly NOT have piled her and the kid in the car for a 260 mile drive to my parents so that I had a 17 year old niece available to look after the kid in the event I came down with the Virus straight away. That would have been very UNreasonable, very much more so than many of the decisions made by other parents in far more difficult and daunting circumstances.
OK, let's accept he just made a mistake, but for the sake of the Government, his Party and the war against this Virus, he should resign.
So we're largely where we were before. If more details emerge, Cummings and by extension Johnson are in trouble. If not, it may fizzle out.
Pretty much every Fleet Street paper will have put half a dozen reporters on the case. There are also plenty of members of the public with an incentive to snitch on Cummings - starting with anyone who works in a school or whose relatives do.
So, in the words of Zhou Enlai, it's too early to tell. If no further significant details have emerged by the weekend, Cummings will survive. But at the cost of having massively weakened Johnson's government.
That's a question for Mrs Cummings (Ms Wakefield, as I believe she is known professionally).
Some of us actually made the case for a particular outcome. And were right
Nothing else matters above this - he could have infected half the government and senior health figures, and seriously impacted the state's response to the pandemic.
Ah, that unravelled quickly.
Quarter of a million net came last year. I feel pretty confident in saying we'll still be getting net migration this year and next year and every single year of this government.
But it is remarkable that the people who have such a great eye in spotting the shameful antisemitism of Corbyn's Labour fail to spot the vile bigotry they voted for.
I agree that this is likely to be severely damaging to government credibility for the foreseeable future, and while I am no fan at all of the current government, that is not a good thing. They have a job to do, and this will hinder it.
Also, from memory, the Spectator article in question was rather humorous in nature, with their columnists and their partners opining on what life was like under lockdown. Mrs Gove (and her husband) was also involved in it.
Edit: found it! https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/spectator-writers-in-lockdown-by-the-people-stuck-with-them
He found it difficult to find a connection with voters on a personal level.
Should he not take his child to hospital? That's a reasonable excuse under the law.
Excuse isn't a negative word in the law. It has meaning. If he meets it for the law he should follow the law and do the right thing as he sees it. As should anyone.
1. Barnard Castle eye test is the laugh line and very dangerous. That will be repeated ad nauseum in the press and satires, and undermines credibility. I don't think anyone seriously believes it, however credulous they are on the rest.
2. Less of a laugh line, but a huge hole is that he says he couldn't arrange any childcare in London... but later admits he didn't even try.
3. The feigned lack of appreciation this would impact future public health messages will be latched onto by the medical and behavioural experts - clearly nonsense.
4. No empathy at all expressed for people who didn't even have the option of going to a cottage on the family farm, and indeed made immense sacrifices. The "what planet are they on" aspect of asking for sympathy for the gut-wrenching decision to go to your parent's spare cottage is rather strong.
5. For Johnson, there is a big question mark over his total failure to take any interest in it until it became a media story, despite knowing about it for weeks. This is reminiscent of Entwhistle's grim, brief tenure at the BBC - a total failure to take seriously or be proactive on a matter which was obviously going to be a problem until far too late.
6. Johnson has a further problem in the admission that he was, by Cummings's admission, running an office where people were off with Covid, or had been off and were back, without any thought at all to isolating ALL those people. Indicative of a complete failure to take this seriously early on. Contrast Merkel - one staff member ill and isolated herself and others immediately.
The entire media and Opposition establishment played a game of chicken with one man.
He won
The LAW Philip! '...It isn't about The Law.'
Geesh. Hate using exclamation marks but you've driven me to it.
Law makers should not be law breakers and that extends to SPADs. If he'd broken the law he should go - no if's, no buts.
If he's not then this is just petty vindictive witch hunting.
He did not throw Boris under the bus, but I will be surprised if it helped the great man either.
Driving without care and attention.
I expect we'll have another wave (likely this year) and we will not see the same level of compliance with the lockdown rules.
His description carefully included all the firm sightings, and placed them in as innocent a context as possible. It ended up all too smooth to be anything other than a post hoc rationalisation. It included as little as possible which might one day be contradicted by new evidence. So a reasonable effort except for one thing.
The Barnard Castle thing on Easter Day had always stood out as a problem, and the failure to admit or account for it earlier suggests a hope, until yesterday (PM evaded it) or today, that it could be denied.
His explanation was plainly fanciful. Really apart from complex and true explanations (which of the lawful sort were clearly not available) he would have done better to use 'exercise'. Actually I think he was on a trip out, unlike the millions denied a trip to church on Easter Day.
His weakness here undermines his credibility generally. So, ultimately a fail.
5.00 Westminster Gardens
1st Barnard Castle 4/6 favourite. (Backed in from Even money).
Fitness in question, so needed the run. Produced just before turning for home. Never in danger.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
Should he have spent his time worrying about managing the movements of a SPAD, or the availability of PPE and Testing?
Clearly others follow a different practice and enjoy using the facilities at service stations.
Each to their own I suppose.
4 is more wounding. On 2 successive nights the top 2 in government have failed to connect on any human level with an anxious population.
Their utter black hole of compassion for the feelings of others was laid bare.
The rest is legalistic detail.
Working for a pollster at a time like this must be a bit like working on the Exit Poll.
You should be concerned that you consider this to be "trumped-up bullshit" when so many Tory voters do not. Why not go talk to a Tory MP about their email inbox. Or read the Daily Mail. Then tell us how it'll all be forgotten because its trumped up bullshit
But if the laws not been broken then what's the issue? It's the same laws for absolutely everyone.
I'm pretty sure he would like to turn the calendar back and do something else but doesn't want to admit it.
An interesting question is has he learnt from the experience - people capable of doing so can be more valuable, people who can't aren't.
Personally, I think it's about 50:50 and probably the former is more likely than the latter. But he should still step down.
Almost everyone else in the same position wouldn't have travelled and been bollocked by the rozzers if they did.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.