Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

Time to let this rest and move on imo....unless people are just relishing the tory bashing aspect of all this and just want to perpetuate it for that reason.....the media too have been parasitic in pursuing this, repeating rumour and stuff that has appeared on social media as if it was the truth. Plenty of it has just been a witch hunt which has got out of proportion to the reality - a man looking after his family to the best of his ability and resources.  

Sorry that does not fly. He is the special advisor to the P.M. If there is anyone who has access to some help it would be him. A private nurse or nanny for example, so DC's family could stay in London and he could continue to advise the Cabinet during Boris's illness. So the PR team can spin it anyway they want but it is clear he deliberately ignored the instructions the UK Government issued and now they are trying to cover all of that up. It's not like this happened last week, the papers have had several weeks to do their research on this, and his wife also fabricated that story for the Spectator which was at minimum "economical with the truth."

So the issue is - they have very publicly shown that you can't trust DC, and you can't trust the P.M or Cabinet either, they have shown that whatever rule they create for the British public they are free to ignore themselves, and this will have big implications moving forward. In the short term many people may consider the lockdown instructions to be dead in the water - which in turn may lead the government to compensate by rushing to open the country back up before the science says they should. 

All to protect an advisor. Something stinks here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

.

Edited by Surfer
Duplicate Post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Surfer said:

You do actually. MP’s are still sensitive to their constituent’s concerns and when you lose the confidence of the population there are all sorts of things that can a happen that - yes you can force people to do with the police - would go a lot more smoothly if you had retained it. So for example ministerial assertions about protecting food standards or the NHS, or immigration are all going to fall under the “so are you lying to me again” skepticism. It true the Tories have an 80 seat majority, but it won’t take too much to see a backbench rebellion break out, and the new northern Tories are not going to be concerned with having the whip withdrawn if they feel they will lose their seat anyway if they back up this nonesense. The “one nation” and “government of the people” facade has been shattered now. 

 

But that’s my point, 80 is a whopping majority. You don’t need credibility, all you have to do is hold that majority in Parliament. That’s a hell of a rebellion before you need before anything changes.

Would you say Donald Trump has credibility as President? Yet he’s going to survive everything thrown at him and finish his term.

And Johnson has an absolute stranglehold on the workings of the UK government in comparison. Johnson and this Government isnt going anywhere until at least the next GE, people need to get used to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Essjayess said:

Well done Indy, also totally correct,  fact that 121 deaths from Coronavirus today, positive that its coming down for sure, sad that its still 121 deaths to many and sad that as you say, its just a side note in this topic now. Hundreds die, yet pages and pages of Cummings Goings...

Alright,  let the waffle continue and Coronavirus tragedies  stay as a sideshow, its only a football forum after all.

What more is there to say? Many more than 121 people died of all sorts of things today. Yes it’s terrible that people die of anything, but we are well past the “panic” stage now and other than a reviewing to ensure they haven’t shot back up again, I’m not sure what anybody really gets from focussing on the exact number of deaths each day.

For context, in the week ending 8 May (last weekly stats available on gov ONS site), there were 12,657 deaths and 3,930 related to coronavirus. That means there were 1,250 people a day who died from things other than coronavirus. Coronavirus numbers have reduced since then but I see no reason why other deaths would have significantly decreased since. So chances are that approximately 1350 people died today and only 121 were to do with coronavirus. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Aggy said:

What more is there to say? Many more than 121 people died of all sorts of things today. Yes it’s terrible that people die of anything, but we are well past the “panic” stage now and other than a reviewing to ensure they haven’t shot back up again, I’m not sure what anybody really gets from focussing on the exact number of deaths each day.

For context, in the week ending 8 May (last weekly stats available on gov ONS site), there were 12,657 deaths and 3,930 related to coronavirus. That means there were 1,250 people a day who died from things other than coronavirus. Coronavirus numbers have reduced since then but I see no reason why other deaths would have significantly decreased since. So chances are that approximately 1350 people died today and only 121 were to do with coronavirus. 

 

Does seem a bit odd describing 121 deaths as a 'side note' though doesn't it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Monty13 said:

But that’s my point, 80 is a whopping majority. You don’t need credibility, all you have to do is hold that majority in Parliament. That’s a hell of a rebellion before you need before anything changes.

Would you say Donald Trump has credibility as President? Yet he’s going to survive everything thrown at him and finish his term.

And Johnson has an absolute stranglehold on the workings of the UK government in comparison. Johnson and this Government isnt going anywhere until at least the next GE, people need to get used to that.

If you don't have credibility you finish up getting nothing done. Yes Donald Trump will stumble into the election, but the practical matter is the country is paralyzed. If he had any ability to lead, to be trusted, so much could be done, but he can't and isn't. 

I appreciate the UK is rather different, but public opinion and the press still make a huge difference to what a government can get done - unless it wants to go full authoritarian and lose all legitimacy that is. We must all hope that is not the UK's fate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aggy said:

What more is there to say? Many more than 121 people died of all sorts of things today. Yes it’s terrible that people die of anything, but we are well past the “panic” stage now and other than a reviewing to ensure they haven’t shot back up again, I’m not sure what anybody really gets from focussing on the exact number of deaths each day.

For context, in the week ending 8 May (last weekly stats available on gov ONS site), there were 12,657 deaths and 3,930 related to coronavirus. That means there were 1,250 people a day who died from things other than coronavirus. Coronavirus numbers have reduced since then but I see no reason why other deaths would have significantly decreased since. So chances are that approximately 1350 people died today and only 121 were to do with coronavirus. 

The Sunday figures are always lower due to the way hospitals report. Expect higher figures for Tuesday and Wednesday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The Sunday figures are always lower due to the way hospitals report. Expect higher figures for Tuesday and Wednesday. 

Very true, but the 121 figure is significantly lower than last Sunday's so, strange as it seems to say, it is good news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Essjayess said:

Well done Indy, also totally correct,  fact that 121 deaths from Coronavirus today, positive that its coming down for sure, sad that its still 121 deaths to many and sad that as you say, its just a side note in this topic now. Hundreds die, yet pages and pages of Cummings Goings...

Alright,  let the waffle continue and Coronavirus tragedies  stay as a sideshow, its only a football forum after all.

Encouraging figures, albeit tragic, must remember its a bank holiday so probably falsely low figure but still worthy of note.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/04/2020 at 15:52, Barbe bleu said:

Mark Y asked if a confidence gauge could be added to statements to distinguish known facts from assessments and then so that the level of confidence of that assessment could be known.

It seems that it had not been proved that there was any additional spread as a result of Cheltenham but your assessment is that it is "highly likely" or "almost certain" to use government speak that some will have occurred.

I agree that spread from the festival was likely or highly likely but I wouldn't be able to provide absolute evidence.

 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-52797002

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

Does seem a bit odd describing 121 deaths as a 'side note' though doesn't it.

Only one person who has described it as such. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zero deaths reported for yesterday in ROI, possibly one or two extra today due to weekend ( wasn't bank holiday here). Very positive indeed.  5 km limit may be raised to 20 km a bit earlier. Still crystal clear instructions from non govt.👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wcorkcanary said:

Zero deaths reported for yesterday in ROI, possibly one or two extra today due to weekend ( wasn't bank holiday here). Very positive indeed.  5 km limit may be raised to 20 km a bit earlier. Still crystal clear instructions from non govt.👍

Good news

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Looks to be  on the wane here and the rest of western Europe.

Still rising sharply in Russia, India, Mexico, Brazil and a few other Latin American countries.

No real sign of any second wave yet.

Edited by ricardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Icecream Snow said:
10 hours ago, lake district canary said:

To tell the truth I'm fed up with hearing about it.

Then stop posting on a thread about it

Except the reason I am fed up about it is that people won't leave it alone.  It's like all these witch hunts that get their momentum from social media and whipped up by the general media.  They ignore the facts and continue behaving as if none of the mitigating circumstances exist. 

The bottom line is why he went up to Durham.  You either think he was genuinely worried - fearful even - for his family or you think he went on a two week jaunt to see his parents. If it was the former and he was genuinely fearful, then you have to have some compassion for the situation - there is NOTHING that a father/husband will not do to protect his family, special advisor or not.  If you think he was just off to get away from it all then yes, you have a right to be angry. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Looks to on the wane here and the rest of western Europe.

Still rising sharply in Russia, India, Mexico, Brazil and a few other Latin American countries.

No real sign of any second wave yet.

Thought you were talking about Cummings / Johnson and Populism there for a moment on the wane....

Keep your wallet ready - position remains untenable - first ministerial resignation already!

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s now turned into Political Points and will not go away in the foreseeable future, we haven’t even heard much from the Krankie lookalike  yet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Except the reason I am fed up about it is that people won't leave it alone.  It's like all these witch hunts that get their momentum from social media and whipped up by the general media.  They ignore the facts and continue behaving as if none of the mitigating circumstances exist. 

The bottom line is why he went up to Durham.  You either think he was genuinely worried - fearful even - for his family or you think he went on a two week jaunt to see his parents. If it was the former and he was genuinely fearful, then you have to have some compassion for the situation - there is NOTHING that a father/husband will not do to protect his family, special advisor or not.  If you think he was just off to get away from it all then yes, you have a right to be angry. 

 

A lot of people think it’s the latter so are still discussing it. You’ve answered your own question basically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jools said:

Kinnock took his missus to his parents to say happy birthday to his dad. He was deemed not to have broken regulations.

Cummings was instrumental in creating the regulations, Kinnock was not.

Cummings took his wife and family on a birthday trip to a beauty spot. He broke his own regulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Except the reason I am fed up about it is that people won't leave it alone.  It's like all these witch hunts that get their momentum from social media and whipped up by the general media.  They ignore the facts and continue behaving as if none of the mitigating circumstances exist. 

The bottom line is why he went up to Durham.  You either think he was genuinely worried - fearful even - for his family or you think he went on a two week jaunt to see his parents. If it was the former and he was genuinely fearful, then you have to have some compassion for the situation - there is NOTHING that a father/husband will not do to protect his family, special advisor or not.  If you think he was just off to get away from it all then yes, you have a right to be angry. 

 

And you think he’s done nothing wrong?

Went to 10 Downing Street after he thought his wife had Covid 19. Shouldn’t have left the house.

Drove 260 miles without stopping, after the government instruction was very clear.

He timed his visit with two birthdays, not mentioned.

He drove thirty minutes with a small child and wife when he claimed had poor eyesight, while still in lockdown situation. Then sat by a river with his family when everyone else was being stopped from sitting in one area!

He then had to stop on his 30 minute return cause his 4 year old needed the toilet yet didn’t need to stop during a 5 hour journey.

I understand that in some views technically he’ll argue the case, but the guys wife tried to cover this up, she wasn’t very honest, now he came out in an arrogant and very poor worded statement which was appalling.

He should have showed humility to all those families really effected by this virus and not used it to defend his actions. He should have said he panicked took this action which in hindsight was wrong and he should have apologised to the Public especially the critical workers as his actions could have had the potential to infect others. Simple show humility to the public.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Indy said:

And you think he’s done nothing wrong?

Went to 10 Downing Street after he thought his wife had Covid 19. Shouldn’t have left the house.

Drove 260 miles without stopping, after the government instruction was very clear.

He timed his visit with two birthdays, not mentioned.

He drove thirty minutes with a small child and wife when he claimed had poor eyesight, while still in lockdown situation. Then sat by a river with his family when everyone else was being stopped from sitting in one area!

He then had to stop on his 30 minute return cause his 4 year old needed the toilet yet didn’t need to stop during a 5 hour journey.

I understand that in some views technically he’ll argue the case, but the guys wife tried to cover this up, she wasn’t very honest, now he came out in an arrogant and very poor worded statement which was appalling.

He should have showed humility to all those families really effected by this virus and not used it to defend his actions. He should have said he panicked took this action which in hindsight was wrong and he should have apologised to the Public especially the critical workers as his actions could have had the potential to infect others. Simple show humility to the public.

That is spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's simply a matter of leadership.

You lead by example - not do as I say not as I do.

For what it's worth the whole Cummings fable stinks - there are so many implausible issues with it that the local police let alone a prosecution barrister (know any) could smell a rat a mile off.

It was almost as if Cummings, being a 'master' strategist, had a lot of planned as a what if - car full of fuel, obliging nieces,  nice pad in the country to escape too and hide away. It was not a spur of the moment poor decision. I needn't go on as it only gets worse for Cummings and his wife and the day trip. I guess they all traiped to the local hospital (with Covid symptoms) when their son was ill too overnight and stayed? 

Then we have Johnson - again it's a matter of leadership. He offers none.

Cummings should of offered to resign or been fired. The rules, the spirit of the rules are clear (no - I'm not listening to feeble minded  excuses). Remember these were the days when the Police were driving around moving/dispersing people from sitting down on park benches! 

Trying - as some desperately do - to simply sweep under the carpet such outrageous behaviour to 'excuse' and protect our failing leaders does nobody any credit least of all them.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is that I think you are flogging a dead horse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

A final point (at least for tonight) which I have’t seen made in the wake of Cummings explanation. If this was all above board and entirely in line with the rules, and not at all illegal, and Cummings thought so at the time, why didn’t his wife detail it all in her Specsavers, er sorry, Spectator article, rather than writing it in such a way that everyone was left with the strong impression they had stayed in London the whole time?

 

 

I hadn't realised Cummings himself had written a piece for The Spectator about being in lockdown in which he also makes no mention of it not having taken place at their London home...

Also of relevance, some months ago a journalist read through all of Cummings' blogs from the last decade. Many thousands of words on any number of subjects, and came up with a mixed verdict. But noticed one omission - Cummings hardly ever seemed to mention the role of the rule of law.

Cummings is practically silent about jurisprudence and the law. (In his diatribes against the always obstructive civil service, “legal arguments” are occasionally mentioned, but only to be swatted aside as another typical ruse by these masters of delay.) This is significant because legal systems and legal reasoning involve attempts to draw up general rules and procedures to govern human interaction.

The law, especially in a common-law system, is a historical enterprise in a way that Cummings should, in principle, approve of. That is to say, it seeks constantly to modify the agreed rules in the light of new circumstances; in this respect, it is one large feedback loop. And it attempts to take into account not just the purposes informing any given individual’s actions, but the likely effect of such actions on the interests of others, now and in the future.

[But] Cummings writes from the perspective of someone who’s in a hurry to get the thing done, never from the perspective of the judge who has been schooled to reflect on the potentially damaging consequences in the future of licensing this particular action in the present.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ricardo said:

The reality is that I think you are flogging a dead horse.

Somehow Ricardo we've got to get this 'government' or lack thereof to start acting like a British government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Somehow Ricardo we've got to get this 'government' or lack thereof to start acting like a British government.

Ladbrokes Stay 1-5

Go 3-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ricardo said:

The reality is that I think you are flogging a dead horse.

You can hope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, lake district canary said:

You've got to take away all the hype and frenzy that has built up around this story and see the human element.  So much of what we have been told by the media was wrong. 

Yes there were a couple of pieces in the Spectator that disgracefully and widely.  inaccurately reported the Cummings Durham jaunt. One was written by the aristocrat Mary Wakefield (baronet father lives in castle, ancestors include former PM Earl Grey and Governor generals of Kenya & Canada). She gave a detailed account of the couples lock down experience.......

Didn't once mention going to Durham or Barnard Castle

She is Mrs Cummings

Why didn't she talk about the trip. Obviously because they knew it was wrong.

They are hypocrits and liars - you have been taken for a mug @lake district canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Indy said:

And you think he’s done nothing wrong?

He should have showed humility to all those families really effected by this virus and not used it to defend his actions. He should have said he panicked took this action which in hindsight was wrong and he should have apologised to the Public especially the critical workers as his actions could have had the potential to infect others. Simple show humility to the public.

I didn't say he didn't do anything wrong, only that there were circumstances that may have affected his decisions.  He could have done as you suggest and be a bit more humble and apologised, but if the circumstances were as he said - to do with wife's illness, his likelihood of him getting the virus and the real possibility the child would be on it's own, then he will think he did the right thing - and if you think you have done the right thing you won't want to apologise for it. 

Unpopular view of it, yes, but by far the worst thing I have seen in the whole saga is the sight of members of the media falling over themselves outside his house day after day, flouting the social distancing rules openly and without caring.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dj11 said:

That is spot on.

Just for an example imagine the stick had this been say Jack Grealish! I’m sure people wouldn’t be so understanding!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...