The Dominic Cummings Appreciation Society.

It's an example as to how exceptions work
Or how exceptionalism is claimed in Cummings’ case. He claimed that his case was exceptional, I don’t agree, you do, and I respect that. Circular long winded regurgitation over.

Cummings and BJ hold the evidence to put this to bed apparently. It’s difficult to discuss knowing that.
 
Seriously? You want to crucify him for a trip to Barnard Castle with zero interactions but you're relaxed about him going to a railway station, getting on a train and then getting off the train at a London Terminal, walking through that terminal and then getting in a taxi or an official car?
If he was concerned about his eyesight, he could have got the train from Durham back to London. It's not rocket science ffs.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
You are talking about a different part of the regulations. I've quoted them once before, and here they are again. Read them very carefully, then tell me which of the exceptions permits a 60 mile car journey to test your eyesight based on being a key worker or for the care of the vulnerable.

The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020
Made at 1.00 p.m. on 26th March 2020
Laid before Parliament at 2.30 p.m. on 26th March 2020
Coming into force at 1.00 p.m. on 26th March 2020

Restrictions on movement
6.—(1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need—

(a) to obtain basic necessities, including food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including any pets or animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons and supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person, or to obtain money, including from any business listed in Part 3 of Schedule 2;
(b )to take exercise either alone or with other members of their household;
(c) to seek medical assistance, including to access any of the services referred to in paragraph 37 or 38 of Schedule 2;
(d ) to provide care or assistance, including relevant personal care within the meaning of paragraph 7(3B) of Schedule 4 to the Safeguarding of Vulnerable Groups Act 2006(3), to a vulnerable person, or to provide emergency assistance;
(e) to donate blood;
(f) to travel for the purposes of work or to provide voluntary or charitable services, where it is not reasonably possible for that person to work, or to provide those services, from the place where they are living;
(g) to attend a funeral of—
(i) a member of the person’s household,
(ii) a close family member, or
(iii) if no-one within sub-paragraphs (i) or (ii) are attending, a friend;
(h) to fulfil a legal obligation, including attending court or satisfying bail conditions, or to participate in legal proceedings;
(i) to access critical public services, including—
(i) childcare or educational facilities (where these are still available to a child in relation to whom that person is the parent, or has parental responsibility for, or care of the child);
(ii) social services;
(iii) services provided by the Department of Work and Pensions;
(iv) services provided to victims (such as victims of crime);
(j) in relation to children who do not live in the same household as their parents, or one of their parents, to continue existing arrangements for access to, and contact between, parents and children, and for the purposes of this paragraph, “parent” includes a person who is not a parent of the child, but who has parental responsibility for, or who has care of, the child;
(k) in the case of a minister of religion or worship leader, to go to their place of worship;
(l) to move house where reasonably necessary;
(m )to avoid injury or illness or to escape a risk of harm.
(3) For the purposes of paragraph (1), the place where a person is living includes the premises where they live together with any garden, yard, passage, stair, garage, outhouse or other appurtenance of such premises.

(4) Paragraph (1) does not apply to any person who is homeless.

f)
 
Civilised - that made me laugh out loud..... The PM throughout, has kept referring to common sense and he quite clearly does not enjoy locking down the nation hence the caveat of what a person deems as reasonable. The ruler of north britain on the other hand seems to be revellling in her newfound power.
What's effectively a one party state with a unitary police force all snuggled up to the ruling party.... Nah It'll be fine.... :p :)
 
Exception f?
(f) to travel for the purposes of work or to provide voluntary or charitable services, where it is not reasonably possible for that person to work, or to provide those services, from the place where they are living;

Try again. He went for a drive to Barnard Castle. He wasn't working in Barnard Castle, he wasn't providing voluntary or charitable services in Barnard Castle. He was having a jolly day out testing his eyesight.
 
Bad news, we are for at least the rest of the year.
It’s not me
Johnson has said Brexit is done. Yet the Brexit loonies are still bleating about sell out and Brexit in name only.
What’s the matter, you have a government majority and a cabinet packed full of Johnson supporting brexiters, don’t you trust them?

I hope they handle the Great Leap Forward a hell of a lot better than they’ve dealt with coronavirus.
Given the way they seem to be lurching from fuck up to fuck up, you'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath. Don't get me wrong, I desperately want Brexit to happen and in a way that is as good as possible for the country. But with these dumplings in charge? Really?

For example, Test, Track and Trace was due out in a week or two. Now it's just Test and Trace, with Track coming along at some unspecified point in the future. I seem to recall that only a week or so ago, Track was being hailed as a key part of getting a lid on the virus. So, apart from the app allegedly having several issues, (despite Hancock I think it was saying it is working well on the Isle of Wight), what's the reason for it being put on the back burner? Promising to deliver and then failing - it bodes ill I fear.
 
If he was concerned about his eyesight, he could have got the train from Durham back to London. It's not rocket science ffs.
So.. go in a car and share droplets with nobody... Use the train and share droplets with the departure station staff, platform passengers, fellow passengers, destination station staff and concourse passengers, leave infectious contact traces on any other public transport used to complete the trip...

Please tell me you don't do risk assessment for a living... :p :)
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Exception f?
(f) to travel for the purposes of work or to provide voluntary or charitable services, where it is not reasonably possible for that person to work, or to provide those services, from the place where they are living;

Try again. He went for a drive to Barnard Castle. He wasn't working in Barnard Castle, he wasn't providing voluntary or charitable services in Barnard Castle. He was having a jolly day out testing his eyesight.
His return to work involved a long car trip. He wanted to make sure he was up to doing it safely. He went for a test drive with zero interactions to make sure. What are you objecting to exactly?
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
So.. go in a car and share droplets with nobody... Use the train and share droplets with the departure station staff, platform passengers, fellow passengers, destination station staff and concourse passengers, leave infectious contact traces on any other public transport used to complete the trip...

Please tell me you don't do risk assessment for a living... :p :)
It's Cummings Derangement Syndrome.
 
His return to work involved a long car trip. He wanted to make sure he was up to doing it safely. He went for a test drive with zero interactions to make sure. What are you objecting to exactly?
An advanced driving check drive, at the end of a 5 week course doesn’t extend to much more than about 30 to 40 miles. A drive out for 10 minutes would have been sufficient, with his family at home. He had to stop, because he was unwell and his child needed a lag, that didn’t need to happen.

A 10 minute spin out, would have probably passed muster.
 
If you think Cummings is a cnut then that's your opinion and you are entitled to it, I know others feel the same way but I don't. I don't think BoJo is being weak. He has had his discussion with Cummings and clearly accepted his version of events. I know Boris has wielded the sword over various Tory MPs when he needed to do so or felt he had to impose his authority so we know he is not afraid to act. Were he to sack Cummings as a result of the media witch hunt that to me would be a sign of weakness. A Prime Minister giving in and bowing to the pressure of an agenda-driven toxic media is not a good thing to do; they'd just go after him over something else. Time and again until he is hounded out of office.

If Cummings broke the law why hasn't he been arrested? I'm sure that after such a high profile fuss is being made the police would be under a lot of pressure to bring this notorious criminal to justice and feel his collar for such an odious crime.

BTW, thanks for the 'dumb', have one of your own.
Bollocks.


It's blatantly obvious that Mr. Cummings broke the law, by his own account.

Mr. Johnson is standing by him for reasons of his own. In doing so he is certainly undermining the Covid Secure message-there really can't be any discussion about that. He is also bringing derision upon his own legislation, brought in just weeks ago.

That is weakness and a failure of leadership, both of his own party and the country.
 
An advanced driving check drive, at the end of a 5 week course doesn’t extend to much more than about 30 to 40 miles. A drive out for 10 minutes would have been sufficient, with his family at home. He had to stop, because he was unwell and his child needed a lag, that didn’t need to happen.

A 10 minute spin out, would have probably passed muster.
Nobody with an ounce of honesty would drive to london without a test drive, you seem to accept that argument and I commend you for it.. He said he went east and south, to get to barnard castle and the river which is fair enough. No direct route exists from where he lives to barnard castle, unless your willing to drive through fields and fences so the length of time is fair enough.

The choice of barnard castle you would have to ask him, why he chose that destination, one assumes his family know it really well. His narrative was he stopped their for 15 minutes and that is about right for a toilet break and stretch your legs.

If it transpired he lied and was there for say an hour or more, then I would agree he broke the rules. Those who think he drove to barnard castle for a family fun day on the river, really don't have the proof to make that assertion.
 

Chef

LE
You can't be that dense. His behaviour will be influencing some of the muppets now. I hope you or your loved ones aren't amongst the innocents who these muppets will end up infecting and thus killing.

The party of government and their employees are supposed to set an example. Those amongst it who haven't have gone. Except for DC.
Firstly dense? Possibly in comparison to your good self. But I was taught to dress to the threat and if the expert in dying from cross contamination was happy to go against his own advice I'd take that as a strong indicator that he, the expert, didn't really believe his own predictions.

How much influence has Mr Cummings had on the 'muppets'? As much as professor Ferguson? There was a great amount of ignoring the guidelines well before Mr Cummings's death ride. But after Professor Ferguson's rendezvous with risk. Who do you reckon had the greater influence?

Unless you have a system which can tell who infected who it's unlikely that any of the people who've ignored the guidelines will be charged with manslaughter. As it happens a group I belong to has a lot of members in the at risk groups of all ages and so far seem to have done OK bar an old friend late 70s but healthy. How many more? Who knows?

If you believe the media's dire warnings on the risks associated with ignoring the lockdown guidelines then a question worth asking is how long did they sit on this story and how many innocent lives have been put at risk by that decision?

The handling of this is fast degenerating into a witch hunt and I feel the only thing that will satisfy the media blood lust is for Mr Cummings to resign. The press and BBC demand their tribute.

Many other politicos have picked which bits of the guidelines to observe and have failed to receive as much attention as Mr Cummings. It would be interesting to see how much their views meet with BBC standards.

I take it for granted that you have observed to the letter the guidelines from the outset and didn't have too much trouble booking Occado deliveries and the like. Thanks for that.
 
His return to work involved a long car trip. He wanted to make sure he was up to doing it safely. He went for a test drive with zero interactions to make sure. What are you objecting to exactly?
Tory scum, Tory austerity, Boris the baby-eater, ETA: Brexit bastards, Trump the baby-eater, Alt-Right trolls, Tory toffs, billionaire fat-cats who aren't Tories but who have Tory mates who steer the country according to their whims and peccadilloes.

Just the usual.
 
Last edited:
Firstly dense? Possibly in comparison to your good self. But I was taught to dress to the threat and if the expert in dying from cross contamination was happy to go against his own advice I'd take that as a strong indicator that he, the expert, didn't really believe his own predictions.

How much influence has Mr Cummings had on the 'muppets'? As much as professor Ferguson? There was a great amount of ignoring the guidelines well before Mr Cummings's death ride. But after Professor Ferguson's rendezvous with risk. Who do you reckon had the greater influence?

Unless you have a system which can tell who infected who it's unlikely that any of the people who've ignored the guidelines will be charged with manslaughter. As it happens a group I belong to has a lot of members in the at risk groups of all ages and so far seem to have done OK bar an old friend late 70s but healthy. How many more? Who knows?

If you believe the media's dire warnings on the risks associated with ignoring the lockdown guidelines then a question worth asking is how long did they sit on this story and how many innocent lives have been put at risk by that decision?

The handling of this is fast degenerating into a witch hunt and I feel the only thing that will satisfy the media blood lust is for Mr Cummings to resign. The press and BBC demand their tribute.

Many other politicos have picked which bits of the guidelines to observe and have failed to receive as much attention as Mr Cummings. It would be interesting to see how much their views meet with BBC standards.

I take it for granted that you have observed to the letter the guidelines from the outset and didn't have too much trouble booking Occado deliveries and the like. Thanks for that.
Four horsemen of the apocalypse and now we have a fifth man: dominic cummings and his death ride.
 
It's blatantly obvious that Mr. Cummings broke the law, by his own account.
I've yet to hear a coherent definition of the specific offence with which he should be charged. Also, in the event of this semi-mythical offence ever being brought to light, should Mrs Cummings be charged with conspiracy?

On a related note I, for one, am grateful for the Arrse Epidemiology Investigation Branch who are giving up their precious time to take up additional duties as the Arrse Law Enforcement & Legal Investigation Branch.

I just hope no planes crash any time soon, or I fear the Arrse Investigatory System may collapse.
 
Last edited:

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
An advanced driving check drive, at the end of a 5 week course doesn’t extend to much more than about 30 to 40 miles. A drive out for 10 minutes would have been sufficient, with his family at home. He had to stop, because he was unwell and his child needed a lag, that didn’t need to happen.

A 10 minute spin out, would have probably passed muster.
Fine, but that's your view and, in the absence of definitive guidelines, that's all it is. What makes people confident is a very individual thing. Durham police have classed it as a minor infraction and won't take further action.

For me, as I posted earlier to make it clear why I would change my mind and think Cummings culpable, it's the number of unnecessary interactions that matters because limiting the speed and spread of disease was the 'intent' of lock down. Lock down was never intended to be applied without regard to other factors, as the exemptions make clear.

On the evidence presented so far, I think Cummings's actions were reasonable and justifiable, though I agree that another mile or two might have broken the camel's back, and that nothing he did materially increased the chance of spreading infection. If someone shows otherwise, fair enough, but no-one has so far.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top