Opinions on how the Government have handled the coronavirus outbreak

[Docfoster]

The hypocrisy of either MP's or officials advising the government is no surprise to me. Hypocrisy is human nature in conditions like these.

Surely.
But so is integrity.
And the propensity to identify and cast-out those who have too little of it.

I totally agree and always will. However I believe that whilst that once was instinctively the way the majority of the English electorate thought it's impossible to ignore the fact that Johnson has always had a reputation for not giving a toss about, the truth, rules or laws, he revels in his maverick profile. And yet knowing all of this the English electorate said yes please, so much so that he won the election by a very large majority. The fact that he continues to make what are to me dreadful but to him maverick decisions is not a surprise. Quite how this situation will end I have no idea but I do know it will cost lives and for that reason both Johnson and Cummings should go and not return.

Sure.
The majority has got exactly the government it wanted.

The points I wanted to make were really:
1. That human nature is multi-faceted.
2. That there is variance between individuals in the relative salience of those natural facets. (Except for identical twins, humans do not share identical genomes, so do not share identical natures).
3. That an individual's nature can (and will) be judged only through their words and deeds.

[savvypaul]

Under our FPTP, 43% of those who voted gives one party an 80 seat majority.

[slinger]

Cummings is to make a statement, and then answer questions, this afternoon.

[savvypaul]

That should be an interesting listen...

[savvypaul]

These are (some of) the questions that the Loony Left, virtue signalling Daily Telegraph believe need answering...

Did Dominic Cummings stop at a service station? His wife had symptoms of coronavirus at the time so would potentially have put civilians at risk if so. It seems likely that the couple would have stopped given that the 260-mile journey would have taken at least four hours and they had their four-year-old son with them in the car.

In the course of his journeys between Durham and London did Mr Cummings or his wife come into contact with other members of the public?

Why did Number 10 keep quiet about Mr Cummings’ trip to Durham for eight weeks?

Did the Prime Minister have any role in the decision not to disclose the incident?

Did Mr Cummings visit Houghall Woods near his family’s Durham property on April 19? Onlookers say that spotted the adviser at the beauty spot five days after being photographed back at work in Downing Street. If the account is correct this means Mr Cummings broke lockdown rules more than once.

This raises the question: how many times did the adviser visit the north east?

Why could Mr Cummings and his wife not arrange childcare in London?

Mr Cummings’ brother-in-law lives nearby – why did Mr Cummings not ask his for help with childcare?

Alternatively, could the aide's sister not have travelled to London to collect their son?

Did Mr Cummings visit Barnard Castle, 30 miles from Durham, on April 12?

An eye-witness claims he was walking along the River Tees. Given that he developed his own symptoms after arriving in Durham, should he have been self-isolating at this point?

On what day did Mr Cummings fall ill and how long did he self isolate for?

Downing Street has challenged the statement of Durham police which states a family member of Mr Cummings’ was questioned by the force. Number 10 initially said that “at no stage” was the aide or his family spoken to by the police about this matter. Which account is true?

Deputy Chief Medical Officer Jenny Harries said being too ill to look after a small child was an “exceptional circumstance” on April 10 and she pointed to accessing family support. But Mr Cummings’ trip was almost two weeks before this advice was issued. What is his defence of this?

On Saturday night Ms Harries also said that people should only travel with coronavirus to seek childcare if there is an “extreme” risk to life. Was this the case?

Boris Johnson last night said that Mr Cummings travelled to Durham because "both he and his wife were about to be incapacitated by coronavirus". But how could he have known he was about to become incapacitated? At the time of travel, Downing Street previously insisted that his wife was displaying symptoms, while Mr Cummings feared there was a "high likelihood" he too would develop the virus. This indicates he had not yet shown symptoms himself when the couple set off for the north east.[/list]

[slinger]

There are fewer holes in a year's supply of Swiss cheese than there are in Cummings' dog's breakfast of a story, or collection of stories.

Still, the arrogant little shit answering (I hope) loaded questions from (I hope) hostile journos should win him loads of fans this afternoon

[slinger]

This, from The Secret Barrister on Twitter:

The Secret Barrister
@BarristerSecret
An important point about the burden of proof in the Cummings saga: The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 provide that it is an offence for a person to leave the place where they are living *without reasonable excuse*. [1/4]

It is agreed that he left the place where he was living. The prosecution can prove that part of the offence. There is then (at least) an evidential burden on the accused to demonstrate an *objectively* reasonable excuse. So far, there has been no evidence offered at all. [2/4]

It can only be said that Cummings was not in breach of the law if he presents at least *some* evidence to support the claim that his actions were reasonable. This evidence would have to include, at the very least, a full account of exactly what he did and why he did it. [3/4]

No such account has been offered to the public. Nor to any of the ministers, MPs or Attorney Generals rushing to declare no legal wrongdoing. This is why, on the basis of what the public has been told, it is impossible to say no offence has been committed. [4/4]

It’s important to add that it is of course possible that a reasonable excuse might exist. There could be compelling evidence that establishes the defence. My point is that there is presently insufficient in the public domain for anybody objectively to reach that assessment.

[slinger]

And now, in today's episode of Bot, or Not..?



So the story goes, MPs were contacted via a WhatsApp group, given scripted responses, and then told to "personalise" them a bit. Of course, to personalise something one first has to be in possession of a personality.

[savvypaul]

Cummings is to make a statement, and then answer questions, this afternoon.

Well, that was a train crash.

A line under, has not been drawn.

[Daniel Quinn]

Doc Foster. I would dispute there is such a thing as human nature beyond things like hunger and being horny.

We are complex social beings with the capacity for learning about ourselves and others. We don't so much have a personality as behave in certain ways at certain times taking into account all we know.