Weston Super Saint

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/25/somerset-hospital-weston-general-hospital-closed-new-patients-halt-spread-coronavirus Phew, good job no-one has come to the area this bank holiday - well apart from the beach being full up when I rode past it this morning! Doubtless there will be a 'spike' in cases in Birmingham in a week or so

He does that, alot. More likely he just makes stuff up to suit his own weird agenda. Still, if it makes him feel all big and clever and he gets a modicum of comfort from it, who are we to deny it?

Lol, didn't understand most of that; 'you arwrite loads and loads' - your head needs a wobble pal. Fascinated by your recollection of me not understanding why testing was needed - love for you to find ANY post of mine where that was the case. I'm sure it'll be too much trouble for you though - much easier to make stuff up and pretend someone said it.

PMSL - you know the National Trust shut all castles don't you? Oh, right, you think the town is a castle, lol.

Any update yet on pointing me in the direction of where I went wrong? Thought not

??? 1. As a limited company contractor he cannot be 'sacked', nor can he 'resign' in the traditional sense. 2. He is not a member of Her Majesty's Government, merely an 'advisor'.

I agree, 100%, they should be squeaky clean. However, I fear you may be missing the point. As an 'advisor' - and from what I can make out, he is a limited company contractor - Cummings is NOT someone who 'makes the rules', as he is not an elected member of parliament, nor is he a member of the House of Lords (yet).

I don't need to know how politics works. My argument is that the law applies equally to everyone as do the remedies laid out in said law. Perhaps you didn't understand the point and got a little confused so are trying to deflect with this comment?

Lol. Point me in the right direction then....

No rules broken there

Also missing out the fact that the laws of the land apply to everyone, equally and there are not different rules for 'non normal peole' with jobs in politics. Absolutely, the man was an idiot and broke the rules, as did Kinnock. Both of them have been investigated by the police for their actions and have had what the police deemed 'appropriate action' taken. It certainly seems odd that everyone is up in arms that he broke the rules - he did, there's no defence of that - but the same people are clamouring for whole new levels of punishment be invented as a result.

Also missing out the whole 'you can meet with ONE other person from another household' thing then - but then that only came into effect in May for England, but (I think?) still not in effect for Wales. Definitely wasn't available in either country in March.

Missing out the whole 'unless exceptional circumstances' thing then - I get that the circumstances are up for debate, no denying that! You're also missing out the whole 'do not travel out of your local area' directive that the Welsh Government had (still have?) in place.

As opposed to what he has claimed he was doing (no evidence yet to suggest otherwise, but happy to be corrected), which was to stay indoors with his family, 'isolating' and retrieve food deliveries left outside the door?

It's odd really. On the one hand you state that everyone should adhere to the 'directives' or face criminal charges or a fine. It's pretty clear the Cummings DID NOT follow those directives. I believe there was one other option available to police at the time (we had a reasonably heated discussion on this very thread at the time), which meant they could also give appropriate advice to anyone who is/was in contravention of the 'directives'. Why is it then, that you (and indeed many, many otheres) have decided that given the three options; advice, fine, criminal charges, that he (or anyone else for that matter) should be 'sacked'? On what grounds would a 'sacking' in this instance likely stand up in a tribunal - I imagine he has a fairly standard contract when it comes to gross misconduct, potentially it could be claimed that he 'brought the company into disrepute', but then there is the statement from Durham Constabulary which seems to suggest that the 'advice' option was deemed appropriate at the time : If you are happy for Cummings to be fired for ignoring the 'directives', where do you draw the line? Do you go back through all the CCTV with people in parks, on beaches etc during the lockdown who have clearly also ignored the 'directives' and go and hound their employers campainging for them to also be sacked? Yes, the man (and his family) have clearly not followed the 'directives' but shouldn't the 'punishment' for this follow the prescribed guidelines?

Nick Triggle seems to be getting there.... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52758024

Yeah, too right, talk about closing the stable door after the horse has bolted! Totally ridiculous and unsupportable, we should all just ignore it! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52781812

Apologies, 'Early April' not March, but I guess the point stands....

You do know this was reported in March don't you? Where was your moral outrage at the time?

He can have the 'whip' removed and / or be expelled from the Labour party. In both instances, no, his constituents wouldn't have a say.

Where have I said that? So far I've mentioned that in all instances the 'punishment' should fit the 'crime'. Do you not think that is an adequate response from the police?

More or less hypocritical than the opposition? https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2020-03-30/police-urge-mp-stephen-kinnock-to-comply-with-coronavirus-lockdown-rules-after-visiting-dad-on-birthday/ Seems to me that both 'offenders' were advised by the police - as were the instructions at the time - so should they both lose their livelihoods as a result, or is it worse if you aren't an MP?

Footballers are considered to be 'role models' (FFS!) and what they say and do is copied up and down the country. I doubt very much that anyone in their right mind is considering Dominic Cummings to be a role model!

I don't think anyone can or will defend it. However, should the 'punishment' fit the crime? The BBC article states that the police were involved at the time and 'appropriate advice regarding travel' was issued. It doesn't state whether they took any further action. I get that people are calling for him to resign - SNP and Lib Dems - but is that a 'fitting punishment'. I doubt whether he will voluntarily resign - it happened over 2 months ago so he has had plenty of opportunity to do so - so should he be sacked? If so, should the same 'punishment' be applied to everyone who has broken the lockdown rules? Footballers having parties with hookers, trips to Paris etc etc, should they all be sacked too?