Coronavirus (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Spiderman  Horsham 27 May 20 4.20pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
It wasn’t HIS second home, belongs to his father Sorry I was not aware that the son was subjected to a 14 day quarantine period, I must have missed that, is there a link?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| richard shaw (og)65 my minds eye 27 May 20 4.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
The stock market is picking up an awful lot of late. A combination of stimulus and reopening no doubt. I can't see us going back into lockdown whatever happens with the numbers from here on out. Yes it has , stimulus has helped but the confidence of a decent recovery has made it look an attractive investment
interviewer " iggy , do you think you influenced anybody?" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
cryrst  The garden of England 27 May 20 4.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by DanH
Even in his own statement, if you believe it, he admitted he broke the rules, or at least the rules that the overwhelming majority of the country had been trying to follow as closely as possible for a couple of months. This is why people are angry. When you say 'trying' to follow what do you mean.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 27 May 20 4.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by DanH
The Trump influence on British politics. Media outlets you don't like reporting actual things that actually happened by people in power are to blame. Scary. So you don't think that by using this situation purely for political ends, they are risking an increase in deaths?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 27 May 20 4.33pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
If true, may I point out that it was not they who were responsible for the policies and communicating them so that people would obey. So, if true, their punishment should be less extreme. Nothing to do with them being Labour MPs then? Who put more people at risk DC or Labour MP Tahir Ali who attended 2 funeral services on the same day, attended by a large number of people?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 May 20 5.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
It’ll be almost forgotten about soon enough but as there’s not much going on for the wrong reasons, the bitterness continues.
This event has broken the consensus and will be referred to time and again in the coming months. Those, like the PM himself, and his apologists here, who want to "move on" and sweep it under the carpet are going to find that simply won't happen. Many of you seem to be seriously underestimating just how big a deal this really is. It might look just like a minor piece of political theatre to you but it really isn't. This is at the absolute centre of how this government is operating and if Johnson doesn't get his act together he is going to find that all the goodwill he has gathered disappearing over the horizon. He might have an 80 seat majority in the House but right now he needs the people behind him, and they aren't.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 May 20 5.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
I don't think that it's necessarily the "reporting of actual things that actually happened" that many of us find annoying but the fact that they are going on and on and on about it purely because they consider Dominic Cummings to be public enemy number 1 I am afraid that's untrue. It has nothing at all to do with a dislike of Cummings and any desire to "get him" despite claims to the contrary. I dislike Cummings. I dislike all political advisers and think they should be banned but I particularly dislike Cummings. I hate the idea of politics being treated as a marketing campaign and the people sold ideas with clever slogans, that have no truth at all inside them. I hate having a PM who appears, rightly or wrongly, to regard his senior adviser as some kind of comfort blanket. Nevertheless, Johnson is the PM and is free to operate in whichever way he wishes, whatever I might think. However, we are dealing with a crisis in which his own scientific advice has said that retaining Cummings in these circumstances will make dealing with the crisis harder and result in more deaths. So deciding not to sack Cummings has nothing to do with any dislike of him. It's only about ensuring we don't jeopardise the future behaviour of the people. It's beyond stupid to retain him. He should have been suspended the moment the story broke so that a thorough investigation could have been carried out and the PM, and cabinet, advised of the whole circumstances. Not just taken Cummings own account. Once done he could have been asked to apologise, warned as to his future conduct but retained, and then we really could have moved on. People would have been satisfied that he had been dealt with fairly and so were they. Blustering their way through this as the government has done just makes them look like amateurs. We don't need amateurs right now. We need real professionals.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 27 May 20 5.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I am afraid that's untrue. It has nothing at all to do with a dislike of Cummings and any desire to "get him" despite claims to the contrary. I dislike Cummings. I dislike all political advisers and think they should be banned but I particularly dislike Cummings. I hate the idea of politics being treated as a marketing campaign and the people sold ideas with clever slogans, that have no truth at all inside them. I hate having a PM who appears, rightly or wrongly, to regard his senior adviser as some kind of comfort blanket. Nevertheless, Johnson is the PM and is free to operate in whichever way he wishes, whatever I might think. However, we are dealing with a crisis in which his own scientific advice has said that retaining Cummings in these circumstances will make dealing with the crisis harder and result in more deaths. So deciding not to sack Cummings has nothing to do with any dislike of him. It's only about ensuring we don't jeopardise the future behaviour of the people. It's beyond stupid to retain him. He should have been suspended the moment the story broke so that a thorough investigation could have been carried out and the PM, and cabinet, advised of the whole circumstances. Not just taken Cummings own account. Once done he could have been asked to apologise, warned as to his future conduct but retained, and then we really could have moved on. People would have been satisfied that he had been dealt with fairly and so were they. Blustering their way through this as the government has done just makes them look like amateurs. We don't need amateurs right now. We need real professionals. If you think the media would have accepted that you are deluded
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 May 20 5.45pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
It wasn’t HIS second home, belongs to his father Well, this is the guidance: Essential travel does not include visits to second homes, camp sites, caravan parks or similar places, either for isolation or holidays. You should remain in your primary residence. In general, you should not visit family or friends in their homes Did he put his elderly relatives at risk? As he was staying in a property separate from theirs, that is debatable Not really, the risk is automatically higher. The earliest reports stated he delivered his son to his parents, the son that had just been locked in a car with his sick mother for five hours. He had been advised by medical experts that he would be able to drive if he so wished That is not what he said, he said he had been cleared to go back to work. However, the unfit to drive point was that his wife was concerned his eye sight was impaired. He also said he felt sick on the day he travelled to Barnard Castle I believe the trip to Barnard Castle was after the 14 days ( I may be incorrect) It was on the 12th. He has been very 'circumspect' in providing information on when he became ill. Who spotted him in the garden? Doesn’t the family have a large estate? ( which is a bone of contention for many labour mps and supporters I have heard interviewed). There is a quote from a neighbour Whether he was in the right or in the wrong, his family’s wealth has nothing to do with it. Eh? In the Scottish Parliament today, Scottish mp stated a rich and powerful person. Why mention wealth or is that a lefty thing? I didn't
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 27 May 20 5.45pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I am afraid that's untrue. It has nothing at all to do with a dislike of Cummings and any desire to "get him" despite claims to the contrary. I dislike Cummings. I dislike all political advisers and think they should be banned but I particularly dislike Cummings. I hate the idea of politics being treated as a marketing campaign and the people sold ideas with clever slogans, that have no truth at all inside them. I hate having a PM who appears, rightly or wrongly, to regard his senior adviser as some kind of comfort blanket. Nevertheless, Johnson is the PM and is free to operate in whichever way he wishes, whatever I might think. However, we are dealing with a crisis in which his own scientific advice has said that retaining Cummings in these circumstances will make dealing with the crisis harder and result in more deaths. So deciding not to sack Cummings has nothing to do with any dislike of him. It's only about ensuring we don't jeopardise the future behaviour of the people. It's beyond stupid to retain him. He should have been suspended the moment the story broke so that a thorough investigation could have been carried out and the PM, and cabinet, advised of the whole circumstances. Not just taken Cummings own account. Once done he could have been asked to apologise, warned as to his future conduct but retained, and then we really could have moved on. People would have been satisfied that he had been dealt with fairly and so were they. Blustering their way through this as the government has done just makes them look like amateurs. We don't need amateurs right now. We need real professionals. You go on believing that in your little SW England bubble.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 May 20 5.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
Sorry I was not aware that the son was subjected to a 14 day quarantine period, I must have missed that, is there a link? Oh do keep up He was a family member where other family members had COVID. Geddit?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 27 May 20 5.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
A neighbour really! I didn't say you mentioned wealth did I? It was the Scottish MP and former Labour Advisor yesterday. Do you agree his familiy's wealth is an issue?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.