I'll Just Leave This Here

[douglas9401]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52779356

Feel free to divide down party lines

[gness]

Your critical by implication response was prompted by my post.

[Chinajan]

https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Society-and-Culture/Question1699462-8.html

[Zacs-Master]

Why did the rules need to be broken?

[jno]

how things change, Chinajan

[gness]

Oh my!....thank you. :-)

[naomi24]

And that applies, chinajan - under normal circumstances. No question about that.

[naomi24]

jno, cross-posted there. What's changed?

[sp1814]

Chinajan

If you don't get Best Answer for that 13:53 post, then the world is a very unfair place.

Excellent.

;-)

[naomi24]

SP, which bit of normal circumstances don't you understand?

[jno]

once you thought you were duty bound. Now you think you are except when you think you aren't.

Who gets to decide what are "normal" pandemic circumstances and what aren't? You.

[ynnafymmi]

@13.57.According to Tora and Douglas Bader the"rules"only apply to the little people,Zacs....

[sp1814]

naomi24

On the other thread you posted:

//Whether you fall into the group classified as ‘at risk’, or are over 70 and advised to remain at home, or younger and fit but requested to abandon your social life, will you comply - and if not why not?//

//Me? I think we are duty bound.//

What normal circumstances are you referring to?

You asked a question based on these exceptional circumstances. Now it appear that you've changed you mind.

Or have you?

[naomi24]

Jno, //Who gets to decide what are "normal" pandemic circumstances and what aren't? You.//

Try to keep up. No one is talking about normal pandemic circumstances but rather normal personal circumstances. Of course in normal circumstances we must abide by the rules - I’ve never said differently - simply that there are times when we have no option but to break the rules.

[iluvmargie]

But sp, there's no mention there of a very sick or dying parent and if at all possible to get to that parent, then I feel the vast majority of us would, me included.

[naomi24]

SP, //You asked a question based on these exceptional circumstances. //

What are you talking about. Where did I mention exceptional circumstances on that thread?

[gness]

I think we are all keeping up very well.... :-)

[naomi24]

Apart from Margie, I think you've all lost the plot. Your inability to differentiate between normal circumstances and exceptional circumstances should worry you.

[iluvmargie]

Yes, I have to admit, it's clear enough to me.

[sp1814]

naomi24

The circumstances were that Cumming and his wife showed signs of having contracted Covid-19.

We are told that Cumming made s journey to his parents' house to arrange child care for his children.

By law, he and his wife were supposed to isolate at home with their immediate family.

His wife writing for the Spectator implied that the family had isolated in London.

What do you mean when you say, "there are times when we have no option but to break the rules."

How does that apply in the case?

I agree that sometimes circumstances force people to break rules, or even laws - but we're talking about the specifics of this story.

What have you read that suggests he was right to break the rules that the rest of us follow and how does your attitude square with your post from March 19th?

https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Society-and-Culture/Question1699462-8.html

[jim360]

Rules are meaningless if you break them as soon as it's even slightly inconvenient. Duty is meaningless if likewise it's discarded so readily.

The simple fact is that even if Cummings felt it was necessary to arrange alternative childcare, then he should have done so in a different way, one that didn't break the rules. It may not have been easy, but then there would have been no point in the rules if it were easy to follow them.