Dominic Cummings - a new kind of (anti-)hero..

[AuntDaisy]

They’re all charlatans aren’t they? I can’t imagine what will come out about vaccine procurement when the dust settles. But the point is Johnson has an immense majority and the combo of brexit and Covid is delivering a Tory hegemony they could only have dreamed of a decade ago. I’d be surprised if Hancock goes. There’s an age-old phrase for why but in the context of covid it would be in v poor taste to use it.

I wonder if the Cummings tapes will ever appear? Even if the charlatan-in-chief was proved to have lied, e.g. about letting bodies pile, would it make a difference to the next election or force any honourable resignations?

[teamsaint]

I agree 100%. BJ was indeed stupid to hire Cummings in the first place. But it's the latter's apparent 'right' to have a public voice that worries me.

Given that we have special advisors, and have done for a long time, wouldn't we be asking questions if they were not being questioned by the select committee ? Wouldn't that be a bigger problem than allowing them a public voice ?

[oddoneout]

If Hancock goes it will have nothing to do with what he may have done wrong, that's not the way things work these days. Whether you go or stay is down to the decision/whim of the club;actions/performance however egregious, don't carry consequences unless it suits the establishment. Just look at Priti Patel's continued actions, all appalling, some involving death or harm, and all carried out in plain sight and evidently with approval.
As far as Cummings goes (so to speak) the recent outpourings haven't changed my view of him as an unpleasant and untrustworthy person, and given his fantasy approach to his own place in the universe I find it hard to go along with the apparent acceptance of his version of things as gospel truth and his revelations being a public-spirited action. I haven't gone into it in depth but my reaction was that it seemed something of an anti-climax after all the build-up (although some of the detail filled in some gaps), perhaps because my opinion of the bunch of incompetents currently ruling us is such that whatever DC says simply strengthens what I have already suspected/assumed to be the case.

[LMcD]

If Hancock goes it will have nothing to do with what he may have done wrong, that's not the way things work these days. Whether you go or stay is down to the decision/whim of the club;actions/performance however egregious, don't carry consequences unless it suits the establishment. Just look at Priti Patel's continued actions, all appalling, some involving death or harm, and all carried out in plain sight and evidently with approval.
As far as Cummings goes (so to speak) the recent outpourings haven't changed my view of him as an unpleasant and untrustworthy person, and given his fantasy approach to his own place in the universe I find it hard to go along with the apparent acceptance of his version of things as gospel truth and his revelations being a public-spirited action. I haven't gone into it in depth but my reaction was that it seemed something of an anti-climax after all the build-up (although some of the detail filled in some gaps), perhaps because my opinion of the bunch of incompetents currently ruling us is such that whatever DC says simply strengthens what I have already suspected/assumed to be the case.

That pretty well sums up my view of the situation!
I think we'll find that, in the end, the system which has been devised over the years to make sure that nobody is ever actually blamed for anything will once again prove to be remarkably effective.

[french frank]

I haven't read all the posts but I have a slight unease about Cummings being allowed a platform to reveal what (he says) went on behind closed doors in No 10. He is not an elected official, so not part of our democratic system...as in fact none of the so-called special advisors are.

The Parliamentary committees are 'part of our democratic system'. I can't see why the government should have special dispensation from being properly investigated; and those thought to have evidence should be called to give it. The tricky part will be judging how reliable that evidence is.

[gradus]

There's an old business adage about major projects often going wrong, with ensuing panic, the search for the guilty and the punishment of the innocent.

[Serial_Apologist]

There's an old business adage about major projects often going wrong, with ensuing panic, the search for the guilty and the punishment of the innocent.

"Practice of" rather than "adage about", I would have thought.

[LHC]

If Hancock goes it will have nothing to do with what he may have done wrong, that's not the way things work these days. Whether you go or stay is down to the decision/whim of the club;actions/performance however egregious, don't carry consequences unless it suits the establishment. Just look at Priti Patel's continued actions, all appalling, some involving death or harm, and all carried out in plain sight and evidently with approval.
As far as Cummings goes (so to speak) the recent outpourings haven't changed my view of him as an unpleasant and untrustworthy person, and given his fantasy approach to his own place in the universe I find it hard to go along with the apparent acceptance of his version of things as gospel truth and his revelations being a public-spirited action. I haven't gone into it in depth but my reaction was that it seemed something of an anti-climax after all the build-up (although some of the detail filled in some gaps), perhaps because my opinion of the bunch of incompetents currently ruling us is such that whatever DC says simply strengthens what I have already suspected/assumed to be the case.

Paradoxically I think Cummings’ attempt to throw Hancock under the bus has probably secured his position, at least for the time being. Johnson won’t sack Hancock now as to do so would make him look weak, and also give credibility to Cummings’ evidence.

I would also agree with you that he is such a duplicitous person, and some of his evidence was so clearly partial, particularly with regard to his mates Gove, Raab and Sunak, and some of it was clearly wrong (and has already been debunked), that it is difficult to give a great deal of credence to anything he said.

[Barbirollians]

Paradoxically I think Cummings’ attempt to throw Hancock under the bus has probably secured his position, at least for the time being. Johnson won’t sack Hancock now as to do so would make him look weak, and also give credibility to Cummings’ evidence.

I would also agree with you that he is such a duplicitous person, and some of his evidence was so clearly partial, particularly with regard to his mates Gove, Raab and Sunak, and some of it was clearly wrong (and has already been debunked), that it is difficult to give a great deal of credence to anything he said.

What was wrong and has been debunked ?

[Richard Barrett]

What was wrong and has been debunked ?

The continuing story of Barnard Castle for one. But otherwise most of what he said seemed to me just a useful compilation of what we've already heard from diverse sources over the past year.

[rauschwerk]

There was a time when many of this country's leaders has served in the armed forces, and therefore had probably learnt something of leadership and teamwork. Johnson and his cronies (including Cummings) are all too clearly ignorant in such matters. His idea that chaos all around him would cause people to rely on him as leader is beyond ludicrous. In fact it smacks of 'divide and rule'!

[LMcD]

There was a time when many of this country's leaders has served in the armed forces, and therefore had probably learnt something of leadership and teamwork. Johnson and his cronies (including Cummings) are all too clearly ignorant in such matters. His idea that chaos all around him would cause people to rely on him as leader is beyond ludicrous. In fact it smacks of 'divide and rule'!

Iain Duncan Smith, for example. Is it too late to hope that he can still seize the crown and lead us onto the trade deal-filled sunlit uplands?

[rauschwerk]

Iain Duncan Smith, for example. Is it too late to hope that he can still seize the crown and lead us onto the trade deal-filled sunlit uplands?

I fear so.

[cloughie]

Iain Duncan Smith, for example. Is it too late to hope that he can still seize the crown and lead us onto the trade deal-filled sunlit uplands?

Wouldn’t bank on IDS. Over the years he’s done more failing than Grayling!

[gradus]

Wouldn’t bank on IDS. Over the years he’s done more failing than Grayling!

Pity the poor Hedgehogs now that Mr Grayling has come to their rescue.