What we know:
A man and his wife, caring for an autistic four year old who can’t be looked after by anyone but family, become ill and fear becoming incapacitated where they have nobody to look after their child so travel to a separate empty house next to their family. The man’s sister does their shopping and leaves it outside until they recover.
There’s an “exceptional circumstances” get out in the lockdown rules arguably designed to cover these situations. Shortly afterwards, further exclusion clauses are added to cover the specific needs of autistic children.
A combination of bitter remainers, lockdown jobsworths and the usual “it’s all fatcher’s fault” anti-Tory tw@ts crawl out of the woodwork baying for blood. Pathetic.
Good points, and I have every sympathy for his family position.
I do not have sympathy for those that seek to excuse him of apparently disregarding the restrictions that he was party to impose on others, by claiming criticism of his actions purely a political Witch Hunt.
To be fair to the rest of the population who abide by the rules, we deserve a full account of his actions. If his account proves justifiable, fine...if he has done nothing wrong why not publish the details of his movements? To just ignore and brush aside the reports is an insult to all those who have suffered through abiding by the rules.
Apart form anything else, if he doesn't it will be just that much harder to persuade everybody of the need to look out for others during the pandemic.
We have extended family with a 20 year old autistic child who have been
following the 12 week shielding guidance, in their sixties they are more vulnerable than the Cummings family. They too have not been able to have any of their usual carers in to help. They have
not been [reported] travelling back and forth to London or going out in to Public spaces in that period.
They also fear becoming incapacitated and becoming unable to look after their child. I am sure that fear goes for many people with dependant children and vulnerable and / or elderly relations, who have had to make heartbreaking decisions in order to abide by the guidance both in letter and spirit for the greater good.
We have been shielding my 96 year old mum, and 200 miles away my sister in law has coped with shielding and caring for my wheel chair bound vulnerable brother in law, we also fear becoming incapacitated and being unable to support and care.
It is true that my view that he should publicly account for his actions can only be coloured as a remain voter. It will make me more likely to believe in yet another example of his hypocrisy. He is arguably the most powerful man in the country, and he is the unelected bureaucrat who devised the "Take back control from unelected bureaucrats" slogan.
We allow him or the government not to give a full account of his actions at our peril.
Alan
