Day Four, folks, of the analysis of these wretched letters from these wretched (in the main) Tory MPs. Thank you to all who have been sending them, but please keep tabs on the ones mentioned in previous blogs, so I don’t have to delete too many emails. There was a major rush of Dan Poulter’s letter last night, and James Cartlidge is creating a lot of ire with his cut and paste dismissal.
I can’t say I have counted them all, but I would say the MP whose letter has been sent to me more than any others is Beaconsfield MP Joy Morrissey who, like Boris Johnson was born in America and who, like Boris Johnson, might have served us better had the stayed there. To think that Dominic Grieve is an ex-MP, and she her replacement, is a reflection of something gone pretty wrong in our politics.
Here is her stock letter.
‘Over the last week a number of constituents have contacted me about reports concerning Dominic Cummings. In the light of their own sacrifices and hardships, a lot of people have been asking serious, understandable and justified questions about Mr Cummings’ trip to Durham.
However, (cue ‘creep of the week’ award en route) since these reports were first published, Mr Cummings has given a full and frank account of what happened, (well, long, yes; full and frank, certainly not; riddled with gaps and inconsistencies and nonsense, for sure) including answering numerous questions from the press. (I love how this ‘he took questions from the press’ somehow clears him of anything. Most of the press, rightly, thought he made a total tit of himself, and of his ‘boss,’ Boris Johnson. I took literally hundreds of thousands of questions as Tony Blair’s spokesman, but it didn’t stop the press saying I was an evil, manipulative Svengali type figure, though I think they had enough respect to know I wouldn’t break rules I helped to devise.)
‘In addition,’ Morrissey goes on, ‘Durham Constabulary have (has) confirmed that having reviewed all the evidence, they (it) will not be taking any further action.’
(Now get ready for some good sturdy Trumpism) ‘Much of the media reporting of this story (well, bits of it, not “much,” and I can’t be arsed to say which bits, and OK, the central allegation was indisputably true) proved to be factually inaccurate, with even the BBC having to apologise for the coverage by Newsnight, (which was about tone, not fact, and all the facts in Emily Maitlis’ monologue were accepted as true) their flagship news analysis programme (which the spineless tossers who make up the Cabinet are boycotting because they sometimes ask hard questions about why we fucked everything up.) With facts in short supply (unless you count 60,000 plus deaths as one fact or 60,000) and opposition groups seeking to make as much political capital (because we never did that in Opposition) out of the uncertainty (odd word) as possible, it is no surprise that this story has gained so much attention. (Normally, stories get attention because of facts, and despite the Opposition, but hey, she’s new, and American.)
‘Nevertheless, I share the Prime Minister’s view (it says here) that the time has come to move on (bingo!) and focus all our efforts on the job at hand. (which is going so well.) That means continuing to ensure that the lockdown is lifted in a careful, considered and safe manner, (wrong government here, Joy) so that we can get our economy moving again and reunite with our loved ones. (sweet.)
I am too kind to print the words of her constituents that accompanied the many submissions of her letter.
But, ever fair, I now want to present, as I have each day, the evidence that some Tory MPs have a spine, their own view, and the ability to express it.
David Warburton, MP for Somerset and Frome, starts with a cheery: ‘I do hope this finds you safe and well,’ then goes into a rather sad personal story. ‘My own father died alone because I – and the rest of my family – followed government advice on non-essential travel. There’s nothing exceptional in that. Having been helping thousands of constituents over the last 6 weeks, I know that very few people have remained untouched by this – from those with severe mental health problems (one of the tiny number even to acknowledge this) and difficulties in seeing their children, to those who, like me, have been unable to say goodbye to loved ones.’
He goes on, rather eloquently I might add: ‘I don’t doubt that Dominic Cummings felt that he was doing the best for his family – something that we can all understand. I don’t think he took the trip to Durham blithely or light-heartedly. But I do feel that the symbolism inherent in a Downing Street adviser choosing to interpret rather than follow the regulations he helped to fashion is damaging. It risks compromising the lockdown at a point where we are seeing very real progress and has upset many who feel they weren’t given equivalent leeway when facing personal distress of their own. It’s for this reason that I now feel the Government would best be served by Dominic Cummings’ removal. I have no personal animus against him – indeed, we’ve never met – (has Cummings ever met any MPs apart from Johnson?), but, as I said on the BBC yesterday, I believe his presence now damages the Government and country he is trying to serve.
‘Having received death threats myself in the past, I am made extremely uncomfortable by the harassment he and his family have faced from the hordes of photographers outside their home. I also find some of the very personal vituperation and hatred he faces extremely distasteful – outright hatred has absolutely no place in anything even approaching rational political discourse. But the best way to defuse that is for the public to see that he has been held accountable – and that’s something I’ll continue to argue for in the coming days.’ (Well done, sir, though in my experience the best way to deal with death threats is to tell the police, not the public.)
Paul Bristow, MP for Peterborough, also has a very personal story, but reaches a different conclusion: ‘The most toxic thing in politics is someone behaving as though “it’s one rule for me and another rule for you.” I don’t think Mr Cummings intended that, or actually felt that way, (clearly another one who has never met him) but it is the impression people have got. (Am I alone in finding the word ‘got’ at the end of a sentence deeply unpleasing?)
His next paragraph, as per dozens of others, focuses on details the media got wrong, and the ‘worryingly false statement by Durham Police. Mr Bristow watched the Cummings press event and ‘I saw a father and a husband trying to do what he thought was best for his family, in difficult circumstances.’ Then the ‘he answered lots of questions’ point, one of the most used cut and paste points. ‘Many will still disagree – that is fair.’ (Fairness! So important to these Tories, eh?) Then into a total buying of the Cummings bullshit on security, which I have dealt with before.
But then, a real turn, and something which leapt out at me. ‘Like so many others, my family has faced tragedy during the lockdown. My father died at home from a brain tumour and my wife’s grandmother died from coronavirus. We had to suppress every instinct and follow the lockdown guidance, which intensified our grief … Strictly speaking, I didn’t follow the guidance, when I went to be with my father in the final hours of his life. I have been open about this, without being prompted by questions or media enquiries.’ (Respect. But my God he is more forgiving of Cummings than I would be in his circumstances.)
The letter from Karen Bradley, MP for Staffordshire Moorlands, is short and to the point: She waited to hear Cummings’ side of the story before rushing to judgement. Having listened to his garden bullshit, she is unpersuaded. He is damaging the government and the fight against Covid, he has to go. (Well done Madame, all on one side of paper, no waffle.)
Esther McVey, MP for Tatton, doesn’t take too long either. [Lots of emails/sacrifice/Cummings has explained]
‘ I fully appreciate why you and others take a different view, and feel so strongly about his actions, and I have conveyed that strength of feeling directly to the Prime Minister and other members of the Government.
Whilst the future of Dominic Cummings is a matter for him and the Prime Minister – had I been in the same situation, I would have resigned my position.’
Julian Lewis, MP for New Forest East, is an odd chap in many ways, not least the fact that you can’t email him and he doesn’t do social media. The New Forest East constituent who contacted me tried to call Lewis’ office, got nowhere so wrote by post and today got a reply. He suggests waiting for the outcome of any investigation which, as there isn’t going to be one, is kind of out of date already.
David Morris MP for Morecambe and Lunesdale, has a neat little delay tactic: ‘Please can you reply to this message enclosing your full postal address , if you would like a response to your email. There is a strictly adhered to Parliamentary protocol which dictates that Members of Parliament may only correspond on behalf of and with their own Constituents. In order to ensure that this is the case I need to have been sent your full postal address before you will receive a response.’ (Ah, Parliamentary protocols, how we love to obey those; like lying to the Queen about prorogation, and having mile long queues and votes that last 45 minutes because a Victorian cartoon is Leader of the Commons.)
Another one with a good cop-out is Siobhan Baillie, MP for Stroud: ‘For the first 5 weeks of her maternity leave,’ says an automated message, ‘she is not responding to emails nor using her social media so she can bond with her new born child.’ (Nice, I’m sure, bond away. But child or not, you have constituents, so what are they supposed to do? Answer comes there none. There is a link to the House of Commons staff handbook – I worked there for years but this is news to me, and she posts an explanation of maternity rights. This suggests to me she thinks Parliament is there to operate for her, rather than that she is there to work for her constituents. If any of her friends are reading, perhaps advise her to get a system in place.’)
UPDATE HERE, a few hours after first posting … (Cummings style, but mine is factual.) I have finally had an MP come to another MP’s defence. The only Tory MP messages I have had have either been to say how unfair I have been or, in several cases, how much they enjoyed seeing how idiotic their colleagues had been. One MP said she had sent a draft cut and paste answer to colleagues with the note ‘turn this into your own words,’ but then was amazed to see then put it out word for word in their own name.
Anyway the MP coming to the defence of Siobhan Baillie is not a Tory but Stella Creasy, Labour MP for Walthamstow, who says the issue here is the Commons’ antediluvian approach to maternity, and the lack of clear support for an MP who has a child. Point taken, thanks Stella, and good luck Siobhan.)
I had a pop at Greg Knight, MP for East Yorkshire earlier on, because he suggested he didn’t reply to emails because it put people who didn’t have the internet at a disadvantage. Now I have one of his letters, though it doesn’t say much more. “The issue of whether or not the lockdown law was broken is not one for the Prime Minister to determine, nor for me, or the press but is a matter for the police. Indeed, I understand that Durham Police have now concluded their investigation” He repeatedly emphasizes that if the police see no crime then there is no issue, (though the police clearly state that Cummings was in breach.)
I had cause to upbraid Greg Hands, MP for Chelsea and Fulham, yesterday for a ludicrous tweet he posted about a package about Britain on German TV. As part of my current attempts to rediscover my lost German with a Goethe Institut course, I am watching German TV myself, and the report he criticised was a measured analysis of just how badly Covid has had Britain, with a reminder that Brexit was still to come, and a lot of businesses were worried. Hands, who speaks good German, called it a rant, and said if the BBC carried reports like that, there would be an outcry. Only from people who think the news should be read by a Minister for Propaganda. Stop embarrassing yourself, Mr Hands. Oh, and if you thought Annette Dittert’s package on ARD was harsh, you had better avoid the piece I have done for Der Spiegel, on the national catastrophe made in Number 10 by liars and charlatans. Out tomorrow I think. I will send you a copy.
As for Mr Hands’ letter, pretty cut and paste, but then he is a minister in a department, don’t laugh, headed by Liz Truss. ‘As the Prime Minister has acknowledged, people may disagree with his actions. I can understand the difference of views. It is now time for the country to move on and focus on tackling the coronavirus pandemic together – and in doing so, we all must stay alert, to control the virus and save lives.’ Good to end with the slogan. Bleiben wachsam. Kontrollieren den Virus. Retten Leben.’
Another minister, ex of the Cabinet now one rung down, is James Brokenshire, MP for Ted Heath’s old seat, Old Bexley and Sidcup. He makes clear it is a stock letter.
‘People will reach their own views on Mr Cummings’ actions and I respect your opinion that they breached the guidelines. (I agree with you but I am a minister so can’t say so). I have underlined the strength of feeling on this issue at senior levels of Government (and have said he is an idiot.) During a recent media interview when I was asked about the resignation of the Government’s then scientific adviser Professor Neil Ferguson over an alleged breach of the lockdown restrictions, I said that there could not be one rule for one and one rule for everyone else. This remains my position and no-one is above the law.(So Cummings should go too.)
[Blah re up to the cops now, move on]
To constituents not happy, who went back for more, he replied: ‘The Prime Minister (an idiot, agreed) has formed the view that the matter is now closed. Ultimately, decisions on whom he believes should advise him are properly for him. I am sorry for the upset this whole situation has caused at this incredibly difficult and sensitive time – especially when the challenges surrounding the control of the virus as well as the urgent need to rejuvenate our economy to protect jobs and livelihoods firmly remain.(But if Johnson wants to keep fucking it up, there is not much I can do to stop him.)
Dr Therese Coffey, MP for Suffolk Coastal and Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and who must be really hopeless to be behind Priti Patel in the Number 10 briefing pecking order, managed to address someone by the wrong name and then say: ‘I am not going to ask you to put yourself in another person’s shoes as we, or people we know, have gone through very similar experiences.’ (I mean, we all know someone who had to drive 260 miles to Daddy’s estate … wait a minute, no we don’t, his circumstances were unique, supposedly.)
Then, after a bit of cut and paste, she says: ‘I appreciate that this is not the answer that you may have been seeking. (Correct) I recognise that some people will continue to be angry. (Indeed) Nevertheless, I think we do now need to keep focused on what we must all continue to do in order to beat this virus.’ (Like by being part of a Cabinet that is easing the lockdown even though the death rate, because we have screwed up so royally, is the same as when we went into it.)
‘Having been through so much together, (apart from Durham Dom) we have overcome the peak and we need to have a new normal which will be helped if we all continue to do our bit to stop the transmission of the virus to each other. Gradual easement (I think easing is the English word, you are probably thinking of app-easemsent, as in the Isle of Wight app project that seems to have failed, like everything else you lot have done) of the lockdown regime will only work if we do this and actually protect each other – washing hands (so we have to wash each other’s hands now?) and social distancing. (How can we maintain social distancing if we are washing other people’s hands? I am confused. Or is this just yet more bad English from these leading lights in the English Nationalist Party?”)
Another Cabinet minister, Chief Secretary Steve Barclay, MP for North East Cambridgeshire, doesn’t bother to reply himself, but signs off ‘Sent on behalf of Mr Stephen Barclay MP by Katy Lipscomb, Assistant to Rt Hon Stephen Barclay MP.’
’
Katy writes: [Cut and paste, really not worth bothering you with.]
A minister who gets close to saying Cummings should go, and Johnson is useless, is Chris Heaton-Harris, MP for Daventry and Minister of State for Transport: “Overall I think that when Mr Cummings explained his actions at his Press Conference last week people also would have appreciated an apology for any upset caused. Thus let me apologise to you.’
Then a lovely dig. ‘Few can disagree that the Prime Minister has done his best to lead the country through this crisis’ (Leaves thought hanging … My God, is this his best? Have we elected a total dork?)
I mentioned there had been an overnight deluge of the letter sent by Dan PoulterMP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, so his stock letter must have landed on doormats yesterday. He is a doctor, as you will see.
‘Please accept my apologies for the brief delay in responding as I have now returned following a short period of leave and rest after what has been a very busy three months volunteering extra hours to the NHS in my capacity as a doctor and also helping many people in Central Suffolk and North Ipswich with problems and queries relating to the COVID-19 pandemic.’ (Hold on – rest and leave? There is a crisis on, you know.)
[Cut and paste Durham cops, mentions the word ‘Constabulary’ about a dozen times, mentions the eye-test test drive, but makes no medical analysis of this, which perhaps means that, like Michael Gove, he thinks driving to check your eyesight is fine.]
I hope this reply is helpful (not really, no) and wish you well in these challenging times.’
Then get this for a love of letters before and after your name..
Dr Daniel Poulter MP Llb (hons), MBBS, AKC, MRCPsych
(Maybe he is crawling in the hope he gets to the Cabinet, and he can put Rt Hon before Dr, or perhaps an OBE after MP? He needs to get rid of that Lib though. Doesn’t that stand for Liberal?)
Caroline Ansel, MP for Eastbourne: ‘Media coverage of Mr Cummings’ travel in March has sparked fury (auditioning for a Sun column) and frustration and I understand that; lockdown has been at a very great cost to very many of us.’ (very poor use of semi-colon after ‘understand that.’)
As for her sign-off: ‘Thank you for all you have done personally these last weeks and months and with every good wish to you and your families and friends,
Caroline”
(Where to begin? ‘All you have done personally? – as opposed to what, impersonating someone else? Also, without a comma after ‘months’, it reads as though the constituent has been doing things personally with every good wish. I am fascinated by the plural ‘your families’! Someone has more than one? Maybe she knows them personally? Then she ends the letter with a comma, and signs off without a full stop, let alone a ‘Best Wishes.’)
Mark Francois, MP for Rayleigh and Wickford: I covered his call for an inquiry into Cummings yesterday, but now I have the whole letter, and I am intrigued by this paragraph.
‘Whatever the rights or wrongs of Mr Cummings’ actions, as we have now been in Lockdown (capital L not needed unless you are Dominic Cummings’ wife lying in The Spectator about “Lockdown London”) for slightly over two months, I can well understand why they have led to a considerable amount of public anger. For instance, for someone who might have been living in a flat without a garden with two very lively children for two months, obeying the guidelines, I can immediately see why they might feel pretty aggrieved, by what they have seen reported in the national media.’ (The grammatical mangling of ‘we’, ‘I’ and ‘they’ leaves open the possibility that Mr Francois is living in a gardenless flat with two lively children. I doubt that.)
Yesterday I did a detailed analysis of the letter sent out by Watford MP Dean Russell. Today the wife of the man who sent it to me also got one. Identical, save that Mr had become Mrs.
Anne Marie Morris, MP for Newton Abbot, at first sounded like she was going full Walter Cronkite/Emily Maitlis, mother of the nation. ‘We have all been living very different lives; (different from each other, or from the past? Oh, and by the way, what the hell is that semi-colon for? A comma would suffice) in some cases alone, and in some cases with family members suffering from COVID 19. Everybody has done their bit (er, no, or else you would not be getting hundreds of letters about Durham Dom) to support the Government’s call to limit their freedoms to help reduce the infection rate. Many have suffered family loss, bereavement and the support network that is their family. It has been a tough time.
The Government trusted the British people to do the right thing – and they did. Powers of enforcement were limited, and police forces endeavoured to persuade rather than fine. However, in the efforts to get the message across that people should stay at home to help reduce the spread of the virus, I believe a better job could have been done in communicating where there was flexibility in the lockdown guidance.’
(Ok, Anne Marie, let’s get to the point, eh?)
‘I have had letters which condemn him and letters that support what he did.’
(Get to the point, I said.)
‘For me two things matter.’
(Jesus, not more throat-clearing and scene-setting.)
‘First, did he do his best to comply with the guidance and was his decision to travel to Durham reasonable? I believe it was. (Mmmm, I note you don’t answer re compliance with guidance.) Second, did his action put anyone else at risk? I don’t believe it did as no social distancing rules were broken. (You only have Dom’s word for that, AM, and let’s be honest eh, I know you have never met him, but you do know he is a liar, don’t you? Anyway it is bloody obvious where this is going, so get on with it …)
‘Dominic Cumming’s employment (sorry to swear but what the fuck is it with these Tories and apostrophes?) is a matter for the Prime Minister, who has made it clear his position on the matter. (And what does the ‘it’ in that sentence achieve? ‘It’ is the ‘position’, so you don’t need both.) This is clearly not going to change, and therefore it’s time to get on with reducing the risk to society of Covid-19 and the much-needed reopening of our economy. (Aka Johnson can’t tie his laces with Domboy, and we need to focus on killing more Covid patients and screwing up the economy more.)
David Simmonds, MP for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner: Definite cut and paste, as I am getting really tired of reading this paragraph: ‘I have been in daily contact with local organisations from the police, NHS, and schools, to volunteers and charities who have been part of this national effort. The sacrifices made are hopefully paying off as we see numbers of new cases and deaths reducing, but there is no room for complacency.’
He follows with further explanations for why we should wait to pass judgement etc and ends: ‘We must be able to return our focus to the progress which continues to be made, as a result of the sacrifices we have all endured.’ (Progress? Like towards the top of the global death league table?)
Jesse Norman, MP for Hereford & South Herefordshire: |
‘It has never been my practice to pass judgement on others in politics, whatever their party or views, and I do not propose to start now.”(So if someone committed mass murder? If you’re not there to pass judgement on ideas and the people who argue for them, it kind of makes you wonder why he went into politics.)
Iain Stewart, MP for Milton Keynes South: ‘On the basis of what I know, and unless subsequent facts emerge, I don’t condemn him and call for his head.’ (Grammatically a bit all over the place, and the double space after ‘I don’t’ and before ‘condemn’ suggests a bit of fiddling with the cut and paste from the whips. It can also be read, Ian, as saying you are calling for his head. In case Dom is reading all these, you might want to change the last bit to “I don’t condemn him and so I am not calling for his head.” Or maybe you are? After all, King Henry the Eighth did it when his courtier, his Cummings, Thomas Cromwell, overshadowed him, didn’t he? Those were the days.)
Michelle Donellan, MP for Chippenham: Cut and paste, move on. But at least she dives into the Matt Hancock book of clichés (RAMP UP, Published by Bullshit Books 2020) for her pay off: ‘My job is to represent the community through thick and thin and I will continue to work night and day to make lives better and safer in Wiltshure.’ (Sweet)
Chris Green, MP for Bolton West & Atherton: ‘A number of MPs have breached the rules to visit relatives, attend funerals or travel long distances with Covid-19 symptoms. (Have they? Who?). They have been exposed in the media and, where necessary, advised by the police on their behaviour as this has been thought to be the right approach.’
Mel Stride, MP for Central Devon, makes the claim that the rules concerning children, on which Cummings made his bogus claim of exceptional circumstances, have been ‘largely ignored in the press coverage.’ (Only in so far as there has been scant coverage of what they were intended for – to protect children at risk of abuse, and women in particular at risk of domestic violence, so you can get stuffed with that one.)
Then get this: ‘It may be argued of course that the guidance itself is deficient but that is another matter. It is also the case that some of the reporting, especially around the time the story first broke was substantially inaccurate and appears to have had little to do with objective journalism. That said, I believe that Mr Cummings’ journey to Barnard Castle and back – to test his fitness to drive later – feels more problematic which is why I wanted to see the independent Durham Police statement (and now that it says what we want, move on …)
‘I do not know Mr Cummings (course not, he is a hologram) and I have never met him (who has?) but on balance and particularly given the view of the police, I do not believe that he should be forced to resign especially when taking into account the very difficult position he found himself in, including the sickness within his family, (which nobody else has had) the potential health threat to his 4 year old child (which no other parents had to worry about) and the press presence at his home in London (which didn’t exist at the time he left, otherwise people would have seen him leaving, Numpty.)
My hope now is that we can move on (bingo!) and re-focus our efforts on combating this dreadful virus and working towards the economic recovery that our country so badly needs. [pure cut and paste]
Aaron Bell, MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme: Fair bit of cut and paste but a nice opener, on how hard lockdown has been. ‘Birthdays have had to be celebrated on Zoom, grandparents have not hugged grandchildren, and many people have not been able to attend the funerals of their family and friends. (Small grammatical point – this says whole families have died and been laid to rest together.)
[Then into the ‘as a father’ cut and paste, Durham blah, police blah, and finally…]
‘His employment as a special adviser, and for how long, is a matter for the Prime Minister, and is not something over which I am able to direct any influence.’ (I am powerless, admits MP.)
Amanda Solloway, MP for Derby North, claims she has read all the emails (almost certainly not true) yet they all get the same response.
‘I feel strongly that this is a new experience for all of us and that each and everyone’s circumstances (each and everyone’s!!!!) will be different, and for those exceptional circumstances, there are allowances within the guidelines, providing that there is a medical or clinical need.
Though I appreciate and empathise with the sincere anger and upset caused, I strongly oppose the behaviour of some who have sought to harass Mr Cummings and his family outside of their family home.
That is why it is now important to move forward (forward, not on) as a country and focus our efforts on overcoming this crisis. I will be continuing to ensure that Derby North has a strong recovery from COVID-19 and that my constituents are supported throughout these unprecedented (bingo!) times.
Stay Safe. (I hate that one, it’s like have a nice day, but shorter)
Angela Richardson, MP for Guildford, posts a link to her website, where you find a short ‘Dear Constituent’ letter, with this memorable passage. ‘When it comes to Dominic Cummings, I believe that the Prime Minister is the only one (why so?) in a position to decide on the matter, as all advisers serve at his pleasure. (Pleasure! His Majesty’s Pleasure! Does she think Johnson is now The Queen?) ‘The Prime Minister has made it clear that he has continued confidence in Dominic Cummings? I have been, and remain, steadfast and undeterred in my support for the Prime Minister’s stance.’ (I am a 24-carat creep, the perfect lobby-fodder for our useless leader.)
Laura Trott, MP for Sevenoaks and Swanley: Total cut and paste.
Chris Clarkson, MP for Heywood & Middleton, tries to get a Bingo point for ‘unprecedented,’ but sadly can’t spell it. ‘It is vital during these unprecedent times that everybody abides by the rules of lockdown.’
He actually starts his second paragraph like this! Wit a glaring spelling error, going on to give the stock response to placate and appease, rather than admonish or rebuke in any way.
Peter Gibson, MP for Darlington, has a nice personalised feel to his replies, eg: ‘Thank you for your two emails I read both of them, and your tweet, with interest.” Then goes into cut and paste errors galore
This has clearly been personalised to the sender and is subsequently suffering from an array of errors.
Craig Tracey, MP for North Warwickshire, has an interesting, albeit grammatically offensive approach : ‘I have endeavoured to ‘take the politics out of the matter’ and consider my response as if I was his MP, advising Mr Cummings if, as a constituent, presented me with those same circumstances as we currently understand them to be..’ Followed by cut and paste apologism, not apology.
Still on the apology theme, Eleanor Laing, MP for Epping Forest: ‘It would have been better if Mr Cummings had stuck more rigidly to those rules and set an example for the rest of the country. Whether Mr Cummings was right or wrong, I had hoped that he would apologise for the consternation that his course of action has caused. I am disappointed that he has not done so.’
Victoria Prentice, MP for North Oxfordshire (very badly written, largely cut and paste, with a few mini-digs.) ‘This is a personal appointment by the Prime Minister and he is the only person who can have a say over this.”
Jo Churchill, MP for Bury St Edmunds: Cut and paste/lots of appreciating the anger, doing nothing about it.
Sheryll Murray, MP for South East Cornwall: I posted her short response to some constituents yesterday, but a longer one has emerged, like dozens of others insisting: ‘I do not know Mr Cummings and have never spoken to him personally.’
Felicity Buchan, MP for Kensington: ‘One of the briefest responses and, though seemingly empathising, it lacks any sort of sympathy at all, ending: However, it is important that this issue does not become all-consuming as there are many important decisions that need to be made in the upcoming days and weeks, as we look to reopen schools and in general look to restart the economy.”
Craig Tracey, MP for North Warwickshire and Bedworth: [Sacrifice/anger/I’ve behaved well/cut and paste/move on]
Brendan Clarke-Smith, MP for Bassetlaw: ‘I speak as a husband and a father who…’
Zzzzzz. Cut and Paste. Over and out.
If you can take any more (not sure I can)
Here is Part 1 of the letter avalanche
Here is Part 2
Here is Part 3
And here is the Matt Hancock empathy bypass horror show
Have you had the pleasure of ‘meeting’ our charming MP for Witney, ERG member Robert Courts? If not, take a look at the ludicrous Statement on DC on his website. I have yet to receive a response to my detailed (some may say forensic) comments on it. I would be happy to send it you.
I don’t know if you have been sent the response from Bill Wiggin (Herefordshire North), but here it is – full of one sentence paragraphs!
Dear Mr Quayle
Thank you for contacting me about the Prime Minister’s adviser Dominic Cummings.
Firstly, I wish to thank you for all you have done to observe the lockdown and to help us to defeat the spread of the Covid-19 virus.
I appreciate how hard it has been for everyone at this difficult time.
During the last two months I have been contacted by many constituents who have been struggling in many different ways.
Some of that correspondence has been about whether someone can see family members who are ill or in fact seek help from family members when ill.
In those cases, I have suggested that constituents consult their GP and exercise their own judgement to whether their actions were in line with the Coronavirus lockdown guidelines.
I have had no dealing with Dominic Cummings and know nothing of his family circumstances. Therefore, I believe it inappropriate to comment directly on those circumstances.
During this unprecedented time we have seen large and often painful reductions in our usual freedoms. Those making the laws must of course show leadership and follow the law.
I have contacted the Government regarding the strength of feeling I have observed in my mailbox on this issue.
It is regrettable that this weekend has been such an unhelpful distraction from the genuine needs of my constituents.
I will continue to do all I can to assist people with their personal and business issues during this troubling time.
The guidelines for staying safe during this virus have not changed and they can be found here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing
It is crucial that we keep on abiding by these guidelines as we start to emerge from the grips of this dreadful virus.
I understand that you may still feel aggrieved by Mr Cumming’s actions, but ultimately these guidelines are in place for your own and everyone else’s safety.
The health and wellbeing of the people of North Herefordshire remains paramount. Please do not endanger yourself and others especially on account of Mr Cummings.
To those who have and are continuing to abide by the rules whilst making huge personal sacrifices in the process, I once again remain tremendously grateful.
Thank you again for contacting me on this very important and sensitive matter.
Yours sincerely
Bill Wiggin MP
Hi Alastair,
I’ve written to my MP (Robert Courts) re the new farcical commons voting system. CC’d Rees Mogg and Keir Starmer. I’ll let you know if I get a reply.
Think you may have had it but couldn’t see it..
Thank you for contacting me about Dominic Cummings.
I have listened carefully to the allegations against him and to what the Prime Minister and Mr Cummings himself have said about them. As I hope you would expect from your Member of Parliament, I have taken the time to consider my response before giving it. I should say at the outset that I have never met Mr Cummings. I have disagreed with some of his political views and I do not approve of his abrasive approach to political debate, but I have a fundamental belief that everyone’s actions should be judged rationally and objectively, and not on the basis of whether we like them or not.
I think therefore there are 3 things to be considered – first , what it has been established that Mr Cummings did, second, were those things in compliance with or in breach of the regulations and guidance in place at the time and third, what should happen now? Let me take them in turn.
First, what has it been established that Mr Cummings did? He has himself confirmed that he drove several hundred miles from his primary residence before returning approximately 2 weeks later. He has also confirmed that he drove to another location during that 2 week period, about 30 minutes’ drive from the place at which he was staying, to which he returned shortly afterwards. There is no evidence that he broke social distancing rules at any point. The third allegation against him, that he returned to the North East for a second time after his return to London, he denies, saying he has evidence to support his denial. As I write this, I have seen no evidence to demonstrate that he did make such a second trip.
Focussing therefore on the first 2 allegations, was what he did consistent with the wording of the regulations and the guidance in place at the time and, in the relevant respects, still in place now? I have looked again at both. The general intent of the restrictions was and is clear – to ensure everyone stays at their primary residence except either to carry out activities listed as permissible exceptions (such as food shopping or exercise), or in other exceptional circumstances which are, understandably, not listed because they could not all be anticipated. It is on whether Mr Cummings’ initial journey to the North East fell properly within this second category that the question of technical compliance turns. There is language in the regulations and guidance which recognises the difficulty some will have in complying with the restrictions in full if dealing with young children or seeking to help vulnerable individuals. Mr Cummings has relied on this language to justify his decision to make the initial journey to the North East. At the time Mr Cummings made his decision to make the trip and in the circumstances in which he did so, I do not find his decision to be irrational. As the exceptional circumstances which would allow departure from the general prohibition on travel which was in place would inevitably vary and would always need to be judged on their merits, I also think it is arguable that Mr Cummings’ actions in making that first journey could be found to be within the language of the restrictions as they have been set out, though I would want more explanation on one point. Given that Government and scientific advice has been clear that, for most infected with the virus, it would be experienced as a relatively mild illness, I do not think Mr Cummings has yet explained clearly enough why he believed that he and his wife would likely be incapacitated by it, necessitating the actions he then took.
In relation to the second trip – to the Castle Barnard area from his base in the North East – I do not find his reasoning for making this trip (to test his eyesight) persuasive, but it is worth being clear about what the restrictions in place would permit at that stage. As I understand it, Mr Cummings and his wife and child would no longer at that point have been subject to the 14 day quarantine period applied to those with symptoms of Covid 19. Leaving the house for exercise, for example, would have been permissible and although travelling long distances to take that exercise was discouraged, there was at least some variation in the view of what this meant among different police forces charged with enforcement. Again therefore, it can be argued that there was not a technical breach of the regulations and guidance.
However, in determining what should happen now, technical compliance cannot be the only consideration. As a nation, we face extraordinary circumstances at the moment and our response must also be extraordinary. In 70 years there has not been a time when our commitment to collective action has mattered more, and the effectiveness of that action depends on everyone being clear about what they are expected to do. I fear that this episode will reduce that clarity. Our success so far in restricting the spread of the Covid 19 virus has also been largely due to large numbers of people accepting wholeheartedly not just the letter of the restrictions that have been set out, but also their spirit. I know that for many this has meant interpreting the exceptional circumstances clauses in the regulations and guidance very restrictively, and not seeking to use them to justify leaving home, even at very considerable personal cost. Our continued success in combatting the virus may well rely on more of that and Mr Cummings’ actions and his justification of them will, in my judgment, make it less likely that others will continue to interpret those exceptional circumstances clauses restrictively. These are consequences which may undermine the Government’s central objective – to reduce the spread of the virus so as to allow the lifting of restrictions for all of us to be done safely.
I know how difficult it is to serve in Government but I also know that, fairly or unfairly, your actions are subject to greater scrutiny and have greater consequences. What is most important at this point is that Government can give clear messages about how to defeat the virus and that everyone feels motivated to do their best to help. This is more important than the position of any individual in Downing Street and therefore, fairly or unfairly, I have concluded that it would be better for Mr Cummings to leave his position at Downing Street. I have communicated my view and the reasons for it to the Prime Minister.
Yours sincerely
Rt Hon Jeremy Wright QC MP
Member of Parliament for Kenilworth and Southam
From Greg Hands, at last. Very poor. Didn’t address my points which were about the primacy of ‘public health’ above personal instincts, and the ludicrous tissue of lies concerning Barnard Castle. I am not interested in the act of Cummings, per se, but the attempt to ‘cover-up’ that act, which I see as a political scandal, of a similar scale to that which brought down Nixon. Whilst ‘-gate’ is an overused term, ‘there could be no whitewash at the White House in 1973, the same, it would seem, cannot be said of Whitehall in 2020. A Rubicon has been crossed.
…
Thank you for contacting me about the Prime Minister’s adviser’s journey to County Durham.
Mr Cummings openly set out his actions from 27 March to 14 April in his recent public statement which you may have seen on television or read about in the press.
I recognise that many people have strong feelings on this issue, particularly given the hardship that many families are going through and the many sacrifices that people have made over recent months.
In his statement, Mr Cummings explained his reasons for taking the actions that he took, which were in line with the Government guidance. This sets out that “if you are living with children keep following this advice to the best of your ability, however, we are aware that not all these measures will be possible.”
Mr Cummings then added that he believed he acted appropriately because of the need to care for his young child and protect his family at a time when his home in London had become a target for abuse.
As the Prime Minister has acknowledged, people may disagree with his actions. I can understand the difference of views. It is now time for the country to move on and focus on tackling the coronavirus pandemic together – and in doing so, we all must stay alert, to control the virus and save lives.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.
Kind regards,
Greg Hands
Rt Hon Greg Hands MP
Member of Parliament for Chelsea & Fulham | Minister of State for International Trade
House of Commons | London | SW1A 0AA | +44 (0)20 7219 0809 | mail@greghands.com | http://www.greghands.com
Sorry – lunch break not long enough to read all above! Is there a neat summary somewhere of all the “false allegations” that have been made? OK, the 2nd visit to Durham sounds less likely – is it disproved? – or denied? – or just rubbished? – person vilified by the sweet right wing press so appalled at how we’ve hounded their Dom?
I was struck by the fact that the 2nd statement from Durham Police didn’t actually retract anything.
The noise that needs to be made about George Floyd and brutality and venality in the US makes me wonder if this will have to be allowed to pass.
Michelle Donelan MP for Chippenham finally replies.
Dear Robert
Thank you for taking the time to write to me about Dominic Cummings. I have so far received 1,500 emails on the subject, both staunchly in favour of and indeed against Dominic Cummings’ actions, so thank you for your patience.
All of us locally will know that Wiltshire’s response to the COVID-19 emergency has been extraordinary both in community spirit and also in the results we are experiencing, with far fewer infections here than in most other parts of the country. In my view, a significant factor in this achievement has been our steadfast compliance with the lockdown rules, which has required enormous sacrifices and heart-breaking decisions about seeing loved ones. I have been in touch with hundreds of constituents facing some of the hardest decisions of their lives as a result of the lockdown measures, but whose determination to beat this virus together has prompted them to follow the rules nonetheless.
Recently this significant story broke and since then, I have been inundated with emails from people with entirely understandable concerns, many of which I share myself.
In my view, both Mr. Cummings’ decision making at the time of the incident and in the days following it could have been better and indeed could have been made clearer to the public. I know first-hand that being seriously ill while trying to continue working is tremendously difficult and perhaps unsurprisingly mistakes were made in how Mr. Cummings went about seeking help as a result of him becoming ill with suspected COVID-19. Mr. Cummings acknowledged this in his statement to the media and made it clear that he could have handled this better – this was an honest and frank admission which I was pleased to see. While no laws are thought to have been broken by Mr. Cummings, concerns about him breaching the spirit of the rules do need to be heard and I have passed these on.
On the more positive side, he isolated himself and his family in a separate house on a remote farm with no contact with family members. Apart from an unavoidable trip to hospital for a seriously ill young child, they did not come into contact with any members of the public. A child’s safety when both parents are seriously ill creates a clear exception to the lockdown rules as stated by the Deputy Chief Medical Officer at the time the rules were announced. Undoubtedly, the way Mr. Cummings handled the crisis could have been handled better and I am glad that Mr. Cummings has made it clear that he appreciates this.
Durham Constabulary have now concluded that Mr. Cummings did not commit an offence by travelling to County Durham and locating himself at his father’s premises, nor were any social distancing offences committed at any time. The only potential minor breach previously identified by Durham Constabulary was in regard to the Barnard Castle trip, but again no offence was clearly apparent, nor are Durham Constabulary planning to take any retrospective action.
Durham Constabulary now consider the matter to be closed and I agree that we need to refocus ourselves on fighting this virus together as a community. My team and I are working around the clock to help people locally with a huge range of issues, from getting vulnerable people food and medicine, to helping local businesses access the financial support they need to stay afloat. I want to re-emphasise for those less concerned with this story that my priority is to continue helping those in urgent need in any way I can. I am sure we all agree that this must remain my priority.
I want to finally take the opportunity to thank every single constituent for their sacrifices and hard work at this enormously challenging time. I firmly believe that when we look back on this in the years to come, what we will remember will be the acts of kindness, the acts of selfless sacrifice for others and above all we will look back knowing that what we all did saved the lives of many thousands of people. My job is to represent and support our community through thick and thin and I will continue to work night and day to make lives better and safer in Wiltshire.
Thank you once again for taking the time to write to me. For local coronavirus information or FAQs on the isolation measures in place, visit: https://michelledonelan.co.uk/essential-coronavirus-information/ . If you would like to stay up to date with what I am doing around the Chippenham Constituency and my views on a number of issues, please subscribe to my e-news by clicking the following link: https://michelledonelan.co.uk/subscribe/ .
Kind regards,
Michelle Donelan
Member of Parliament for Chippenham constituency
Email: michelle.donelan.mp@parliament.uk
Twitter: @michelledonelan
Website: http://www.michelledonelan.co.uk
No reply to 2 letters to Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswolds) but perhaps not surprising as he was the 650th on list of MPs responsive to their constituents.
MP Response to My Letter dated 26/5/20 Re Cummings
Received 3/6/20
Dear Mrs Haley,
Thank you for your email about the Prime Minister’s adviser, Dominic Cummings. Please forgive me for taking longer than usual to reply. As you can imagine, I have received a very large number of emails about this issue. I have already made my own position clear to the Prime Minister and have also made sure that he is aware of the strength of feeling of many people who live in my Epping Forest constituency.
I share your concerns about the importance of observing the very restrictive rules under which we have all had to live during this unprecedented crisis. It would have been better if Mr Cummings had stuck more rigidly to those rules and set an example for the rest of the country.
My heart goes out to the many, many families who have not been able to be with their loved ones at their time of need and sometimes, tragically, in their last hours.
Whether Mr Cummings was right or wrong, I had hoped that he would apologise for the consternation that his course of action has caused. I am disappointed that he has not done so.
I hope that, looking forward, we can now all concentrate on doing our best to continue to combat the effects of the Virus and to help each other to get through this very stressful time. The vast majority of people throughout our country have worked with dedication and behaved with good sense during these difficult and disturbing weeks. We have achieved the first goal, to protect the NHS. I hope we can now go on working together to look after people who are vulnerable and to get our country moving again.
I appreciate your taking the time to contact me about this controversial and sensitive matter. As ever, your views and opinions are important to me.
Yours sincerely,
Eleanor Laing.
From: Christine Haley
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 9:25 AM
To: LAING, Eleanor
Subject: Letter from your constituent Christine Haley
Christine Haley
5 Oak Lodge Avenue
Chigwell
Essex
IG7 5JA
Phone: 0208500 8530
Email:
christine.haley@btinternet.com
Sunday 24 May 2020
Dear Eleanor Laing,
I live in Grange Hill in your constituency. I and my husband are over
the age of 70 and since March 15th have been self-isolating at our
home. We have seen family, who live in Hainault fleetingly a few times
over the past ten weeks, when they have dropped off items we could not
obtain via online shopping. We communicate with our sons, grandchildren
and wider family via telephone, FaceTime and other social media.
I usually volunteer at Epping Forest Food Bank where I co-ordinate
Wednesday session at St Mary’s Church in Loughton. Since 11th March I
have worked from home, remotely co-ordinating sessions, over seeing the
transition to a delivery service for clients, and assisting with
recruitment of Emergency Volunteer drivers.
I and all my family have following all the lockdown regulations and
guidance as urged to do so by your Government. After the news of last
couple of days regarding Dominic Cummings, I feel more angry than I can
remember.
Have all the effort me and my family been making been a complete waste
of time? Grant Shapps on BBC television this morning appeared to
indicate we could choose where to isolate. This suggests my husband and
I could have driven 250 miles to self-isolate with my brother in Devon,
living in his outbuildings.
Dominic Cummings is alleging his actions were to protect his young
child, yet he and his wife drove whilst sick (if her Spectator article
is to be believed as she says they were sick at the same time). His
wife has family in London, and there are voluntary groups who could
have delivered food as he says he needs his sister to do.
Please could you tell me your views on his actions. I would hope you
would have the decency and courage to condemn them.
Yours sincerely,
Christine Haley
Still no reply from Gillian Keegan, MP for Chichester, to either my original email of almost two weeks ago, or my follow up chaser a few days later. So today I have sent a third. I am not holding my breath:
Dear Ms Keegan,
It is now almost two weeks since I first emailed you for your thoughts on the Dominic Cummins debacle. I understand that you have probably had hundreds, if not thousands, of emails to reply to, and I suppose you might have hoped that your paltry words in the Chichester Observer would have sufficed. However, I asked some very specific questions, most of which just required one word answers, so that I could understand your views on the matter.
I would appreciate it if you could give me just two minutes of your time to respond to my questions. That is all will take, if you answer honestly with your opinion. I appreciate that if you want to shroud your answers in Conservative politico-speak then it will be a more difficult job for you. But that I am afraid is your problem, and it is your choice if you wish to evade the path of honesty.
I also understand that you have been elected with a very large majority and I daresay your re-election is a fair certainty. perhaps it is therefore not electorally important for you to reply to me. However, as your constituent you do remain my elected representative in parliament, and I do think I deserve a proper, personalised reply. A copy and paste job will not actually answer my questions.
I do have several follow-up questions to ask now, because in the past two weeks there have been more and more worrying signs of government ineptitude, but I will email again with those questions once the initial backlog of emails have been answered.
Yours expectantly,
Alex Dichmont
I had this reply from my MP Steve Brine last week. I personally think his response is pretty fair. As a backbench MP right now there is not a lot you can do. He has also responded today about online voting.
Thank you for your email and your opinions. It is good to hear from you.
I am sorry not to reply sooner but we’ve had hundreds as you can imagine and I am doing my best to respond to you all as well as focus on the usual heavy caseload from constituents and the many other aspects of Covid-19 related work at this time.
I suppose I could have responded straight away to the initial messages received over the holiday weekend but, frankly, my decade plus experience suggests it is generally better to pause, think and (at least try) to ascertain the facts before replying to constituents.
Bottom line; I have never met Dominic Cummings but I know he’s a highly controversial figure and many members of the media certainly have a visceral dislike of him. That IS a factor here, and we should be honest about that as we should the fact there are many who have never warmed to Mr Cummings, but it’s obviously not the whole story and I am not for one moment saying it is.
To be quite honest, I know no more of the facts of this business than what I (like you) hear on the media but I watched that press conference on Monday and I have heard Mr Cummings say he broke neither the law nor the guidance. I guess that was his intention with the event in the Downing Street garden. Whether he achieved that – and reassured people – is something you must judge and it is obviously for the police to ascertain whether any law has been broken.
For my part, based only on what I hear remember, he clearly broke the guidance at the very least and has a reading of the rules that differs from pretty much everyone else in the country including me and my family. The trip to Durham was ill-judged – but it is true there does seem to have been something about extraordinary circumstances involving a child during lockdown – but the Castle trip is quite another. The “test my eyes” defence doesn’t work for me I’m afraid and I think many felt that part of Monday’s statement as being beyond parody.
As a former Public Health Minister, this is a painfully difficult time when the Government is trying to safely ease the necessary restrictions on our lives. Ministers need to retain as much public trust as possible so I see this whole saga as unbelievably unhelpful in that aim.
Furthermore, when the UK has north of 37,000 deaths from this awful pandemic, it’s a distraction for Ministers – and is leading to an almost absence of scrutiny from the media on track and trace, vaccine, care homes, support for workers – which I would think this country can ill afford right now.
To give you one example; I have fought really hard for support in this time to be given to self-employed workers and to ensure they receive parity with the furlough scheme. Thousands of my constituents benefit from that scheme and are rightly concerned that we have no guarantee whatsoever of its extension beyond the end of May. These jobs matter more to me than one highly paid Government advisor so when Radio 4 or Newsnight phone me day after day to go on their programmes I ask them if they’d cover that story as well so I can put pressure on the Chancellor. They usually say we’ll call you!
Public adherence to the rules is achieved by consent in this country and that is made much harder if people feel, no matter that these events were some time ago, it’s one rule for them and another for senior Government advisors.
At the weekend I robustly raised my concerns at Mr Cumming’s behaviour in the most appropriate – and I believe effective way – with the Government Chief Whip. I did so again yesterday when they called me making the point that my concern moving forward is the horrible distraction this is causing at a time of national crisis and the way it is undermining confidence in the public health message.
Ultimately it is for the Prime Minister to decide the future of his senior advisors but my advice to him has been; when the advisor becomes the story it is not, in my experience, a sustainable position and sooner or later something has to give. It’s quite simple, either we as a country decide to move on and put 100% of our energies back into beating this virus or Mr Cummings has to go. If Dominic has any self-awareness at all, he must see this.
I know, via the Whips Office and the Chairman of the 1922 Committee, No.10 is receiving a lot of feedback from MPs as we engage with constituents. I am keeping them both well briefed on constituency opinion from here, on both sides of this debate, as always.
With kind regards to stay safe and well,
Steve Brine MP
PS – we are working 24/7 at present to process all email fairly and promptly. Please consider whether you need to contact me (or click reply) at this time so we can concentrate on those most in need. Thank you in advance and, please note, if you’ve emailed about this before and had a reply, you should NOT expect further.
Steve Brine MP
Working hard for Winchester & Chandler’s Ford
Has anyone had a reply from Sarah Dines MP?
Finally a reply to me from Gillian Keegan , MP for Chichester. Doesn’t address any of the questions I originally asked her – standard copy-ad-paste rubbish.
Dear Alexander
Thank you for contacting me about the actions of Dominic Cummings during lockdown. I have received many emails on this matter and I wanted to ensure I had a broad view of the situation before responding.
I truly appreciate people’s frustration as so many have sacrificed an enormous amount to follow the rules and protect others. We are all anxious to see our families and are now entering our tenth week without being able to do so, something all of us are finding really hard. Ultimately, this sacrifice has been worth it as the NHS hasn’t been overwhelmed and we are now moving cautiously towards a new normal, with greater freedoms. As your MP, my focus is entirely on supporting our local services and those of you who have reached out for extra help and support to get through this pandemic. Many are very concerned about their health, jobs, businesses and children’s education and future. I apologise to those still waiting, the volume has been unprecedented and we still have many cases to respond to.
We have received a number of emails from people who are angry with Dominic Cummings and the choices he made to deal with his personal situation. Many disagree with his choices (some agree) and question whether they were within the spirit of the lockdown or within the guidelines. As the facts of Mr Cummings’ situation are disputed and there are ongoing investigations, I have made the range of views from constituents known to my Government colleagues. I find it difficult to put myself in this situation as I have not had Covid-19, nor do I have a young child, and faced with this situation would hesitate to advise any parent what is best for their family.
In my view, we need to continue to be cautious, keep distant and follow the guidelines during this vital period. The Government is focussed on making the key decisions which will lead us to the next phase and start to open up and rebuild our economy. This will not be easy, we have a great deal of uncertainty ahead of us and we will need all of our collective effort to do so.
Regards
Gillian
Gillian Keegan
Member of Parliament for Chichester
Transcript of the letter from Robert Largan (High Peak) received in the post on 3 June 2020:
Dear Paul,
Thank you for contacting me about Dominic Cummings. I am sorry for the delay in getting back to you. However, I receive a huge volume of correspondence every day and I prioritise
responding to urgent cases, which often involve vulnerable people who need direct help and advice.
When I gave my maiden speech on the emergency Coronavirus Bill back in March, I said that I am an independent-minded moderate, prepared to criticise my own party when I believe they have got things wrong. I have enclosed a copy of the Hansard transcript of my speech, which I hope is of interest.
I was one of the first Members of Parliament to break ranks on this issue, as has been reported in The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph and Sky News.
If all the reports about Mr Cummings are true, then I believe his position is untenable and he should resign.
We cannot have a situation where it is one rule for the public and another for politicians.
I have passed on both my views and those of a huge number of my constituents on to the highest levels of Government. I will also be writing to the Prime Minister.
I would add that some of the hounding of Mr Cummings and his family, including outside his home, has been unedifying. Whatever your views on him, the abuse that has been directed towards his family is unacceptable.
Should you have any further enquiries on any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact me. I am here to help.
Yours sincerely,
Robert Largan MP
And this is my reply of 4 June 2020:
I have finally received your reply Mr Largan, dated 26 May but received 3 June, and I am disappointed at the lack of substance, commitment and relevance:
1. You state that if ALL reports about Dominic Cummings are true then his position is untenable and that he should resign. I assume that you therefore mean that if ANY of the reports were false, or deemed to be false, by anyone, then he is absolved of ALL guilt? Would you apply the same logic to any other circumstance in life? You claim to have stated your position in (carefully) selected press in a way that paints you as independent-minded, as a free-thinker who is prepared to rebel and “break ranks”, but this position is non-committal and appears to be no more than a feint. You have still not clearly expressed your opinion on the matter, which surely must have changed in some way between 26 May and now.
2. You say in your letter that you have already passed on both your views and those of your constituents to the highest levels of government. But you also say that you intend to write to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister not the highest level of government in the United Kingdom? It would be easy to interpret such a blatant contradiction as evidence that you have done neither.
3. I did not ask you for your opinion about the alleged “hounding” of Dominic Cummings and his family so I do not understand why you have mentioned it and I fail to see how this can be in any way relevant to the issue I have raised. Are you suggesting that I am amongst those who have “hounded” him? This appears to be a deflection from the pertinent issue and arguably a clear example of “gaslighting” – this kind of psychological manipulation may work on some of your constituents but I can assure you that it will not work on me.
I expect better of you Mr Largan and I hope that you can do better. I look forward to hearing from you with a more professional, candid and constructive response.
Regards
Paul Carberry
I received this email from Peter Gibson:
Dear Mr Beckett,
Thank you for your email. I have received many emails from constituents over the past few days about Dominic Cummings. Many have been upset, some have been supportive of him, and still more have been angry that they have obeyed the rules of the lockdown when Mr Cummings seemingly did not. I understand all these emotions. We have been able to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed and our death rate is much lower because the overwhelming majority of people have abided by the guidance.
All of us have faced difficulties and huge disruption to our lives, making the easiest of decisions before Covid 19 so much more difficult. I think if Mr Cummings had made a statement earlier many questions would have been answered sooner, and some of the media allegations which have upset people would have been shown to be false.
Dominic Cummings, as one of the people who helped draw up the rules of the lockdown, understood what the rules permitted very well. It was clear from his press conference that he believed that he had acted within the rules and had done so to make provision for his family in the best way he could at the time. There are indeed allowances made for people with caring responsibilities, as I have advised many constituents over the past months on the detail of what is allowed and what is not.
He had driven to isolate himself, his wife and his child close to family, who could help them if they became very ill. This was not a trip, as some had suggested, to visit elderly parents and they would not be required to help with childcare, therefore that did not make it unlawful. It is also clear that some of the allegations made that he had travelled backwards and forwards between London and Durham on numerous occasions were untrue. His trip to Barnard Castle is regrettable.
As your Member of Parliament, I should make clear that I do not believe that any of us are above the law. If the Police found that Dominic Cummings had acted in a way which had contravened the law, I would expect them to take action. Durham Constabulary have now confirmed that they do not plan on taking further action. I do not believe that I should support hounding him out of his job. I do not believe that anyone should lose their job for lawful decisions made at a time of great personal stress.
It would be both easy and politically convenient, given the public anger at his behaviour, to join the calls for his resignation. However, having heard his full account of his actions, I hope that you will understand that I cannot in all conscience, on balance do this. I believe that he acted in the best interests of protecting his family, something which we can all sympathise with.
I was, and remain, proud to be part of Boris Johnson’s team, proud to be working with him in Parliament, and in driving through our levelling up one nation agenda. The people of Darlington elected me to get Brexit done and honour the referendum result, and I intend to continue with that work whilst continuing to support local people throughout the challenges of this pandemic. I have, however, in representing you as your Member of Parliament, conveyed your concerns to Number 10 to ensure that the Prime Minister is aware of your views.
At a time of national crisis, I believe it is time to move on, and allow the Government to concentrate on tackling this crisis, expanding track and trace, getting our economy restarted, and bring the jobs, investment, and infrastructure we need to our region. It is those future achievements that I wish to be judged on at the next election.
I do thank you for taking the time to share your views with me, and if I can be any further assistance to you on any other matter please do not hesitate to contact me.
Best wishes,
Peter Gibson
Member of Parliament for Darlington
I replied:
Dear Mr Gibson,
Thank you for your reply to my letter. I am disappointed that you did not address a couple of key points and questions I raised. I would be very grateful if you could answer these questions:
– Did Mr Cummings or his wife contact the police about the feeling of their house being targeted? If so, what was the response? If not, why not?
– I understand Mary Wakefield’s brother lives in London. Was he unavailable to deliver food or help with childcare if it was required? Do they not have any friends in the city who could have helped?
– The government’s advice to people who are too ill to look after children is to phone a local hub who can arrange childcare. Was this option ever considered?
– Why did Mr Cummings drive to the local hospital to collect his wife and son when, according to his wife’s account in The Spectator, he was seriously ill in bed and could “barely stand-up” the previous day? Was no patient transport available?
– Do you think Mr Cummings’ drive to Barnard Castle was legally, ethically, or morally justifiable? Do you think “regrettable” is a strong enough word to describe a journey the police considered in breach of the lockdown guidelines and when he was, by his own admission, visually compromised?
– As the lockdown was in place, do you think there was any excuse for the family to leave the car and go for a walk by the river during that trip to Barnard Castle rather than staying in the car and then returning to the house in which they were staying?
– Why did Mr Cummings refer to the property as his father’s house when, according to the land registry, he is the owner?
– How can the government “move on” when the Prime Minister’s most senior adviser has refused to express any regret or contrition about a journey the police would, if they could, have prevented on legal grounds? Why will the Prime Minister not acknowledge the deep anger and hurt Mr Cummings’ actions and lack of remorse has caused?
– For the government to “move on”, it needs to take the country with it. It is abundantly clear from opinion polls, questions to the Prime Minister and other Cabinet ministers, and people I know, that the public are not prepared to draw a line under this issue. Is apologising so difficult?
Yours sincerely,
David Beckett
His response:
Dear Mr Beckett,
Dear Mr Miller,
Thank you for your further email.
I can assure you that I read every single email which I receive on this and every other issue. However, I had to resort to sending a standard response to emails about Dominic Cummings. To give you an idea of scale, I have received just over 900 emails about this issue over the past few days. If I were to write a separate email to each I estimate this would have taken just over 4 weeks to respond to them all – and I of course have parliamentary committments plus constituents who are facing real hardship which I must deal with each day without delay.
In normal times I pride myself on responding to constituents quickly and with careful consideration of the points that they make – even if we do not always agree. However, given most constituents wrote asking for my views, I felt was best to set out an all encompassing response and send it promptly.
I did not seek, in my reply, to give a detailed defence of the various parts of Mr Cummings’ activities as even he suggested that, with the benefit of hindsight, he would have done some things differently. The police have however had an opportunity to review the circumstances of his trip to Durham and found that his journey to stay with his family close to his parents was lawful. Regarding his journey to Barnard Castle they stated that it “might have been a minor breach of the Regulations that would have warranted police intervention. Durham Constabulary view this as minor because there was no apparent breach of social distancing.”
The police go on to say “In line with Durham Constabulary’s general approach throughout the pandemic, there is no intention to take retrospective action in respect of the Barnard Castle incident since this would amount to treating Mr Cummings differently from other members of the public.”
The statement form Dominic Cummings did not mention his eyesight – that was something which ran in the media. He said ” She didn’t want to risk a nearly 300-mile drive with our child, given how ill I had been. We agreed that we should go for a short drive to see if I could drive safely.” He went on to say “I accept, of course, that there is room for reasonable disagreement about this. I could also understand some people think I should not have driven at all anywhere.
But I had taken medical expert medical advice. It was 15 days after symptoms. I’d been told that I could return to work and employ childcare. I think it was reasonable and sensible to make a short journey before embarking on a five-hour drive”
If Mr Cummings had been a constituent of mine and been sacked for making such a decision, I would be asking his employer to reconsider and advising him that he had grounds to claim unfair dismissal. All laws must apply to people equally. It would be both easy and politically convenient, given the public anger at his behaviour, to join the calls for his resignation, but for the reasons I have set out above, I do not think it right to do this.
With best wishes
Peter Gibson
That was followed by another email:
Dear Mr Beckett,
I do apologise for mis dressing you in my previous email. Please disregard.
I can assure you that I read every single email which I receive on this and every other issue. However, I had to resort to sending a standard response to emails about Dominic Cummings. To give you an idea of scale, I have received just over 900 emails about this issue over the past few days. If I were to write a separate email to each I estimate this would have taken just over 4 weeks to respond to them all – and I of course have parliamentary committments plus constituents who are facing real hardship which I must deal with each day without delay.
In normal times I pride myself on responding to constituents quickly and with careful consideration of the points that they make – even if we do not always agree. However, given most constituents wrote asking for my views, I felt was best to set out an all encompassing response and send it promptly.
I did not seek, in my reply, to give a detailed defence of the various parts of Mr Cummings’ activities as even he suggested that, with the benefit of hindsight, he would have done some things differently. The police have however had an opportunity to review the circumstances of his trip to Durham and found that his journey to stay with his family close to his parents was lawful. Regarding his journey to Barnard Castle they stated that it “might have been a minor breach of the Regulations that would have warranted police intervention. Durham Constabulary view this as minor because there was no apparent breach of social distancing.”
The police go on to say “In line with Durham Constabulary’s general approach throughout the pandemic, there is no intention to take retrospective action in respect of the Barnard Castle incident since this would amount to treating Mr Cummings differently from other members of the public.”
The statement form Dominic Cummings did not mention his eyesight – that was something which ran in the media. He said ” She didn’t want to risk a nearly 300-mile drive with our child, given how ill I had been. We agreed that we should go for a short drive to see if I could drive safely.” He went on to say “I accept, of course, that there is room for reasonable disagreement about this. I could also understand some people think I should not have driven at all anywhere.
But I had taken medical expert medical advice. It was 15 days after symptoms. I’d been told that I could return to work and employ childcare. I think it was reasonable and sensible to make a short journey before embarking on a five-hour drive”
If Mr Cummings had been a constituent of mine and been sacked for making such a decision, I would be asking his employer to reconsider and advising him that he had grounds to claim unfair dismissal. All laws must apply to people equally. It would be both easy and politically convenient, given the public anger at his behaviour, to join the calls for his resignation, but for the reasons I have set out above, I do not think it right to do this.
With regard to my own situation, when it was suspected that I had Covid I was advised to travel home and isolate in my home, undertaking a 250 mile journey from London. During this crisis a number of constituents have been in touch with me to say that they need to isolate elsewhere for reasons of family support and safety and should they travel – I gave what I considered to be reasonable advice that if that was the best for their family that is what they should do, taking care to ensure their journey was undertaken safely.
With best wishes
Peter Gibson
I sent another email, one which has yet to be acknowledged:
Dear Mr Gibson,
Thank you for your reply. I have read the full transcript of Dominic Cummings’ statement and he specifically mentions his eyesight:
“On Sunday 12 April, 15 days after I had first displayed symptoms, I decided to return to work. My wife was very worried, particularly given my eyesight seemed to have been affected by the disease. She didn’t want to risk a nearly 300-mile drive with our child, given how ill I had been. We agreed that we should go for a short drive to see if I could drive safely. We drove for roughly half an hour and ended up on the outskirts of Barnard Castle town.”
As you have included nearly all of this part of the transcript in your email, I am surprised you did not notice, or chose not to include, the preceding sentence in which Dominic Cummings says his “eyesight seemed to have been affected by the disease”. Were you unaware that Mr Cummings said his eyesight had been affected by Covid-19 or did you selectively quote from his statement and think I wouldn’t notice?
Driving when you feel you have compromised vision is contrary to the Road Safety Act 1988 and the Highway Code, which specifies that a driver needs “to tell DVLA about some medical conditions as they can affect your driving. […] You can be fined up to £1,000 if you do not tell DVLA about a medical condition that affects your driving. You may be prosecuted if you’re involved in an accident as a result.”
The government guidance on the Highway Code to test your vision is to see if you can read a number plate from 20 metres away. Nowhere does it say to test your fitness to drive by putting your family in the car and driving for about 30 minutes.
I asked many questions in my previous email, all of which are still unanswered. Could you please endeavour to find answers to them? Additionally, could you ask why Mr Cummings went into work after spending time with his wife, whom he suspected was unwell with Covid-19? This is in direct contrast to NHS advice, which says that if you live with someone who has symptoms (or have close contact with someone with symptoms) you should not go out and not go to work.
I am also puzzled by Mr Cummings’ statement that he did not tell the Prime Minister about leaving for Durham because the PM was ill. This was at the beginning of March, but Boris Johnson was still chairing Cabinet at the end of March, by which time Mr Cummings had travelled to and from County Durham. It’s my understanding that Mr Cummings usually attends Cabinet meetings. Could you please find out if Cabinet minutes mention Mr Cummings’ apologies and his reason for not attending?
Do you agree that a Cabinet Office inquiry into Mr Cummings’ travels during lockdown to find out who knew what and when would make it easier for the country to “move on”?
Yours sincerely,
David Beckett