24/05/2020
The rules of the UK lockdown were pretty clear back in March and April; far clearer than they are now. Unnecessary journeys were not permitted, visiting family members was not permitted, travelling to properties other than your primary residence was banned and many hundreds of people have been fined for breaching the law.
The requirements set down for those who were infected by COVID-19, or believed they might be infected, were also pretty clear. If you believed you might be suffering from or carrying the virus, you must self-isolate at your home for at least seven days with anyone who was a member of your household. Those other members of your household were also required to self-isolate for at least two weeks.
So, when Dominic Cummings drive from London to Durham, he breached the lockdown and therefore was guilty of a criminal act.
It is worth noting that the lockdown was legally sound and not wholly reliant on the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020. The government had the legal power to impose the lockdown in England and Wales through powers given to UK and Welsh ministers under thePublic Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984. The relevant part of the 1984 Act (Part 2A) was inserted by Part IIIof theHealth and Social Care Act 2008, which was designed with epidemics in mind; in response to the SARS epidemic of 2003.
Many of the people who are publicly criticising Cummings are stressing that it was perfectly reasonable for him to want to make the journey in order to protect his four year old child. However, this would suggest that those individuals are of the opinion that the restrictions were themselves a risk to children.
This is utter nonsense.
Across the country, and indeed across the globe, there have been countless families who have been impacted by the COVID-19 virus and self-isolated with children of all ages. There has been no suggestion that these parents have been neglectful of their children. So, why on earth would anyone think that Cummings has been 'reasonable' in wanting to take his son, who may have already been infected himself, on such a long car journey?
Part of the reason for banning unnecessary journeys, as had been evidenced by frequent social media posts by police forces across the country, was the risk of car accidents that then lead to a need for emergency services workers to need to attend and be unable to deal with the aftermath whilst maintaining social distancing.
There is absolutely no doubt that Cummings has selfishly ignored the restrictions and, in his repeated refusals to acknowledge and apologise for his behaviour, he has compounded his error.
Cummings has, as I write this, apparently entered Downing Street. I sincerely hope that this is him presenting his resignation, or being informed that he has been sacked.
Comments