If advisors are to be held to the same level of accountability as politicians, shouldnt they be elected?
The point is that politicians are held to account over who they choose for their advisers and how they address the behaviour of those they employ. Cummings is under no obligation to resign but Boris has to justify not sacking him.
If you can keep your head, while those around you are losing theirs, you may not have grasped the seriousness of the situation.
If advisors are to be held to the same level of accountability as politicians, shouldnt they be elected?
The point is that politicians are held to account over who they choose for their advisers and how they address the behaviour of those they employ. Cummings is under no obligation to resign but Boris has to justify not sacking him.
This is exactly my point.
The justification is simple. He's a private citizen who broke no law. If you disagree, you can exercise your view by voting in the relevant constitutional election.
If he did break a law, he should be dealt with in the same way as every other private citizen, via a fine.
No other private citizen who broke the law (and has been fined etc) has been publicly vilified and had demands to lose their job.
I cannot comprehend how people who claim to uphold democratic principles are also discarding them because of personal opinions.
There is a reason the law is dispassionate. Whether you agree or not with the law or its application, is irrelevant. You are free to campaign for a change in the law, of course. But none of that changes the fact that Dominic Cummings still did not break the law, and is innocent until proven guilty.
I note no mention of the media who did break social distancing as explained in my previous post.
Elected MPs will have to justify their actions to their constituents ... they can effectively ‘sack’ him now and call another election, or wait until the next General Election to deliver their verdict on their MP’s behaviour.
Dominic Cummings is unelected ... he wields a huge amount of power and influence over the government and over us, and answers to no one but Boris Johnson and has taken advantage of that in an arrogant disregard for the rules he helped draw up ... that is why the public is angry.
I think most of are aware of how Mps are elected and unelected. They can also have the whip removed, or expelled. I would however expect these instances to be reported by the main stream media with the same vigour. I was watching sky's coverage of the Cummings debacle, yesterday and they didn't even try to hide their impartiality. The public are angry, that is there perogative. They are angry because they have been whipped up by the media. As the media despise Cummings as they don't get the same access to the government as they would like, and by all accounts he is an arse
I’m not sure who I feel most patronised by ... Cummings at his press conference ... or by your post. 🤣
Yes you patronised me in your first post by explaining to me how mp's are elected and unelected. I find quite a few posters on here patronising. 🙄 Guess it's just a case of sucking it up
I didn’t patronise you ... I pointed out that DC is not an elected MP but an unelected political advisor accountable to just one person, which could explain the difference in the way his actions are being regarded and reported.
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
I note no mention of the media who did break social distancing as explained in my previous post.
That's because you're not reading what I write.
As far as I can see you'd like to silence the media, stop freedom of speech, allow political parties to govern without accountability and let criminals get away with breaking the law as long as they can lie their way out of it and get the government to change the rules to suit their story. It doesn't sound like a great system to be honest
If you can keep your head, while those around you are losing theirs, you may not have grasped the seriousness of the situation.
I note no mention of the media who did break social distancing as explained in my previous post.
That's because you're not reading what I write.
As far as I can see you'd like to silence the media, stop freedom of speech, allow political parties to govern without accountability and let criminals get away with breaking the law as long as they can lie their way out of it and get the government to change the rules to suit their story. It doesn't sound like a great system to be honest
Absolutely not. Free media is a vital part of democracy.
The issue is that in this case, the media reporting narrative is being driven by individual opinions with personal agendas.
Contrast this to something like the forthcoming SpaceX launch, where coverage is factual.
Since my last post, Dominic Cummings still hasn't broken the law, been arrested or fined, and so forth.
There is nothing more left than hyperbole and ever increasing noise. Should this change, and he is found to have broken the law, I wholeheartedly hope the media will report on that too, in a balanced way.
The media have an obligation to act responsibly. It's time to move on and report on other things such as the SpaceX launch, or the item Rik56 posted, or (shock horror) the plan to release lockdown. Unfortunately in the race for clicks and likes and market share, noise wins and we've all been reduced to National Inquirer readers.
The issue is that in this case, the media reporting narrative is being driven by individual opinions with personal agendas.
Contrast this to something like the forthcoming SpaceX launch, where coverage is factual.
Are you secretly Donald Trump? "This is fake news. SAD. Look at this other story instead with shiny, distracting images".
No, I'm not. I'm not American either. Replace National inquirer with whatever celeb nonsense publication you wish.
There has been no new point of fact in the Dominic Cummings story for several days. The only change is the ever increasing screams of outrage, feeding off itself. He's still not broken the law (getting bored of repeating this essential point).
I'm simply saying that, in absence of anything new and relevant, let's move on to far more important things. Unless someone actually believes all this nonsense is achieving anything valuable?
Why that would make me Donald Trump, I'm not sure. However when an argument descends to ad hominem fallacies, it's pretty clear one side has run out of cogent thoughts so I'll leave it there.
Posts
'The power of accurate observation .... is commonly called cynicism by those that have not got it.
George Bernard Shaw'
The justification is simple. He's a private citizen who broke no law. If you disagree, you can exercise your view by voting in the relevant constitutional election.
If he did break a law, he should be dealt with in the same way as every other private citizen, via a fine.
No other private citizen who broke the law (and has been fined etc) has been publicly vilified and had demands to lose their job.
I cannot comprehend how people who claim to uphold democratic principles are also discarding them because of personal opinions.
There is a reason the law is dispassionate. Whether you agree or not with the law or its application, is irrelevant. You are free to campaign for a change in the law, of course. But none of that changes the fact that Dominic Cummings still did not break the law, and is innocent until proven guilty.
I note no mention of the media who did break social distancing as explained in my previous post.
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
The issue is that in this case, the media reporting narrative is being driven by individual opinions with personal agendas.
Contrast this to something like the forthcoming SpaceX launch, where coverage is factual.
Since my last post, Dominic Cummings still hasn't broken the law, been arrested or fined, and so forth.
There is nothing more left than hyperbole and ever increasing noise. Should this change, and he is found to have broken the law, I wholeheartedly hope the media will report on that too, in a balanced way.
The media have an obligation to act responsibly. It's time to move on and report on other things such as the SpaceX launch, or the item Rik56 posted, or (shock horror) the plan to release lockdown. Unfortunately in the race for clicks and likes and market share, noise wins and we've all been reduced to National Inquirer readers.
There has been no new point of fact in the Dominic Cummings story for several days. The only change is the ever increasing screams of outrage, feeding off itself. He's still not broken the law (getting bored of repeating this essential point).
I'm simply saying that, in absence of anything new and relevant, let's move on to far more important things. Unless someone actually believes all this nonsense is achieving anything valuable?
Why that would make me Donald Trump, I'm not sure. However when an argument descends to ad hominem fallacies, it's pretty clear one side has run out of cogent thoughts so I'll leave it there.