Dominic Cummings at war with media Chiefs.

8 min read.

In recent days, the heinous enemy i.e. Covid-19 appears to be on the wane, particularly in London, South West of England, and Northern Ireland. With the passage of each day there are fewer cases of the infection. The hospital admissions and deaths are tailing off. The virus will be decimated, and it is fervently believed that it will be sooner rather than later. The public have been co-operative, many frontline staff paid ultimate price while working tirelessly. The chief scientists, chief political advisors, and chief political reporters contributed significantly. When I say chief, I include deputy chiefs as well. The politicians made the decisions on the advice of the advisors. The media raised fingers if there was any slackening in the implementation of the decisions. For the success achieved thus far the credit goes to all of them. 

Unfortunately, in recent days and weeks a war has broken out between the Prime Minister’s Chief Advisor ( Mr Dominic Cummings) and the media Chiefs. It cannot be gainsaid that the invisible enemy has not yet been completely crushed. There is every possibility that another peak might return before an effective vaccine is discovered. The war between the Chiefs is ill-timed and ill-advised.

For convenience sake, I have divided these Chiefs into two groups. The attackers counted in the first group, include: political correspondents for the TV Channels and the reporters for the national newspapers.

The complaints are against Mr Dominic Cummings, whom, henceforth, I will call as the Defending Chief or simply the DC, which are his name initials as well. The details of the allegations against him are very much in the public domain. But, as this post might be read within and outside the UK, these may be succinctly stated.

 On the morning of 28^th March, the DC was at work in 10 Downing Street when he received a phone call from his wife stating that she had the virus symptoms. He was seen in the Downing Street running to his house. He feared that he would catch the virus soon as well. To protect their four-year- old child, they travelled to Durham 260 miles away. There his parents lived in one property and his sister and two nieces, aged 17 and 20 in the adjacent dwelling.  He and his wife cooped up a few hundred metres away. He caught the virus the next day. A few days earlier the country was placed in a lockdown. His nieces looked after the child during their isolation. It was also alleged that he was seen away from his house. After recovering, he drove thirty miles to check whether his eyesight had not been adversely affected by the virus. Next day they left their bolt- hole and returned to London.

The Chiefs in the first group, led by the Sky alpha, launched the attack, and demanded an immediate resignation by the DC. Also, the political parties, Labour, Lib Dems, and the SNP jumped on the bandwagon.

According to Sir Keir Starmer, leader of the Labour Party, the DC could drop the child at the residence of his brother-in-law, who lived in London. With due deference to Sir Keir, this alternative was based on speculation and not tenable. DC’s relationship with his in-laws might not be as cordial as of Sir Keir’s, who had suspended his leadership campaign when his mother-in-law had sadly died.

The attacks by the chiefs in the second group against the DC may be compared with a deadly attack by a pride of lions on the huge bull with big horns. The pride did not expect that the bull would be joined by the herd.  They thought that they were hunting a dear with big horns. They misjudged the strength of the bull and found it difficult to devour him while breathing.

The DC got unqualified support from the other chiefs.

 At the coronavirus daily press conference in the Downing Street, the briefer Prof. Jenny Harries argued that the rule could be interpreted according to the common sense. In my opinion she could have used the quote from Charles Dicken’s novel Oliver Twist, in which when Mr Bumble was told that the law assumes that a wife follows the authority of the husband he responded, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands:

“If the law supposes that, the law is a ass- a idiot.”

She could have substituted the word ‘rule’ for the word ‘law’.

The cabinet minister, Grant Shapps, refuted the argument that there were precedents when one chief scientist and a medical advisor of Scotland had resigned after it was found that they had violated the shutdown rules. The case of DC is clearly distinguishable. In those two cases there were no exceptional circumstances – a four-year-old child’s welfare was at stake.

The PM said that he would not throw his chief advisor to the dogs. It would have been better if he had said:

‘There’s no dog’s chance that his chief advisor would be thrown to the dogs’

At a Downing Street Coronavirus press conference on 24^th May, the PM defended his chief advisor and held that he had acted reasonably and legally and with integrity.

To exculpate himself, next day the DC held a lengthy press conference in the Rose Garden of the 10 Downing Street.

He gave his itinerant details from the time when he was seen running home in the Downing Street. He was questioned and cross-examined incessantly. His demeanour during the conference was meek and respectful, while the questioners were aggressive.

An hour later the PM briefly reiterated his acceptance of the version submitted by the DC at his press conference.

Though the DC has unflinching support, there is no let up on the part of the attacking alphas.

I should call a spade a spade. Personally, it does not matter a whit to me whether the DC stays put or is swallowed by the attackers, but I believe that he has not violated any rule. Even the former Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester has unequivocally stated that no rule has been broken. The Durham police have closed the file.

One thing puzzles me, and I do not want to bottle it up. Why these attackers deem the DC as their bete noire? As it stands, the invisible enemy is staring at us. The public are scared, lest the virus re-emerges. There is no certainty that vaccine will be ready in the coming months or years. We are on the cusp of the worst recession in more than 300 hundred years.  But they are out for the DC’s head, whom I have never heard of uttering any words in public, until the press conference on the Bank holiday Monday. As I stated hereinabove, he behaved deferentially, when the questioners were repeating the same questions over and over again trying to provoke him. They have made a mountain out of a molehill. They should spit out the real problem.

If I were in a similar situation as the DC was in, I can swear on my children that I would have done the same. The doubt if there was any in my mind has been decisively dispelled after his press conference.

According to the leading article in the Times [25.05.2020]:

“……Mr Johnson has a government to run and the public health crisis to defuse. He should be allowed to get on with it”.

It is hoped that the media’s rancour vis-à-vis Mr Dominic Cummings will simmer down. But the fact is that the jury is still out.