One rule for them …

[wheelnut]

They must be much more importaner than us.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57877373

[Yorick]

I saw this on another forum

11

Downing Street is among 20 private and public sector organisations - including Network Rail, Transport for London and Border Force - taking part in a pilot where close contacts of Covid cases take daily tests.

[slowsider]

They must be much more importaner than us.

You prolly don't have a security detail and a police driver either

[JamJar]

They’ve u-turned already and are now going to self isolate.

[Mr. Dazzle]

IMO this is one situation where 'one rule for them' is justified. I agree that for the most part the government should live by the same rules as the governed, but like it or not they are more important than the average joe in some ways. That's why they have police protection etc.

[slowsider]

IMO this is one situation where 'one rule for them' is justified. I agree that for the most part the government should live by the same rules as the governed, but like it or not they are more important than the average joe in some ways. That's why they have police protection etc.

They are more of a target, is why.

[Mr. Dazzle]

IMO this is one situation where 'one rule for them' is justified. I agree that for the most part the government should live by the same rules as the governed, but like it or not they are more important than the average joe in some ways. That's why they have police protection etc.

They are more of a target, is why.

Yes, obviously, but the point is they're not just your regular schmucks and there are situations where they should be treated differently. Whether or not they're actually any good at their jobs is almost irrelevant.

[Jody]

I try not to moan about the government too much, especially in terms of making mistakes because they're only human, but repeated examples of this sort of stuff is starting to upset public opinion. Like Cummings swanning about when the proles couldn't even attend a funeral and Margaret Ferrier, still on bail and I'm sure the authorities are hoping everyone will forget because they don't seem to be doing much with an open and shut case.

I'm not having that MPs can't work remotely, it's not like they're stood at a production line or delivering coal.
It might be that they can't claim attendance expenses if they're working remotely...

You haven't thought this through! How is someone supposed to have an affair remotely ?

[Docca]

IMO this is one situation where 'one rule for them' is justified. I agree that for the most part the government should live by the same rules as the governed, but like it or not they are more important than the average joe in some ways. That's why they have police protection etc.

The only real challenge to that is it negates the RCT they’re signed up to. You can’t pick and chose which side you are on.

[Docca]

[Mr. Dazzle]

They can't claim attendance expenses if they're working remotely...

They can claim WFH tax relief though, that's a couple of hundred quid

[Screwdriver]

There should be a different rule for them. They are running the country ffs. OK so one of them has COVID, well so long as it doesn't kill them and they don't infect others they should carry on running the country.

These individuals are so important (no I am not being sarcastic) that it is worth putting in place additional safeguards so they can carry on doing their job. Even if that job means telling Joe Public they need to self isolate because we can't all individually have a team dedicated to managing our infection.

I dunno about you chaps but I seriously doubt if anyone would even notice if I turned up for work or not. If one of our top politicians is out of action, either their work in managing our country is not being done to its fullest extent or they shouldn't be doing that job.

I don't see why it is so difficult for people to accept that certain individuals have more important roles to play which actually do entitle them to special treatment.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I don't see why it is so difficult for people to accept that certain individuals have more important roles to play which actually do entitle them to special treatment.

This is the crux of it.

No-one likes to feel they're not important, even fewer people like to feel they're not important while also having it made plainly obvious who is important

Politicians don't make it easy for themselves of course, they want to paint themselves as just one of the people. But as you say, their role - if not necessarily the person - IS more important than yours or mine generally.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Yes, Minister wasn't actually meant to be a sitcom.

[Docca]

This is the crux of it.

No it isn’t. They were part of a randomised control trial, with random and not selective being the driving word here.

There is an arguement that if they had elected to ignore to isolate it would have been the final straw in the permission slip of excuses people would have had to self-govern. That’s the crux. We are moving, in leaps and bounds towards ‘common sense’ tomorrow ( btw could tell me what time the pandemic ends tomorrow - I’ve missed my memo).

It’s also conveniently enabled distraction to the other key issue of today; decision not to pursue MPs for their involvement in Dido Harding’s 37bn chum fund.

It’s one disgrace after another. Delta could have been given a much bigger swerve - but here we are again. Count yourself lucky if you are relatively untouched by it all.

[Screwdriver]

They're not there to actually run anything, they're rarely subject matter experts and they're there to listen to people that know how to run stuff, to coordinate, to sign stuff and take the fall when it goes wrong.

Sajid Javid is a banker, not a health care expert, if he took two weeks off nothing would collapse.

Which is why I suggest “manage the country”, clearly SJ would be a very capable manager. That role is way more complicated than just merely being any good. It’s who you know (and who knows you), what your level of authority is and whether or not you can be trusted with it. It is how you persuade people to do as you ask after determining what it is that needs to be done.

At this level It is less important to understand the fundamental technology of a subject than it is to have an overall grasp of the strategy involved in making things happen.

And as for "I can't take two weeks off because everything would collapse" - next time an MP asks for maternity leave we should assume that their department is doomed?

No one is saying that except you and you top that off by absurd over exaggeration. Who said “everything would collapse”? Just you. Ok well the rest of us appreciate either there is a requirement for a politician to play this role or there is not. If there is a requirement, I’d like them to keep on doing it for as long as is humanly possible. I want my pound of flesh.

It looks increasingly as if those clever boffins at the CCP have managed to produce an extremely effective bio weapon. They certainly seem to have gained some function so it’s starting to look like this pandemic is set to become endemic.

If humanity has to learn to live with COVID, let the politicians responsible test the theory and just get on with it. No rest for the wicked.

[Mr. Dazzle]

There is an arguement that if they had elected to ignore to isolate it would have been the final straw in the permission slip of excuses people would have had to self-govern.

That is exactly the problem. People want the politicians to live by the same rules as them, I'm saying politicians (and certain other people) shouldn't have to always live by the same rules as the general population in this situation.

They shouldn't have to justify themselves on the basis of being in an RCT (or not) or anything else, people doing certain things SHOULD be allowed to say "that rule doesn't apply to us" because their circumstances are different.

That may be unpalatable but that's the reality IMO.

[Mr Moofo]

They shouldn't have to justify themselves on the basis of being in an RCT (or not) or anything else, people doing certain things SHOULD be allowed to say "that rule doesn't apply to us" because their circumstances are different.

That may he unpalatable but that's the reality IMO.

Does that include knowing your adviser / driving to Barnard Castle to check your eyesight?
Whilst there do have to be mitigating circumstances allowing those who govern to do so, the do have to been seen to be living by the rules that apply to the electorate. Social distancing, not taking freebie holidays when you are in a position of power, not giving you bedmate a job, or using mates firms for contracts etc.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Does that include knowing your adviser / driving to Barnard Castle to check your eyesight?

No.

HTH.

[millemille]

Does that include knowing your adviser / driving to Barnard Castle to complete off the record deals for vaccine production at GSK?

Edited for the sake of reality (possibly, allegedly etc.)