Three months after his breach of lockdown rules came to light, Hardeep Matharu explores the precedent set by the No 10 chief advisor’s callous hoodwinking of the public – a fundamental degrading of democracy that was missed by the Labour Party at a dangerous cost
The latest in a long line of scandals smacking of incompetence, arrogance and ideology, outrage has swirled around the Government’s utter mishandling of ‘A’ Level exam results. Having been backed into a corner on performing a U-turn by widespread shock at the unfolding fiasco, the Education Secretary Gavin Williamson has faced calls to resign. The damage, however, was done many months before it was decided that an algorithm should be used to determine the future of thousands of young people.
It took place in the sunshine of the Downing Street Rose Garden on the May Bank Holiday when Dominic Cummings informed the public that he drove to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight, expected people to buy this, and then smirked when we had to.
In that bizarre, contemptuous press conference – and the days that followed – the Prime Minister’s chief advisor obliterated the fundamental norms underpinning Britain’s political system and set a dangerous new precedent: that democratic accountability and the rule of law can be thrown under a bus for personal and partisan gain.
Williamson now finds himself with no norms to which consequences will be attached if he does not adhere. If an unelected official already in contempt of Parliament faced no repercussions for breaking the rules and misleading the public during an unprecedented public health crisis, why should a softly-spoken Cabinet Minister who keeps a whip on his desk be rattled?
In an unwritten Constitution such as Britain’s, norms are largely all the political system has to deal with scandals, incompetence and bad faith. The Cummings affair not only stuck two fingers up at these principles, it graffitied all over them. And this vandalism will have far-reaching effects.
For Cummings’ lockdown affair was never simply about Cummings and his faux Machiavellian tendencies. It was never simply about the damage his actions did to public trust around the Coronavirus pandemic. And it was never simply a story of establishment power and the closing of ranks. It was a story about democracy itself – and its vulnerability to those determined to destroy it from within.
Why was Cummings allowed to get away with it?
Protecting Cummings At All Costs
A new benchmark was set in the Downing Street Rose Garden on the afternoon of 25 May and by the extraordinary defence of Cummings that followed.
In a televised account of his actions during lockdown, he told the public that, instead of self-isolating at home after his wife developed Coronavirus symptoms, he drove his family to Durham. He then later drove to Barnard Castle with his wife and son on 12 April – which he forgot to mention was his wife’s birthday – “to see if I could drive safely” as “my eyesight seemed to have been affected by the disease”.
When asked about this account at the Government’s daily Coronavirus briefing which followed, the Prime Minister reached for a pair of glasses in his pocket before offering: “I have to wear spectacles for the first time in years because of this thing so I think that’s very, very plausible that eyesight can be affected by Coronavirus.”
In a 2014 Daily Mail article, headlined ‘I’m Blind As A Bat’, he told the newspaper he needed glasses to see things around the house.
The police also seemed to have problems seeing things clearly.
When the scandal broke, the Durham force said it had been in touch with Cummings’ family at the time and “reiterated the appropriate advice around essential travel”. But, ahead of Cummings’ press conference, the story changed. It then said it had only spoken to Cummings’ father at the time and that it “gave no specific advice on Coronavirus to any members of the family and that Durham Constabulary deemed that no further action was required”.
Later, Durham Police concluded that there might have been a “minor breach” of lockdown regulations but that it would not be taking any action against Cummings retrospectively.
Meanwhile, the Metropolitan Police – which was accused of dragging its heels in investigating breaches of electoral law by Cummings’ Vote Leave group – has not looked into the matter, with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) saying that no evidence has been presented to it by police for it to consider.