If the Tories try to fine anyone for keeping their kids from school, they can just claim the Cummings defence

It might be technically illegal, but Johnson’s ‘did what any parent would’ excuse for Cummings would surely open the door for group legal action if Tories try to pursue parents for keeping their kids safe from unsafe school environment

The Tories are threatening parents with a £120 fine if they keep their children home out of fear for their safety while the coronavirus is still a threat.

But Boris Johnson’s decision to excuse Dominic Cummings’s complete disregard for the law in driving to Durham – and at least once, probably twice, to Barnard Castle – during lockdown by claiming Cummings only did what any responsible parent would do in the circumstances means that any pursuit of parents, for doing what they think the circumstances require, is intrinsically unjust and unsafe.

Parents have more than justifiable cause for concern:

Any parents penalised for keeping their children home would surely have a clear basis for a class-action style legal case against the government for acting against them and against the Cummings precedent – and Johnson would be committing political self-immolation if he fought it.

Do what you think is right for your child and your family. What ‘any responsible parent would’.

The SKWAWKBOX is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. There are still hundreds of thousands of people on self imposed lockdown thanks mainly to government and media terrifying them. This will result in ongoing mental health problems for those people who will present with anxiety, depression, agrophobia and general bad health. There will also be a marked increase in home schooling. All of these outcomes are bad for society. Children need to return to school, if it means penalising over protective parents, so be it.

    1. Not forgetting of course the Tsunami of avoidance deaths because of insane policy of lockdown. Moreover, the policy of closing schools is one more example of this. Number of school pupils England and Wales about 8,000,000 : no of Covid 19 fatalities 15.

      Scots cancer deaths soar as 900 patients die at home during lockdown.

      Lockdown has been linked to an increase of almost 900 cancer patients dying at home, official figures reveal.

      The National Records of Scotland data shows an extra 873 fatalities at home between March 16 and June 29 compared to the five-year average over the same period.

      Meanwhile, there were 575 fewer cancer deaths than normal in hospitals – at a time when wards were being emptied and admissions severely restricted.

      Politicians and campaigners have questioned whether terminally-ill patients received sufficient care and are demanding that cancer services are restored

      Coronavirus could cause 35,000 extra UK cancer deaths, experts warn

      Prof Mark Lawler, Scientific Lead of DATA-CAN, told BBC Panorama: “Initial data that we got was very worrying to us.
      Coronavirus ‘wreaks havoc’ on cancer services
      ‘More than two million in UK wait for cancer care’
      ‘Thousands missing out on cancer diagnosis’

      Cancer referrals down by 45%

      1. Correction: the Tsunami of potential deaths because of the insane policy of lockdown..

      2. Can you not see that the problem is neo-liberal austerity policies, rather than some conspiracy to pretend that there is a pandemic?
        Are you so wedded to preserving the capitalist status quo that you refuse to understand that the virus has exposed the weaknesses in a system which has been starved of resources, bled for profits and designed to be sold to foreign capitalists?

    2. Libertarian then…up to a point. Nobody should he forced into quarantine but it is fair enough to criminalise parents for protecting their kids from a pandemic which the world fears but you (and your mates) know, in your hearts is a fraud.
      Oh and Boris, Donald and fascists everywhere agree with you.

      1. Who Cui Bono from the ” pandemic ” and then you will be on the road to enlightenment my dear chap.

      2. “Who Cui Bono” – seriously?
        Translation: Who who gains?
        You and lundiel with her “agrophobia” are both out of your depth.

    3. lundiel: “This will result in ongoing mental health problems for those people who will present with anxiety, depression, agrophobia and general bad health. There will also be a marked increase in home schooling.”

      botbubba: “No teachers have caught coronavirus from pupils anywhere in the world, claims SAGE adviser.”

      1. How can I link to a peer reviewed paper for something that is yet to happen? I’m not talking about a scientific experiment here. There are reams of evidence pointing to the effects of fear, the causes of agrophobia and difficulties encountered when trying to reintegrate sufferers into society along with mental health problems caused by isolation. There is none as far as I’m aware that is directly a consequence of an alleged pandemic.
        Show me a peer reviewed paper that says you aren’t totally prejudiced and one sided in your comments.
        I have some knowledge of what I say. I used to manage a centre that helped get people with disabilities back into work so I’m well aware of the problems associated with isolation.

      2. “How can I…” Exactly. My comment was merely to point out to you and the other idiot the ridiculously, blatantly spurious nature of your demands for ‘evidence’ from everyone who disagrees with you.
        You say you “managed” a centre – that suggests your experience was not of a clinical nature so you’ll forgive me if I don’t accept your word as conclusive.

      3. Sorry the study below was of people who had suffered from coronavirus not people who suffered through fear of it.

  2. No teachers have caught coronavirus from pupils anywhere in the world, claims SAGE adviser who suggests it was a mistake to shut schools
    Professor Mark Woolhouse said there is no proof of pupil to teacher spread
    He said children are ‘minimally involved’ in the spread of coronavirus globally
    Official statistics show 15 under-20s have died of Covid-19 in England and Wales

    There is no proof Covid-19 has been transmitted from a pupil to a teacher in school anywhere in the world, a scientist advising the Government has claimed.

    Professor Woolhouse, who sits on a sub-group of SAGE, told The Times it is ‘extremely difficult’ to find any instances of children spreading the virus to adults in schools, with no certain cases.

    Data shows children have an almost non-existent chance of dying of Covid-19 and scientific evidence,

    Office for National Statistics data shows that, in England and Wales, 15 people under the age of 20 have died of Covid-19 during the entire outbreak up to July 10.

    Professor Edmunds, who is a member of SAGE, the group of scientists advising the government, today told members of the Lords: ‘It is unusual that children don’t seem to play much of a role in transmission because for most respiratory viruses and bacteria they play a central role, but in this they don’t seem to.

    School children in England Wales about 8,000,000.0 : Covid 19 fatalities up to July 10th 15.0

    No of school children to fatalities ratio = 0.0001875%

    Just to give it some perspective.

    1. using your own statistic of >>No of school children to fatalities ratio = 0.0001875%

      So kids die then? YES so you’re asking that parents somewhere play russian roulette that eventually their kids will DIE!!! Can you stupid defenders of the indefensible finally just admit kids will DIE under your patient stupidity. That if there kept home won’t yes?

      Your asking people to sacrifice their kids lives for no good reason just because you want it back te way it was.Or your a boss and want to exploit people for money or whatever BS reasons you have basically you don’t care as long as you’re not the one dying that’s someone else…

      Silly me I forgot were in the midst of a global pandemic and defenders of the stupid keep up this BS of well it’s only a few must die. Because we don’t want to care well admit you don’t care shoot yourself and your kids becase hay stay ahead of the cue and shut the hell up about us killing our kids because you want..

      1. Hmm, another mixture of myth, falsehood, a sprinkling of truth with a hefty dose of emotion. If you have any factual scientifically peer reviewed papers which can contradict what Professor Mark Woodhouse has stated, can you produce it. Ranting doesn’t count.

      2. They already knocked nearly five and a half deaths off from 46,706 to 41,356. How? Oh something about it needed recorded correctly. Really or could it be it was getting embarrassing. Thing is still going up albeit slowly. Its not over yet

    2. Do you have an axe to grind? May be you aren’t aware, but readers here do not find the BBC and Daily Mail the most persuasive of sources.

      I note you have not addressed the risk of kids passing it onto their more vulnerable parents.

      1. There is no scientifically peer reviewed paper in the world which can prove categorically that pupils transmit Covid-19 to teachers or adults.

      2. Look at who is making the statement Professor Mark Woodhouse, epidemiologist offical government adviser to SAGE plus the other medical doctor’s.

      3. brianbotou 26/08/2020 at 3:27 pm
        Look at who is making the statement

        Why, when according to you unless he was quoting directly from a peer reviewed paper anything he has to say was bollocks…

  3. I doubt very much if there will be fines initially at least, and as the R number continues to rise, possibly pushed further by this move (20 odd teachers and several children in one Dundee school infected already) the number of parents voting with there feet on the matter may well increase exponentially.

    1. I’m sure they will. Especially when false positives due to winter colds and flu affect the numbers. Thankfully death rates are very low at present and not everyone’s lost their sanity.

      1. lundiel: “Especially when false positives due to winter colds and flu affect the numbers.”

      2. lundiel – As the article you reference was published before the following I don’t think it refers to the tests currently being rolled out. If you’re really interested follow the link and read the full press release, it is quite informative (you can find other sources on Google if you want to verify the info)

        Two new tests – both able to detect the virus in just 90 minutes – will be made available to NHS hospitals, care homes and labs. The 2 tests will be able to detect both COVID-19 and other winter viruses such as flu and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). The tests do not require a trained health professional to operate them, meaning they can be rolled out in more non-clinical settings.

        The Rapid LamPORE test is claimed to have the same high levels of accuracy as the PCR Swab Test

        Whilst the DnaNudge test is an adaptation of an existing on-the-spot genetic testing service that provides product recommendations suited to your DNA to promote a healthy lifestyle.
        DnaNudge’s new RNA COVID-19 tests are based on DnaNudge DNA testing innovation delivering processing outside of a laboratory environment, using DnaNudge’s patented and miniaturised ‘NudgeBox’ analyser, which can be used anywhere.

  4. ” PEER REVIEWED PAPER PLEASE “, you are having a laugh since when have you produced any.

    1. brianbotou – Given your monotonous repetitive insistence that everyone else provide this evidence then what makes you exempt. You could have been a shining example to us all by posting a link to the peer reviewed papers that Woodhouse was relying on to support his statement.

      1. Steve H, it seems you are not acquainted with English criminal law so let me enlighten you. When some one, organisation is accused of having done something wrong or in error, the onus is on the accuser to provide the evidence ( that’s you by the way).

        Now, you disputed the statement from Professor Woodhouse, an epidemiologist, a official adviser to SAGE who stated that there is no evidence that pupils transmit COVID 19 to teachers or adults.

        Despite asking you more times than Jeremy Paxman asked Michael Howard, you still have not produced a single scientifically peer reviewed paper which contradicts the government SAGE epidemiologist.


      2. I will say to you what I said to your bosom buddy. “ your having a laugh since when have you produced any. “

  5. “… it seems you are not acquainted with English criminal law so let me enlighten you.”
    Fake teacher, fake statistician, fake scientist and now fake lawyer – is there no beginning to your talents?

  6. David Mc Niven, always a sign of flattery when you have to pinch other people’s phrases but also sign of an inability to think for one’s self. Sums you up.

    1. botbot, you have evidence of my plagiarising “other people’s phrases” of course?
      If you can point to the particular one of your brilliant bons mots your copyright in which I’ve infringed I’ll be distraught, obviously.

      1. Oh – and by way of a ps… you’re the queen of uncredited copy-paste on this blog, sucker.

      2. pps… I see it took you THREE tries to respond to my previous comment.
        Please try to be succinct this time. I’m a busy man.

  7. Steve H. 6.48 pm

    “ The Rapid LamPORE test is claimed to have the same high levels of accuracy as the PCR Swab Test”

    Fei Zhou and colleagues1 estimated mean duration of viral shedding by assessing the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral RNA in patient samples. Assessing potential infectivity is a labour-intensive process, but the presence of nucleic acid alone cannot be used to define viral shedding or infection potential, as the authors state is possible within their methods.
    For many viral diseases (SARS-CoV, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, influenza virus, Ebola virus, and Zika virus) it is well known that viral RNA can be detected long after the disappearance of infectious virus.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 With measles virus, viral RNA can still be detected 6–8 weeks after the clearance of infectious virus.8 The immune system can neutralise viruses by lysing their envelope or aggregating virus particles; these processes prevent subsequent infection but do not eliminate nucleic acid, which degrades slowly over time.

    We were surprised to note the absence of viral load data in this study.1 Although the use of sensitive PCR methods offers value from a diagnostic viewpoint, caution is required when applying such data to assess the duration of viral shedding and infection potential because PCR does not distinguish between infectious virus and non-infectious nucleic acid.

    the intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.


    Now the question is: What is required first for virus isolation/proof? We need to know where the RNA for which the PCR tests are calibrated comes from.

    PCR is extremely sensitive, which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of DNA or RNA — but it cannot determine where these particles came from. That has to be determined beforehand.

    And because the PCR tests are calibrated for gene sequences (in this case RNA sequences because SARS-CoV-2 is believed to be a RNA virus), we have to know that these gene snippets are part of the looked-for virus. And to know that, correct isolation and purification of the presumed virus has to be executed.

    Study 1: Leo L. M. Poon; Malik Peiris. “Emergence of a novel human coronavirus threatening human health” Nature Medicine, March 2020
    Replying Author: Malik Peiris
    Date: May 12, 2020
    Answer: “The image is the virus budding from an infected cell. It is not purified virus.”

    Study 2: Myung-Guk Han et al. “Identification of Coronavirus Isolated from a Patient in Korea with COVID-19”, Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives, February 2020
    Replying Author: Myung-Guk Han
    Date: May 6, 2020
    Answer: “We could not estimate the degree of purification because we do not purify and concentrate the virus cultured in cells.”

    Study 3: Wan Beom Park et al. “Virus Isolation from the First Patient with SARS-CoV-2 in Korea”, Journal of Korean Medical Science, February 24, 2020
    Replying Author: Wan Beom Park
    Date: March 19, 2020
    Answer: “We did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification.”

    Study 4: Na Zhu et al., “A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China”, 2019, New England Journal of Medicine, February 20, 2020
    Replying Author: Wenjie Tan
    Date: March 18, 2020
    Answer: “[We show] an image of sedimented virus particles, not purified ones.”

    Dr Charles Calisher, who is a seasoned virologist whether he knows one single paper in which SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated and finally really purified. His answer:

    I know of no such a publication. I have kept an eye out for one.”[4

    Wang Chen, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences that the PCR tests are “only 30 to 50 percent accurate.

  8. So now you’re not just a CV19 denier – now you deny the existence of ALL viruses I suppose, like one of the quoted sources in off guardian? You and your co-dreamers jump on highly-technical publications and jump to conclusions with zero knowledge of the field.
    As well as arguing that the world should wait for complete understanding of CV19 before acting – after 8 months and 830,000 deaths.
    You pick up on every scientific unknown and claim every expressed doubt or absence of evidence is evidence for your theory, instead of what it is – the normal process of building understanding of something novel.
    Just because the government’s response is idiotic doesn’t mean yours isn’t.

  9. David Mc Niven, 27.08.2020 12.34 pm “ I am a busy man” living in a fantasy world of make believe of soldiers and boats plus the “ pandemic “. Evidently, you are unable to respond with any evidence to support your claims, which I have. All you ever appear to do is invent new stories and pump out the usual pish about the “ pandemic “. You really are some kind of cretin.

  10. David Mc Niven, aka the weekend soldier, round the world sailor with more fairy tales than Hans Christian Anderson. It appears you have been playing with your soldiers to long to distinguish fact from fantasy. Get into the real world more instead of regurgitating shite.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: