[chimprich]

I think we can fairly easily dismiss Cummings' views on anything. He was of the opinion that the best thing for the UK economy was Brexit, and that the the best team to carry out that out was to be headed by Boris Johnson.

He changed his mind on Johnson, but he seems to be of the view that nothing works and that there is nothing for it but to burn everything down and start again according to the Dominic Cummings vision.

[9JollyOtter]

> He was of the opinion that the best thing for the UK economy was Brexit, and that the the best team to carry out that out was to be headed by Boris Johnson.

Not exactly. I think you need to listen to the interviews.

Dominic Cummins has solid rationale for why he believes what he believes. I would need to listen to them again to remember what he said, but what you are describing was too simplistic.

Also his opinions on Brexit have nothing to do with some of the things he said about how COVID was handled.

> He changed his mind on Johnson, but he seems to be of the view that nothing works and that there is nothing for it but to burn everything down and start again according to the Dominic Cummings vision.

I don't remember him saying that exactly.

[chimprich]

> That has never been his opinion. There are many interviews with him on YouTube and I suggest you listen to them.

I've viewed and read an interminable number of interviews with Cummings.

He decided that a) Brexit was a good idea (we can see how that turned out), b) he decided to help get a Johnson government elected, and c) joined his administration as de facto chief of staff and chief advisor. If that's not a tacit approval of Johnson and his government, then what is? Of course, he backtracked later when it was a disaster.

[9JollyOtter]

> I've viewed and read an interminable number of interviews with Cummings.

The statements you have made don't really line up with the interviews I've listened to.

The context around the events and what his involvement was and was not, is important.

You are leaving out key information that he mentioned in many interview appearances.

> He decided that a) Brexit was a good idea (we can see how that turned out)

Without re-litigating everything. It may have been different if the politicians and those that worked for them hadn't frustrated the process. I was genuinely disgusted by the attitudes that many of the politicians had after the Leave won. That was my interpretation of what happened. Your obviously differs.

It also says nothing about the validity of his other statements, which is what I was referring to.

> b) he decided to help get a Johnson government elected

Yes, but the way you are talking about it is omitting events both before and after the 2019 General Election.

Theresa May had been ousted by the Conservative Leadership. Earlier she ran an awful election campaign, squandered a huge lead in the polls and had to form a coalition Government with the DUP to maintain a majority.

Cummins said he was contacted by Johnson because Johnson had a minority government and couldn't call a re-election. His first job was to get Johnson out of that Quagmire, then prepare for re-election. He decided to help Johnson under certain guarantees / conditions. Which tells me that he didn't actually trust Johnson.

He claims to have been gradually forced out by Carrie Johnson and his team shortly after the election.

If you are being hampered by the Prime Minster's wife on the agenda that you are supposed to implement. It is likely to fail.

I've actually experienced something similar in my career where I was being blocked (for political reasons) by another team. It makes getting anything done impossible.

So there is no reason to believe he is lying, back tracking or retconning events.

This is because his statements about Carrie Johnson's involvement line up with other accounts from other people that I've heard during the time period shortly after his departure.

> c) joined his administration as de facto chief of staff and chief advisor. If that's not a tacit approval of Johnson and his government, then what is? Of course, he backtracked later when it was a disaster.

It not about it being an approval or disapproval of his government. Often you must work with people that you would rather not to, to achieve things.

His feelings about the Johnson government doesn't change his the validity of his statements about how Whitehall operate while he was present.

His comments about ossified organisations lines up with my past experience of working in both ossified Public and Private orgs.

His account of the events around COVID match up with the timeline of events, and I re-watched old interviews of him and he hasn't backtracked at all or changed his story around what happened. He has mentioned things he couldn't mention at the time e.g. his residence was broken into and he was advised not to mention this at the time.

I have no reason to not believe him, since his statements match up with both what I have experienced and a known timeline of events.

I think your dislike of Cummins and his involvement with Vote Leave. As a result is clouding your judgement on the validity of his statements about how Boris Johnson behaved and how Whitehall operates.

Generally there is a lot of stuff in his interviews that I've seen that quite honestly changed my opinion of him (which was somewhat negative). I believe he is telling the truth.

[solumunus]

> It may have been different if…

Genuinely, how? Give me the best case scenario.

[9JollyOtter]

Any answer I give would be found unsatisfactory so there is little point in bothering.

I've already stated my impression of what happened in Parliament leading during that time period, it was obvious that people were being obstructionist and that alone doomed any hope of a positive outcome.

[solumunus]

That’s not true, I’m genuinely interested in hearing the argument. I don’t understand how it could have caused any improvement.

[mytailorisrich]

> He was of the opinion that the best thing for the UK economy was Brexit

I don't want to start another Brexit debate or even take position on it. However I'd like to point out that the key with Brexit is the plan on what to do afterwards and that is what has been completely lacking.

Whatever one's opinion of Cummings, he did put forward a plan and that plan was never attempted (probably too bold, shall we say, for politicians to touch it). I am not commenting on whether that would have worked or not, but at least he put forward a plan and strategy. On the other hand, Bojo's "plan" for Brexit seemed to have been limited to becoming PM...

[iamflimflam1]

I would say “could not possibly be implemented” rather than “bold”.

Anyone can propose a brave or bold course of action. It’s very rare these people have any idea how to actually execute their plans.

[9JollyOtter]

> It’s very rare these people have any idea how to actually execute their plans.

Regarding Cummins, Why exactly? Dominic Cummins is articulate, seems to be quite intelligent and seems to be very fact/data orientated. I've also heard him describe how he would action particular policy.

Therefore I find it hard to believe he had didn't have any idea on how to execute his plans.

[iamflimflam1]

You are Dominic Cummins and I claim my 5 pounds :)

[9JollyOtter]

It seems when some people don't have an answer they prefer to deflect with a joke.

[mytailorisrich]

I think one issue we are having is that more and more things are said to be impossible to implement to the point that nothing happens... There is a lack of ambition, boldness, and leadership.

[iamflimflam1]

I don’t know.

Increasingly I see people offering simplistic solutions that don’t even pass basic smell tests.

And then when you point out the obvious flaws the response is that you just have to be brave or take a risk.

But I do agree - we seem to be in a world full of intractable problems and doing something may be better than nothing.

[mytailorisrich]

Yes there are simplistic solutions but, on the other hand, more often that not I think that claiming that issues are extremely complex is a way of avoiding doing anything for whatever reasons. So, it depends.

I think that the UK won't solve its issues until it gets a PM with a bold plan and great leadership, whatever side they may come from.