The Guardian view on the Cummings crisis: a social contract ripped up
A social contract, John Locke wrote in his Two Treatises of Government, is generally entered into by citizens on the understanding that “uniting into commonwealths” is the best way to preserve prosperity, lives and liberty. It is a compact which fails the moment executive power overreaches itself, and tramples basic freedoms.
Two months ago, we entered into a very special form of this contract with the present government. Confronted with an epidemic that threatened to ravage the population if it continued unchecked, Britons effectively signed their freedoms away: they forwent their right to leave home, visit their mum, see newborn grandchildren and even, heartbreakingly, attend the funerals of loved ones. An emergency pact was made between the government and the people. Striking it required a level of trust in the powerful that is highly unusual in the modern era.
This trust is what Dominic Cummings has betrayed. By helping to define the new rules for others and then operating according to his own very different set, Mr Cummings has acted against the interest of the common good. The fury at his lockdown-defying trip to Durham in March is not, as some commentators try to maintain, down to it becoming another front in the post-Brexit culture wars. Those demanding he step down are not merely a coalition of “campaigning newspapers”, embittered remainers and politicised bishops. The prime minister’s chief aide has outraged wider public sentiment at a time of acute hardship and stress. A YouGov poll on Tuesday indicated that a huge majority in the country think Mr Cummings should leave his role as chief adviser to the prime minister.
Mr Cummings, as he likes to make sure we know, is no fool. Monday afternoon’s extraordinary press conference was a belated recognition that his flouting of lockdown rules had cut through far beyond the Westminster bubble. The theatre of the rose garden was staged to allow him to explain himself to the public. His account raised numerous further questions: for example, why did Mr Cummings and his wife not explore other childcare options before ignoring the “stay at home” message he had devised. But perhaps most damningly, in relation to his Easter Sunday drive to Barnard Castle, it was risibly implausible.
This matters. Mr Cummings claimed that, in driving his wife and small child 30 miles to a well-known tourist spot during lockdown, he was testing his eyesight. This has become an internet meme and something of a national joke. In normal times that response might just be written off as a personal humiliation. But this shambolic episode comes as Britain is about to embark on the most delicate phase of the Covid-19 ordeal. Next week, in some form, a test and trace system is due to begin, allowing new cases of infection to be identified and acted on once lockdown is lifted. Rigorous selfdiscipline will be required from members of the public who are contacted and instructed to self-isolate as others enjoy new freedoms. If Mr Cummings pays no price for ignoring this kind of instruction, the citing of “Barnard Castle” will be available as a shorthand justification for others to do as they see fit.
The government’s serious mistakes in this crisis, contributing to the highest death toll in Europe, have already imperilled public trust in its stewardship. A new study at the weekend confirmed a truth already settled in the public mind – that unnecessary delay in locking down cost lives. People believe, with good reason, that the safety of residents in care homes was culpably neglected. The move from “stay at home” to “stay alert” has been muddled and confusing. The unique social contract agreed in March must hold if the country is to stick together in the months to come, but it currently feels fragile. The failure to remove Mr Cummings risks undermining it still further.