At the end of March, during the peak of the pandemic - when we were all longing to be near our loved ones but stuck to strict lockdown rules to ‘Stay Home’ - the prime minister’s chief advisor Dominic Cummings was driving half-way up the country to be near family.
When his secret leaked over the weekend, he explained that he had to travel the 240 miles from London to Durham in case he and his wife, Mary Wakefield – who had coronavirus symptoms - fell ill and needed someone to care for their four-year-old son.
Now, it appears that the specific section of the coronavirus regulations that he is relying on to excuse his lockdown-breaking behaviour is the part which lists the exemptions of why you can leave your home. A section which I campaigned for, to protect victims of abuse during this time.
In early April, during the height of the lockdown restrictions, campaigners and politicians like me were growing more and more concerned with how the strength of the government’s ‘Stay Home’ message may be affecting victims of abuse. We were worried that it would be used by perpetrators to keep people imprisoned, and that those needing to flee thought refuges and support services weren’t available and they would get in trouble for leaving their homes.
The legislation was drawn up quickly. It could not list all of the reasons why someone might feel at risk of harm, as might normally be the case. However, even if it had been exhaustive and listed all of the reasons, such as domestic abuse, child abuse, sexual violence, coercive control, threats to kill - threats of any kind for that matter - it would never have listed inability to get local childcare if you thought you had the virus. Never.
The section states that you can leave home and travel ‘to avoid injury or illness or to escape a risk of harm.’ Cummings perceived that it would be a harm to his child if he and his wife were to get ill if they didn’t have anyone nearby.
The fact that he is using a part of the regulation which his administration had done very little to publicise for those who really needed it, is not just cynical, it is completely wrong
But, if every parent who got sick with coronavirus (or sick at all) during this crisis had leaned on this regulation, thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people would have fled their homes to be with their families. This little line in the regulation was put there to ensure that if people who needed to flee their home because they were suffering violence and abuse, then they would know they weren’t in breach of the law.
In the first weeks of April I went on TV, radio and various podcasts to try to get that message out. The domestic and sexual violence sector launched public campaigns. Here in Birmingham we worked with police, our mayor and local providers to draw up promotional materials to be put in local supermarkets, banks and pharmacies, to tell people that they could flee if they needed to.
The same was done across the country by various police forces and local government; we could see from falling police call outs that those who really needed to know about this vital exemption to the law didn’t know about it. For these people, the ‘Stay Home’ message was causing harm and injury.
But the government were slow to get the message out. Eventually, the collective voices of domestic abuse campaigners meant that, on the same weekend Dominic Cummings was walking amongst the bluebells in Durham, the Home Secretary finally took to the podium at Downing Street to launch a national campaign about how victims of domestic abuse could leave their homes for safety. This happened because of our campaigning.
Never once did I or anyone else who was part of the push to get the message out think it would accidentally be interpreted as meaning you could drive hundreds of miles if you can’t find childcare locally. It never crossed my mind, and I’ve not seen any evidence that that is how it was received by anyone else.
Dominic Cummings’ sin could be understandable – if, that is, you believe the excuses he’s given. But the fact that he is using a part of the regulation which, when he travelled to Durham, his administration had done very little to publicise for those who really needed it, is not just cynical, it is completely wrong. The government he is in charge of should have done more than they did, and sooner. Now Boris Johnson needs to put the public health message before protecting his friends.
Jess Phillips is Labour MP for Birmingham Yardley
READ MORE: What Is Gaslighting? And What Has It Got To Do With Dominic Cummings?
READ MORE: Who Is Mary Wakefield? Dominic Cummings' Wife And The Most Googled Woman In Britain