Tag Archives: Jonathan Sumption

COVID Con-Sumption

Jonathan Sumption’s life is an extraordinary litany of high achievement; Eton, Magdalen, and then a stellar legal career. He has devoted his life to a belief that the Judiciary is one of the essential three pillars (along with the executive and the legislature) of a stable and equitable society.

He got a first in History, which is creditable, but this hardly seems to qualify him for opining widely on epidemiology, which he has chosen to do frequently recently. In October, he argued for the approach set out in the Great Barrington Declaration, which has promoted an entirely hypothetical reliance on ‘herd immunity’. He cites as support for his argument that 35,000 ‘experts’ signed the declaration as somehow lending it credibility.

These experts included “Mr Banana Rama”, “Dr Johnny Fartpants”, “Dr Person Fakename, “Professor Notaf Uckingclue”, and “Prof Cominic Dummings”, along with numerous homeopaths, physiotherapists, massage therapists, and a performer of Mongolian overtone singing. Perhaps he thought that Professor Uckingclue was better qualified than the Chief Medical Officer for England, Chris Whitty.

However, the point of this entry is to note that having said that he knew no-one who intended to follow the Governments edicts (and he presumably did not intend to do so himself) and posed the question, “why on earth should they?”. This is an extraordinary statement from a ex Supreme Court member. The answer is surely that unless and until Statutory Instrument 350/2020 is struck down by that same court he was a member of as ultra vires (which he claims) it is the law.

Picking and choosing which laws one follows on the basis of whether you agree with them or not is a formula for anarchy. Such folk can be seen any day on motorways as they overtake at 100mph in their BMW 750is. Let’s hope that Sumption does not come into contact with a mugger who doesn’t agree with restrictions on violent robbery.

But where are the howls of establishment indignation on this incitement to break the law? Leftie vultures sought to fry Dominic Cumins for ignoring the rules, but when this libertarian geriatric advocates exactly that, not a squeak.