YESTERDAY we asked for your thoughts on whether Shipley MP Philip Davies was right to defy the Prime Minister and vote against his own Government's move to bring the Rule of Six into the legal Coronavirus regulations.

Mr Davies was one of 12 Conservatives who rebelled against the Government to oppose the rule, limiting the number of people from different household who can meet up to six.

In the T&A comments section, on Facebook and on Twitter, you have been having your say on whether Mr Davies was right to oppose the Rule of Six.

On Facebook, the majority said he was wrong in his actions.

Chris Holland said: "We should follow Scotland and exclude young children from the rule of six. Otherwise the restriction makes sense."

Graham Smeaton added: "35% of infections picked up through school vs 4% through hospitality...why isn't Boris Johnson releasing the science behind his Rule of Six OR 10pm pub closing times?"

Craig Hamilton and David Wilford pointed out no alternative solution has been offered by the Shipley MP, while Heather Fawcett said the rest of the country was "lucky to have rule of six", as local restrictions in Bradford mean households can not mix in people's homes.

Meanwhile, Denise Boocock Virr backed Mr Davies, and said: "Yes defo need more MPs to stand up now/ although it’s sad people have died.

"We have to try get back to some normality for the sake of our children and for the ones who cannot get treatment etc for other diseases and for our mental health."

James Walker added: "Yes definitely, Covid is not going anywhere anytime soon we need to stop these stupid restrictions and shield the elderly and vulnerable Sweden got it right it’s time we followed suit."

Andy Holdsworth said: "Yes of course he was [right to oppose Rule of Six]."

In the comments section of our website, opinion was divided.

Supporting Mr Davies, user Whatitis said: "We should be allowed to get on with our regular lives, it is quite ridiculous!

"Like most I support this Government but I cannot understand, other than that they are scared of the backlash of such a massive turnaround, why they don't do the right thing and stop all restrictions but try and prevent the vulnerable. That will save lives, help the economy and jobs and allow people to enjoy their lives again.

"There of course will be deaths but that is inevitable because there is a virus that can kill but it is never going away and will always kill, just like flu but presumably not as bad as that. Lockdowns and all this messing about is simply disproportionately affecting things that shouldn't be, including the economy.

"Doing the opposite of what they are doing could stand this country in a much better position than others economically etc. and they just need to have the strength to do it."

However other users questioned why Mr Davies would oppose it.

Batchainpuller asked: "Why should we all be dictated to by those whose priority is drinking and partying the night away rather than stopping the spread of covid-19?"

City Boy 5705 added: "It does feel like people expect us to sacrifice our elderly and those battling cancer so students can go out and get legless."

In the Twittersphere, again opinion was split.

Criticising Mr Davies, Joolz Denby said: "Davies yet again proving his desire for attention is way more important to him than the health and safety of his constituents.

"The ‘restrictions’ are an attempt to save people from illness and death and save the NHS, it’s not personal or out to spoil your fun."

On the other hand, Caroline Hills said: "Well done Philip Davies with this vote. I wish other MPs would have the sense to do the same."

And Freeezo added: "I don't get it... Philip Davies puts his head above the parapet for the benefit of the people, against the wishes of his own party and he still gets criticised.

"Folk bleating about how the restrictions are bad for mental health etc. He's arguing ON YOUR BEHALF."