So ... Michael Howard has sacked Boris Johnson because he had an affair. Or rather - not because he had an affair. But because he was not honest about it when challenged. So, he has been sacked for not telling the truth. Now, I wonder if every Tory minister was sacked for not telling the truth, would there be anyone left?

I think the Tory Party has gone mad.

I heard this on the radio this morning SF. I don't know the story at all but just this week in the paper Michael Howard was at some award ceremony singing Boris's praises.

Personally I think he's much better off out of the Tory party - he can speak his mind now!

I think Michael Howard is overreacting and setting daft precedents. For starters, does Boris owe anyone (other than his wife) an explanation of his private life? I'm not sure that it can be said that he has lied, simply that he does not feel bound to bring the truth to people it does not concern. In any case, Michael Howard seemed to find the whole subject amusing enough when he publicly joked about it during a speech a few days ago.

If Boris has indeed done what is alleged then I'm not impressed. But I was far less impressed by his continuing to allow the racist junkie Taki to continue his nasty column in the spectator, unreprimanded for frequent racist rubbish -something which seemed to be overlooked. And that pales into insignficance over the excesses of duplicity shown by the labour front bench over iraq. That's the sort of stuff which ought to raze political scalps, not shagging in the press office.

I actually agree with Howards decision.

I am looking at this from the point of view of a potential future PM. He is looking at his oppo, Blair and he sees that Blair tells geet huge porkies. He sees the GBP becoming disallusioned with the continual lies and cover ups perpetrated by the Labour government.

So he is presented with a situation, Boris. He really has no other choice to sack him. He has made it quite clear that he is not sacking him because 'of' the affair - no, because of his dishonesty. And a future PM cannot be seen to be permissive of dishonesty.

I personally think he has made a great 'politically tactical' call. However, I love that loon Boris Johnson!

I happen to agree with Flip on this one. She said everything I would say about it, so I won't repeat it . :)

I regret Boris going. If they read back in the press when he became an MP there were huge hints of his dalliances. He is apparently fully expected to be involved with his chidren including school run, on that Mrs J will apparently not compromise. I would be suprised if his wife left him. I don't feel he should be sacked for not telling Howard whats what. I would still be miffed at Howard over the Spectator rebuke.
Thats my almost vote for the Tories gone again.
Boris is as honest in his politics as the next MP. He has been on a huge learning curve as an MP. I make an effort to read what he writes and frankly have liked him from day one.

he is not sacking him because 'of' the affair - no, because of his dishonesty. And a future PM cannot be seen to be permissive of dishonesty.


But that is just an illusion surely - I mean that dishonesty can't be permitted. Are the Tory faithful really taken in by it - or is it that they simply want to let themselves be taken in by it?

Also, I wonder if it's being dishonest that's the real issue - I get the feeling that dishonest is OK, it's being found out that's the problem!

Also, I wonder if it's being dishonest that's the real issue - I get the feeling that dishonest is OK, it's being found out that's the problem!
I think this is probably true.

I really dont' see why Boris should apologise to anyone except his wife and family. What Michael Slimeball Howard thinks he is gaining with this pathetic show of sacking someone for having an affair is beyond me. Oh and btw - wasn't the fragrant Mrs H married when Mr H met her?

The likes of Boris were saving the Tory party from totally mediocrity without him they are pale and lacklustre - good - so maybe Howard has done the Labour Party a favour!

If Howard dismisses everyone who lies in his party he will find himself in very deep water!

What I wonder is how Boris Johnson - with his Spectator editors job, his role in the Tory Party, his role as Shadow Arts Minister, and his other media commitments - was able to fulfil his duty to his constituents as an MP??!

The man's a buffoon. He's great entertainment value, but has no credibility as a serious politician. I don't think that Howard's just sacked him for this latest indiscretion - I think he was sacked because of all the accumulated bloopers he's committed, particularly the Liverpool article. He should back to where he belongs on HIGNFY.

The man's a buffoon. He's great entertainment value

He is both of these things Mik! But I also believe he has a great intellect which is hidden by his disarmingly charming and affable nature.

Whereas Mr Howard has none of the above!

I agree that Boris Johnson's private life should be relevant at all to his career. I also agree that sacking any politician him on the basis of dishonesty is hypocritical.

Reading between the lines, I also agree that Boris Johnson probably wasn't actually sacked for either his infidelity or the fact that he lied about it. He was sacked because his infidelity had made the front pages, proof of his infidelity could have been easily forthcoming, but he still lied about it, despite the fact that it could have been proved that he was doing so.

Or to put it another way, he was sacked because his dishonesty wasn't clever enough.

So, on that basis I agree with Flip. Michael Howard cannot be seen to be supporting blatent dishonesty. It makes no difference that half his party are probably dishonest on a regular basis - no-one knows of their dishonesty and their dishonesty might be hard to prove even if someone did know about it. But for Michael Howard to stand by someone who has been undoubtedly dishonest would make it appear that he happy to tolerate a lack of personal integrity within his party.

Of course, its all horribly hypocritical. But, thats politics!

Well said Karen - I suspect you are right. I know so little about the case - I just am putting myself, very grandly into Michael Howard's shoes, with the Rider that I 'have got to do better and be seen to do better than the lying toerag in power now'.

And Dol - I could not agree more about Boris. I just cannot think of him, however, having an affair - he looks like a character Matt Lucas would conjour up on Little Britain.!!

And Dol - I could not agree more about Boris. I just cannot think of him, however, having an affair - he looks like a character Matt Lucas would conjour up on Little Britain.!!
lol Flip! Yes if Boris didn't exist you'd have to invent him! And he does bear stunning resemblance to a bewigged Matt Lucas!!

As soon as saw this thread my answer was to be, he was sacked for being caught out. But its been said here more eloquently than I could have put it.

I like Bonkin' Boris, loved him on 'Have I got news for you'

They are all a bit bloomin bonkers tho arn't they...thats where the confusion comes in Bonkers....Bonkin...

:huh:

Are you thinking what I'm thinking??!! :laugh:

Are you thinking what I'm thinking??!! :laugh:

Hmmmmm, it depends if you are thinking about having a tuna fish sarnie for lunch :unsure:

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_4_125.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxdm22755GB) http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_5_4.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxdm22755GB) Sorry ......What do you mean GONE?