Completely missing the point that has been pointed out several times.To me the saddest aspect is this morbid, voyeuristic, pseudo-moralistic attention that this kind of things seems to arouse in England. If he is a shitty health minister he should go, of course. But not because of this. Who knows what his family life, and that of his "co-respondent" are like? Maybe there are tacit understandings, maybe not, but what business is it of "The Sun" and of its drooling, libidinous readership? Love affairs happen, thank goodness, and often when you least expect it. It is not like the Profumo thing, where national security was involved. This is just gratuitous looking through keyholes. Think of the effect of this kind of thing on their children!
No 10: "The Prime Minister has accepted the Health Secretary's apology and considers the matter closed".
They are all absolute scum.
Hancock & Johnson take the 'o' out of 'country'...This is what you get when a country elects a charlatan like Johnson as PM.
We are ruled by cheating, lying, corrupt scum.
The Good Law ProjectAnything is possible in Boris' government. Whilst I am not seeking to defend Hancock, did he actually break any of the guidelines given all this supposedly happened in May?
This is a story of massive corruption, the giving away of taxpayer money by the billion, complete hypocrisy, deception and lies.To me the saddest aspect is this morbid, voyeuristic, pseudo-moralistic attention that this kind of things seems to arouse in England. If he is a shitty health minister he should go, of course. But not because of this. Who knows what his family life, and that of his "co-respondent" are like? Maybe there are tacit understandings, maybe not, but what business is it of "The Sun" and of its drooling, libidinous readership? Love affairs happen, thank goodness, and often when you least expect it. It is not like the Profumo thing, where national security was involved. This is just gratuitous looking through keyholes. Think of the effect of this kind of thing on their children!
Naturally the tabloids are going for the prurience angle, but of the course the real story here is the corruption.
Nonsense, surely you’ve heard of Hancock’s half-hour.
Gizza snog.
I can do that.
Politics has been rather quiet on the extra-marital nookie front for quite a while recently - perhaps newspapers (post the mobile phone tapping age) have had fewer sources to rely on - I can't believe its because politicians are any better behaved.
But affairs happen all through society - I am always amused by the mock/faux outrage that ensues when people of this type get 'caught'. Perhaps we should reserve similar outrage for all the journalists and editors who have affairs... why are they not reported in headlines? Or nurses and doctors - plenty of ex-marital nookie to report on there. The idea that a politician has some special moral responsibility on such matters is laughable - they are ordinary people, doing a job. So what if they are elected?
Yes - the picture 'looks' incriminating - but are we jumping to conclusions? - and what about the respective partners, who cares about them? - seeing their spouses splashed all over the news while they meanwhile have to carry on getting the kids to school and go do the shopping.
To me the saddest aspect is this morbid, voyeuristic, pseudo-moralistic attention that this kind of things seems to arouse in England. If he is a shitty health minister he should go, of course. But not because of this. Who knows what his family life, and that of his "co-respondent" are like? Maybe there are tacit understandings, maybe not, but what business is it of "The Sun" and of its drooling, libidinous readership? Love affairs happen, thank goodness, and often when you least expect it. It is not like the Profumo thing, where national security was involved. This is just gratuitous looking through keyholes. Think of the effect of this kind of thing on their children!
Completely missing the point that has been pointed out several times.
You must be a Tory fan boi
His paramour is married with 3 children. Perhaps she should think of hers?Surely Hancock should be the one thinking of his children?
Gary