Between flooding, Brexit and the growing number of coronavirus cases, the UK remains under a cloud of gloom.
Presumably Johnson and his new fiancée Carrie Symonds thought it might jolly us along to learn of their impending parenthood – together, that is, given Johnson already has an incalculable number of offspring – and forthcoming nuptials.
These nuptials, dependent as they are on Johnson’s current wife signing the decree absolute, were only coincidentally announced on the same day as the bombastic resignation of civil servant Sir Philip Rutnam.
While this wasn’t the return of labour to Downing Street we had hoped for, the baby news did manage to skew the news agenda.
Speculation about the location of conception of the baby mounted, so to speak. Should the Johnson-Symonds follow the naming traditions of the Beckhams, this child may be called Balmoral or Party-Conference.
Madame Tussauds moved quickly to add a baby sling to the Boris Johnson waxwork.
Lads, can we not treat this as a nice little lark, please? Our government is in the grip of a moronavirus. When questioned yesterday, the leader of the House of Commons suggested people might like to sing the national anthem while washing their hands in order to ward off the spreading virus.
Presumably Jacob Rees-Mogg intends to suggest that the anthem will provide an adequate hand wash duration and not that God Save the Queen will kill germs with its patriotic power but, frankly, God only knows with this mob.
Just be alert to singing too robustly in a public lavatory least people rise from their seats, creating a whole new public health emergency.
Back to Boris, and the due date of his newest sprog is believed to be June, coinciding with the G7 summit at Camp David, Maryland. This also clashes with the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Rwanda and a high-level Brexit summit before a European Council meeting in Brussels.
As Jeremy Corbyn has already referred to him, he is a part-time prime minister. “Where’s Boris?” ran the refrain as flooding victims wondered why the leader of the country had not been to visit them. He would, unsurprisingly, not cut short his holidays. You might think Johnson is the ideal man in charge during a viral outbreak, given how skilled he is at washing his hands, yet do we really feel confident that he can lead the country during a health emergency?
Johnson is said to be the first serving prime minister since the Duke of Grafton in 1769 to be divorced. He will be the first prime minister to marry in office for 250 years.
These are not impressive milestones. He is a married man who impregnated his mistress. He is about to have a child, while seemingly expressing little interest in those he has already, with a woman four years older than his oldest daughter.
What on earth should we expect from the wedding of Bozzie Bear and Little Otter? His first, to Allegra Mostyn-Owen, was described as a “cross between La Dolce Vita and Brideshead Revisited”, an event to which Johnson forgot to wear either trousers or shoes. His second wedding came just days after the legal ending of his first.
All his marriages feature overlap and the previous two were marked by affairs. Few politicians can get away with such behaviour - Donald Trump is another - and why?
It is because this is the one point on which he is honest. He is an immoral, hypocritical cad and has never pretended to be anything other.
How particularly galling that decent, solid female politicians struggle to balance political life and children – think of MSP Gail Ross leaving her Caithness, Sutherland and Ross constituency before her full talents have been seen – while these mediocre males potter about in office without having to give the issue a second thought.
Ms Symonds seems like a relatively modern young woman. Perhaps she’ll insist on him taking his portion of shared parental leave.
The “happy” part of this happy announcement would be that Johnson job shares, preferably with someone actually competent and committed to doing the job.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel