So its not only pies that he is in love with

[Dom Tuk]

2 jags now has been caught with his pants down. Affair with secretary since 2002, trysts at a secret flat......and he is the deputy PM. Shameless and morally corrupt this whole labour govt has been....top to bottom.

[flip-flop]

Hold on a minute jno.....didn't His Tonyness pledge that his government would be 'whiter than white' or words to that effect? Surely Blair saying they would be whiter than white is effectively confirming they would have impeccable morals?

Like it or not, having a dabble away from the Mrs is hardly morally acceptable.

[jno]

flip-flop I think the whiter than white business was about financial sleaze (into which they have most certainly pitched). But I don't rate sexual dalliance as a problem, myself.

Mind you, it does produce fine quotes: "I feel sick. I can't believe the woman I wanted to marry has slept with John Prescott. I've been betrayed by one of the most powerful men in the UK."

[brionon]

I love the way Millionaire Yuppy Tories call him 2 Jags.

[mimififi]

jno, I think you misunderstand me; I am not suggesting that MPs should be moral exemplars, rather that if you are in a position of power and thus trust, you should be at least display trustworthy behaviour across the board.

We are all known by our fruits, from the most powerful politician, through to the lowliest of all.

My point was that if you can't be trusted with a little, how can you be trusted with alot. This is at best a personal betrayal of one person to another and at worst a symptom of an untrustworthiness that may run deep to the core.

I don't think we should hold archbishops responsible for moral behaviour, we should all be responsible for the upkeep of morality in the UK, if not the world.

[Pedders]

He's been doing to us all for years.

[jno]

mimififi, you did say the government should be 'the example to us all'. But I don't agree that if you can't trust a person in one matter you can't trust him in another. It sounds plausible, but I don't think it actually works that way in real life. People somehow seem able to separate their sex lives off from the rest of their lives. Even the nicest people do odd things in private. I think it's only my business if it affects the way they do their job, or if they've been lecturing me on how to conduct my private life (as in the Tories' back-to-basics, Victorian-values slogans). Neither of these seems to apply to Prescott. Mrs Prescott may well feel he's betrayed her, and that's for them to sort out, not for me.

[rico35]

Let him that is without sin cast the first stone.

Is this incident not reflective of the modern society? Why condemn a man for doing what every other person (except a negligible few) is doing?

The whole nation needs to return to God and embrace His salvation. The world is in need of Jesus. Only He can save, cleanse and make whole.

[Dom Tuk]

No thanks...no God needed in this country...look what he made Tony do.

[flip-flop]

Blimey - who let the god botherers in???

[Pippa68]

It's a bit rich coming from a bloke who tells us how to spend our money, what to spend it on, what schools we should be sending our kids to, what cars to drive..etc etc...he goes & spends our (ooops sorry ~ HIS) money on a floozie.

I don't usually have a problem with Joe Bloggs sowing his oats elsewhere if that is how he wants to conduct his life, but when it comes to a high ranking (rhyming slang, anyone?) politician I do. Yes, I believe it is our buisness as they are civil servants. We keep getting 'family values' shoved down our throats by the government so this stinks.

[Pippa68]

rico35 ~ negligible few? I take exception to that. I also take exception to religious people implying that non-religious types are all worthless individuals who live their lives in an abhorrent way.

[mimififi]

I can fully accept that we ALL do things wrongly and make poor choices at times, but my point is that when you are 'up there' supposedly being the one in charge, you are more accountable, as Pippa69 says, it's a bit rich frankly coming from a man who although doesn't necessarily legislate who we can and cant have affairs with, he does legislate on other aspects of our lives and yet his life is, frankly, deplorable.

Not only for the ramifications it has to his personal life, in light of the two other fiascos that are occuring in the cabinet at the moment, i think it comes back to the big man himself who is at the end of the day responsible for the cabinet he chooses. In government we should have honest, open, trustworthy honorable men who are known as such by the fruit of the lives both in parliament and out of. We would have faith in such people to run our counrty in an honorable way.

But, it's never going to happen I know that, but it just doesn't wash with me that they can do whatever they like in the private lives as long as they make good choices in their political life. The point of the matter is is that we are rarely able to live two lives. The person we are inside is indeed the same person we are at work.

But, power is a great and terrible thing and has the means to do great and terrible things to the people who weald it. SOme rise to the challenge, some do not.

[kepla]

I am qualified to post - happily married for over 25 years and I intend to make sure it stays that way ! Please, please, please could somebody answer me this: No matter what you think of the guys politics or personal morals, for some starnage reason he is labelled as 'two jags' as if that is some sort of insult. Why ? I just don't get it ! What on earth is actually wrong with him owning two jags ? ? ? In buying two Jaguar cars he has helped support the British economy and sustain jobs in Britain. Isn't this something to be respected ? If he had bought two foreign cars, especially if they were Japanese cars, then wouldn't that be something to criticise ? A politician being a traitor to the economy and the British workers - yes, I can understand why that would be criticised. I don't support the guy, but why attempt to criticise the one thing that he has actually done right ?