Keith Vaz

Hypocrisy is not what Vaz has been accused of. If he had spoken against gay rights he would be guilty of hypocrisy but he supports gay rights.

He is chairman of a committee looking into laws on prostituation , there are 20 MP's on this committee , they all have a voice.

What annoys me about sleaze allegations against MP's is why should they not have a private life, what matters is they do not break the law.

So Vaz will have to,live with mocking as Boris Johnson has to as a philanderer

I accept we all have different standards of morality and decency, I confess I am judgemental when it comes to Nigella Lawson

IF the newspaper article is correct he asked for cocaine to be brought to the party and said he would pay for it, although he did say he wouldn't want to take it. He has previously condemned the use of drugs. I have no interest in his sexuality or what happens between consenting adults in private but he did show a lack of awareness of what he was leaving himself open to. I can't help thinking that if this had been a Tory MP many on here would have been calling for his resignation.

I don't think so sunseeker - long gone are the days when MPs, of any party, were expected to resign for sex scandals.

I think you are correct sunseeker.

I would say the same no matter which party . I think Boris did harm to the country with his lies about how much money would flow into the NHS if we voted out, people believed him.

An MP having an affair does not affect the country . All this talk of sleaze, one would think this was a country with high moral standards , it isn't

Brooks Newmark - 2014

That was in reply to Riverwalk

I had to Google Newmark as couldn't remember anything about him - also can't remember if many on GN called for his resignation.

Surely it would be up to his constituency party who nominated him for their MP to decide what to do, if anything?

Newmark didn't resign immediately as a result of the scandal, but stood down at the next election.

Other MPs who were caught up in scandals who didn't resign immediately are John Whittingdale and Stephen Crabb. Neither have been included in May's cabinet, so I guess they've been pushed out by the back door.

Liam Fox did resign after the Adam Werritty and fraud scandals, but he seems to have been rehabilitated.

Where's Jeffrey Archer when you need him to write a 'novel' (any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental) about what goes on in the corridors of power?

As chairman of a HoC Committee looking at the laws governing prostitution he will, it appears, bring expert knowledge as a consumer of the service under investigation, BUT he could be susceptible to accusations of conflicts of interest, and he could be open to blackmail if he was involved in the purchase of illegal drugs.

If he broke the law he should be charged. I expect he will stand down from the select committee, if he remains an MP this will be the choice of his constituency

Pity newspapers can't be sued for stings, they get such information by setting up the situation.

I am amazed Vaz thought he was in no danger of kiss and tell

I don't think the newspaper set this up, so it wasn't a newspaper sting. One of the male prostitutes recognised him (although he said his name was Jim and he was a washing machine salesman) and sussing there'd be cash in selling the story, they subsequently approached the newspaper.

Thank you Grannyknot, so he had met the men before

This event is a classic tabloid sting.

The sex workers could well have recognised him and gone to the press but there is no way a major tabloid, with its army of lawyers, would have printed such a story based only on some one-off phone footage and texts.

So the Guardian says (about halfway down in the article):

www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/sep/05/why-the-sunday-mirror-was-justified-in-exposing-keith-vaz?CMP=twt_gu

That was to AB.

I csnnot agree that on becoming an MP one loses the right to privacy , and the act of buggery was filmed in his own flat , this is wrong in my opinion, if he had visited a brothel then different.

It always amazes me in cases like this that the wife stands by her man! None of us know what goes on in other people's relationships but I wouldn't stay in these circumstances!

...one loses the right to absolute privacy, annie. With that I agree.

I think of my grandad, who was a local councillor in the town I grew up in. He truly was a pillar of the community.

So where do you draw the line between absolute privacy and privacy Grannyknot?

This intrusion of privacy was carried out by a newspaper which hacked telephones

annie I couldn't really be bothered to get into splitting hairs, but I think if someone in a such a high profile position is guilty of "serious impropriety" the public has a right to know.

I am amazed that some think its OK for an MP to hire rent boys and pop poppers as long as he does it behind closed doors.

Sex between two consenting adults of whatever gender is not illegal, even if money is involved and however embarrassing it might be. The involvement of poppers is different.

Surely he has a cast iron reason excuse for his actions: he was doing research for his committee's inquiry into prostitution.?