news

No Daily Telegraph Comment from Boris today

66 Comments

What a shock to open the paper and see Boris transmuted into another face in his column slot today.


Not sure what all this is about but immigration and Michael Howard obvioiusly win the day.

We need Boris’s comment more than ever now …

66 thoughts on “No Daily Telegraph Comment from Boris today”

  2. In addition to the last comment – I agree we need Boris’s level headed comment now more than ever. I would hope his time in political purgatory is nearly over – most agree that he is needed.

  3. It certainly is disconcerting news. Let’s hope that Boris is still thought of favourably at Torygraph Towers. Do we know what his column would have been about? Must’ve have been more interesting than Howard’s “I’m not being racist, but…” mutterings, which probably weren’t written by him and were no doubt filched from some speech or other anyway.

    Bring back Boris!

  4. Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris, Bring back Boris.

    Ahem.

  6. Thanks, you just saved me 20p (university price) although I might buy one anyway as I just love to see the faces of the legion of commies at Sussex Uni when they spot me looking trendy with my Telegraph.

  7. It’s rather sad that the Telegraph will spike one of its best known columnists for a party political piece from the Conservative leader. After all, there are whole swathes of the paper (the Style section, for example) that I doubt anybody would miss.

  9. Ah, but did Boris get paid regardless?

    Actually it’s quite telling that Howard is already having to desperately write puff pieces shoring up his immigration policy.

    (And of course we know what Michael’s real test will be, “Is your blood tasty?” )

  10. Boris spiked!

    Boris Johnson’s regular column does not appear in today’s Torygraph. Instead, we get to read about Michael Howard’s views on immigration. Charming, yes? Surprising, no? Click here to read or leave a comments on Boris’s weblog….

  14. Sounds like a total act of censorship from both the editor of the Telegraph and Mr Howard. An act of censorship to stop Boris Johnson making comment on the fact that the tory party are playing the fear ticket with this reductive policy on immagration. Both Mr Howard and the editor of the telegraph sould resign stright away.

  15. Melissa: well organized! Good job!

    Can we see the spiked article? Let’s get all the facts before we unleash the united blog power at whoever is involved in this.

    Tim: “Does anyone else get the impression that every major party in this country needs a change in leadership?”

    The SNP has a splendid leader in Alex Salmond. You may not think we are a ‘major party’ but we have more potential to change the political face of Britain than any other party.

  17. I’m not sure I’d regard Alex Salmond as splendid. He seems to be overly happy with the current state of affairs re: the West Lothian question for my liking (where he can vote on English matters that don’t affect Scotland, while his party votes on the same issues in the Scottish parliament without interference from Westminster). I realise that the Labour government have granted him this right, and perhaps he would be a fool not to use it, given that the Labour Scots MPs will toe the party line and vote anyway, but I don’t like it. The current constitutional situation is a mess, and he’s not making it any better.

  18. ‘Nick: Boris’s article may not have been on immigration. But I would welcome such a thing.’

    Tim – I just thought it may have been considering the policy was put on the table by the consertaive this week and being that its Holocust Memorial day to day. Immagration and this issuie are very close together are they not?

  19. Nick: I’d agree… but there are also elections in Iraq on Sunday to consider – and Mr Clarke’s clever new ideas on detention without trial for all (not just for foreign nationals or people with ‘suspected links to al Qaeda’).

  20. … at least we get a great BLOGNOTE from Boris – how does he manage to make even this obscure liberties group interesting?

  21. But Boris is more real than the phantom Silkie Howard. What’s your blood group Boris ??? Have you heard about the Brummie Vampire yet?

  23. Tim: to true, there’s just a lot of topics to cover and so little time. And Mystere as for the brummie vampire – Buffy and the Scooby Gang are already on the job!

  24. The reading of all good books is like a conversation with the finest men of past centuries.
    – Rene Descartes, philosopher and mathematician (1596-1650)

    I will stick with contemporary writers and thinkers like Boris any day.

    Shame to read that the Daily Telegraph is morphing into a Daily Terror (smile)

    Indeed, bring back bohemian Boris or we all become barbarians …

  25. Jozef – it is my intention never to become a barbarian with or with out Boris Johnson. And any way one has to be careful using the word barbarian because sometimes it is the barbarian which is more cultured then we will ever be.

  26. Boris’s column goes AWOL

    Boriswatch was agog this morning with news that Boris’s weekly column in The Telegraph was missing – wasn’t it ready? Had something happened to Boris? The ever-present Melissa was on hand on the official site to put us right -…

  27. “sometimes it is the barbarian which is more cultured then we will ever be”

    Good Lord, Nick, you almost made me start thinking then! Maybe philistine would have been a better word than barbarian, if it gets me out of any metaphysical musings…

  28. Dave – philistine may well be a better word to use. But on the whole question of both barbarian philistien are words that would most ceratinly raise a smile on Matthew Arnold’s face.

  29. Phil: ” . . . Alex Salmond . . . seems to be overly happy with the current state of affairs re: the West Lothian question for my liking (where he can vote on English matters that don’t affect Scotland,. . . .”

    Phil, Can you give me ONE INSTANCE when the SNP have voted on England-only matters? Perhaps I should thank you for giving me a chance to correct a common misconception. (Anyway you can check the cats on http://publicwhip.org.uk and the Guardian etc.)

    It’s Scottish Labour MPs who act as lobby fodder voting to introduce unpopular measures in England for which they have no responsibility.

    Phil: “The current constitutional situation is a mess . .”
    That’s right. I would like to see rational political structures, including an English Parliament.

  31. The SNP voted in every session of the recent universities bill debate, on a bill that would only affect English and Welsh students, on the basis that any decision to charge top-up fees would have a knock on effect north of the border. However, the Scottish parliament holds powers to decide what tuition fees if any are charged by Scottish universities, and English and Welsh MPs are not allowed to have any say, despite the fact that the Scottish decision to abolish them also affects English and Welsh universities.

    It should be said, of course, that the Scottish Labour MPs also voted, and the only Scots MP not to vote was the solitary Tory.

  32. Just going back to Matthew Arnold for a moment I remember this little line:

    ‘From a man without a philosophy no one can expect philosophical completeness.’

    This could well apply to Mr Howard could it not?

  33. Quite. Whilst it is natural for a Conservative to eschew ideology, that doesn’t mean the same thing as philosophy.

    I think this is the same point that many people make when they dexcribe the current Tory set-up as being essentially reactive. There’s no cohesion, just a strange combination of lowering taxes whilst maintaining public spending and the joint head-banging combination of immigration control and opposition to further EU integration.

    Where’s the over-riding thought behind all of this? What, in other words, is the point? A political party should be able to make a single statement – and be able to draw all policy from that over-arching thought. At the moment, none of it seems terribly strategic, and it smacks of political bandwagon-jumping.

  34. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
    Boris gone, you say? But where has he gone to?! Was this an evil plot concocted by Michael Howard to overthrow the great Bozza? Will he return? And what *WILL* become of the excellent piece he must have had planned this week?
    Tune in next week to find out all this and more, in the continuing tale of… THE BORIS-COLUMN-WATCH-SAGA!

  36. Tim – I can handle Boris Johnson going missing. I can handle crazy frog ringtones. I’m that type of man. But the Brady Bunch Shrine: I now begin to quake.

  37. Alls I did was choose what I saw to be the most suitable dramatic sting. Now, you mind your manners young man, or there’ll be no meatloaf leftovers for supper.

  38. Phil: “The SNP voted . . .”

    Fair enough, but you yourself have explained why the Westminster SNP interested themselves in the universities bill. Fox hunters probably don’t cross the border much, but university students do.

  40. I think we should sharpen pitchforks, light torches, then march on the Telepgraph offices.

    I plan to do my bit by burning the copies of the accursed organ in newsagents. Don’t suppose Boris could be Not published in the Mail, Top Gear Magazine and Horse & Hound as well could he ? I’ve got matches.

  41. Check out http://www.michaelhowardscv.com – click the envelope to enter the main part of the site.
    Note the slogan – “Britain is working” – and find the links at the top and the bottom for the “extended version four minute film” and click on the “More >>” link at the end.
    For extra effect, note the URL that the link has taken you to. Brilliant. Shows you how much “Britain is working.”

  42. > [While] it is natural for a Conservative to eschew ideology, that doesn’t mean the same thing as philosophy.

    I can’t see why the concept of what is “natural” should have entered into Dave’s formulation here. Moreover, the satement as he phrases it leaves some doubt about what it is it that is “the same thing as philosophy”. But if what was meant is that “ideology” is not the same as “philosophy” then I’d heartily agree. At least it would put me in the company of a considerably more gifted Michael:

    http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/oakeshott-rationalism-politics

    As for the third Michael – Michael Howard – I’m sure he is no less thoughtful than most of us, and certainly no less thoughtful than Dave, who chooses to deride him for no good reason that I can see.

    However, I’d sooner have seen Boris. He does crack the odd good joke here and there. 🙂

  43. > As for the third Michael – Michael Howard – I’m sure he is no less thoughtful than most of us, and certainly no less thoughtful than Dave, who chooses to deride him for no good reason that I can see.

    Apart from the fact that he isn’t moving the Conservative Party to anywhere near a position where it could take advantage of Labour’s frailities, and insists on thumping the same old tubs which have failed to bring any success to the party since 1997.

    Nope, you’re right, he’s doing a fantastic job.

    The point I was making re: ideology/philosophy was pretty obvious, I thought. I still don’t understand you felt the need to sneer, though.

    Still, gold star for mentioning Oakeshott.

  44. Good point Nick

    I understand that Vaclav Havel used to avoid that word for the very reasons you highlighted.

    It is preferred to say that after communism no one wanted to exchange one brutalism with another one … or words to that effect. Keep on spreading the fighting message.

    Cheers

  45. ‘It is preferred to say that after communism no one wanted to exchange one brutalism with another one.’

    Jozef – and one can ceratinly see where this idea came from. All we have to do is look at the histor of Poland and middle europe to see the swing from one brutalism to another: from nazi to communism. but hopefully now the freedoms that have grown in middle europe over the past fifteen years will sustain for future generations.

  46. “The SNP has a splendid leader in Alex Salmond. You may not think we are a ‘major party’ but we have more potential to change the political face of Britain than any other party. ”

    Are you taking the p*ss? Salmond has a mental age of 13. He is the most frivolous, obnoxious, moronic MP in Scotland. He makes George Galloway and Tommy Sheridan look intellectual and classy.
    Scottish Nationalism is a viable political idea, but I wouldn’t trust the SNP to run a pie stall.

    “As for the third Michael – Michael Howard – I’m sure he is no less thoughtful than most of us, and certainly no less thoughtful than Dave, who chooses to deride him for no good reason that I can see.”

    Howard has made several intelligent manouvres in the past few days. Appearing on Talk Sport (the UK’s most popular radio station, (with a major demographic of working class men) was a great idea. He’ll be back again next week on the ‘james whale show’ (contreversial, populist right wing shock jock), which should be interesting. All of the Talk sport pundits are now rooting for the tories. Not a bad days work eh?

  47. Perhaps it’s an all an elaborate job swap?

    Howard takes over Boris’s column for a week and Boris takes over Howard’s party for a week!

  48. > He’ll be back again next week on the ‘james whale show’ (contreversial, populist right wing shock jock), which should be interesting. All of the Talk sport pundits are now rooting for the tories.

    Have you ever listened to Talk Sport? They’re the biggest bunch of swivel-eyed crypto-fascists on the airwaves. We’re attracting votes from the BNP. Woo-hoo!

    See http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1209367,00.html

  50. Aaron – got it now – thought it may have been the server not working … it just illustrates the point – really is funny

  52. “Have you ever listened to Talk Sport? They’re the biggest bunch of swivel-eyed crypto-fascists on the airwaves. We’re attracting votes from the BNP. Woo-hoo! See http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1209367,00.html“

    Nonsense. I think you’ll find that Guardian readers are far more Fascist and intollerant (particularly of working class conservatives) than
    the other way round.

    The aforementioned James Whale show attracts a substantial number of muslim listeners and callers. He regularly has clerics, rabbis and priests on for spirited debate. If anything, Talk sport gives the islamic community more of a voice than the MSM. Have you ever actually listened to it?

    It is precisely the kind of ignorant, knee-jerk elitist prejudice of individuals like yourself Dave, which will keep the Tories in the doldrums. Classifying ANYBODY who opposes unlimited immigration, liberal approaches to crime, and authoritarian political correctness, as ‘Fascist’ or as a ‘BNP voter’ is bullsh*t.

  53. From the Guardian article

    “?But one elderly female caller was in no such a quandary. She cut through all the silly shilly-shallying by pointing out that the BBC pursued an agenda of – wait for it – “internationalism, multi-culturalism and political correctness”. ?Internationalism” – as you probably know – is one of the code words Nazis use for Jews. Or Jewishness. Or, more usually, the international Jewish conspiracy ?

    How on earth do they get away with writing this bile? I think you’ll find that one of Talk Sports most popular presenters is actually jewish (Charlie wolf). And he is not alone. Don’t believe everything you read in vicious left-wing rags.

  54. … If you want to see anti-semitism, then you need look no further than the Guardian and the Independent. Their coverage of Israel, their portrayal of the ‘neo-cons’, and the ‘jewish lobby’ in the United States etc.

    Or what about Blairs attempt to attract muslim voters with his blatant anti-semitic advertising campaign? Or the New Labour spin doctor who told a muslim newspaper that Howard couldn’t be objective on the Israeli-Palestinian issue because he was a jew?

    Nazism grew out of German University intellectual elites. The ‘Guardian readers’ of their day. Little has changed.

  55. Here we go…

    > Nonsense. I think you’ll find that Guardian readers are far more Fascist and intollerant (particularly of working class conservatives) than the other way round. The aforementioned James Whale show attracts a substantial number of muslim listeners and callers. He regularly has clerics, rabbis and priests on for spirited debate. If anything, Talk sport gives the islamic community more of a voice than the MSM. Have you ever actually listened to it?

    Of course I have listened to it, once or twice. It was more or less all I could take. Not sure why you make the point about Guardian readers – I haven’t a clue about their convictions one way or another, that what simply the first article I came across which adequately described the lowest-common-denominator drivel that station emits. It’s trash, admit it. I couldn’t give a stuff how many Muslims, Christians or Buddhists listen to it – it’s still crap and depressing.

    > It is precisely the kind of ignorant, knee-jerk elitist prejudice of individuals like yourself Dave, which will keep the Tories in the doldrums. Classifying ANYBODY who opposes unlimited immigration, liberal approaches to crime, and authoritarian political correctness, as ‘Fascist’ or as a ‘BNP voter’ is bullsh*t.

    Aha! ‘Elitist’, eh? So you *do* admit that it’s junk, then. Only *I’m* a snob for actually pointing out that that sort of thing isn’t exactly a great thing for a political party to be associated with? And so having some sort of standards in terms of what I listen to makes me some sort of bad person?

    Who is calling ANYBODY with those views a fascist? The point I was making was the the TalkSport bunch aren’t the sort of people that the Tories pin their hopes on for the next election. Your own use of the term ‘right-wing shock-jock’ ought to set alarm bells ringing all over the place. I mean, really.

    > If you want to see anti-semitism, then you need look no further than the Guardian and the Independent. Their coverage of Israel, their portrayal of the ‘neo-cons’, and the ‘jewish lobby’ in the United States etc.

    I don’t want to start defending the left wing press here, but I think the charge of anti-semitism is somewhat hysterical. It surely is permissable to take a critical stance towards the actions of the Israeli state with being anti-Jewish?

    > Or what about Blairs attempt to attract muslim voters with his blatant anti-semitic advertising campaign? Or the New Labour spin doctor who told a muslim newspaper that Howard couldn’t be objective on the Israeli-Palestinian issue because he was a jew?

    Hang on, why have we started banging on about anti-semitism? Anyway: agreed. Those posters were awful. If the spin doctor *did* say that, then it’s utterly ludicrous – laughably so. But I don’t see what this has to do with TalkSport.

    > Nazism grew out of German University intellectual elites. The ‘Guardian readers’ of their day. Little has changed.

    This is a ridiculous statement.

    The thing is, if the Tories want to come close to regaining power, they have to become a party that the majority of the voting public thinks is capable of running the country (duh…). To do that they have to offer policies on issues the public consider important. The last election proved this to be the case, namely that the main plank of the Tory campaign, Europe, most of the public didn’t give a stuff about, relatively speaking. Now, this business about immigration capping – fine – but don’t make it the main issue of the campaign, and don’t try and curry influence through barely listended to radio stations. I don’t see what Howard can get out of it. He’ll be branded an extremist, and that will be that.

    I’m not saying that the cabinet should all start wearing flowers in their hair, free all criminals, take out subscriptions to the Guardian (which I only tend to link to because it’s easier than other newspapers…) and generally go all limp wristed. Just that they need to be realistic about how things will be perceived. TalkSport *is* a terrible radio station. It’s awful.

  56. Whoops:

    It surely is permissable to take a critical stance towards the actions of the Israeli state withOUT being anti-Jewish?

  58. I’m probably a bit late with this comeback to Simon Holledges’ point, but anyway: yes, University students do cross borders, which would be a good reason for Westminster to vote on Scots Uni tuition fee policy (which no doubt he’s against). Or on Eire or French tuition fee policy, for that matter! My point remains – if the Scots parliament has the final say on University policy in Scotland, Scots MPs should not be allowed to vote on policy in England and Wales.

  59. Phil: agreed.

    Not sure how likely this is, but are there areas of policy which the GLA has control which would mean a similar situation for London based MPs? It’s possible there aren’t.

    What if a Minister represents a Scottish (say) constituency? Should they not be in charge of a department which has been devolved? What about the PM – who in reality has a dominant role in policy making?

    The more you think about it, the muddier the waters get.

  60. “Of course I have listened to it, once or twice. It was more or less all I could take. Not sure why you make the point about Guardian readers – I haven’t a clue about their convictions one way or another, that what simply the first article I came across which adequately described the lowest-common-denominator drivel that station emits. It’s trash, admit it.”

    It’s no worse than the atrocious political coverage on the BBC, ITN, or Channel 4. All of whom are guilty of producing left wing tabloid garbage. Their anti-americanism (to give an example) verges on outright biggotry at times.

    The reason I mentioned anti-semitism was because the Guardian article mind-bogglingly accused talk sport of being a Nazi propaganda station spreading malicious rumours about jews, a totally nonsensical claim (as I said, one of their most popular presenters is jewish). It’s actually the left wing press which verges on anti-semitism at times (how often do you hear the terms ‘neo-con’ and ‘jewish lobby’)

    Finally, Nazism did emerge among intellectual elites. Read ‘the road to serfdom’. It owed a great deal to Plato, Hegel, Spencer and Nietzsche. A fact all too readily ignored in modern politics textbooks.

    The nasty ideologies of the future (following communism, social darwinism, existentialism etc) are more likely to eminate from cynical intellectual elitists than from ordinary working class folk.

  61. Phil: (Feb 1, 4.34pm) “My point remains – if the Scots parliament has the final say on University policy in Scotland, Scots MPs should not be allowed to vote on policy in England and Wales.”

    [Right, finding your comment and my original took a bit of archaeology!]

    We are close to agreement here, although I don’t accept that your original example was a good one, and I think we need to see the big picture.

    We need to see an end to the present constitutional mess of semi-devolution with overlapping parliaments and an unreformed House of Lords.

    We need a Scottish parliament with full powers and a corresponding English assembly. If a British parliament is needed (which I doubt) then it should be constituted from the national assemblies (including Wales). (The tripling up of MPs, MSPs and MEPs in Scotland is ridiculous.)

    Of course the problem lies in England, not Scotland. It is London that has all the historical baggage of undemocratic institutions: an unreformed old-fashioned first-past-the-post election system, an appointed House of Lords complete with contingents of dubious clerics and lawyers, an inflated monarchy, an established church, entrenched traditional print and broadcasting media etc. all embedded in one of the world’s most ridiculous class systems, reinforced with a system of idiotic feudal titles. Argh!

  62. Monkey: “Salmond has a mental age of 13 . . . I wouldn’t trust the SNP to run a pie stall.”

    Ah! The politics of abuse! If you don’t live in Scotland you won’t have to trust the SNP, but I wonder who you think can run the political “pie stall”. My own view is that we won’t see competent government without reform and modernization, which are not offered at present by either Labour or the Conservatives.

  63. I do live in Scotland Mr Holledge, and I have met Alec Salmond, during the ‘Yes Yes’ campaign for the Scottish Parliament Referendum (the second yes being for the vote on whether it should have tax raising powers).

    The SNP are, without question, political infants. At their most recent conference they were selling ‘Tony Blair Toiletpaper’, official party merchandise. Does that sound like the behaviour of a party of government?

    And listening to the speakers on stage was like turning back the clock to the looney left party conferences of labour back in the 80s. Every single one of them (apart from Fergus Ewing) was utterly thick. I’ve written last minute college essays at 2am, with a hangover, which were more coherent.

    Their foriegn policy man (don’t remember his name) made a blistering speech, essentially calling America the Fourth Reich. 3,000 people are employed in my home town by an American company. I have no idea what the total is for Scotland as a whole, but again, it’s a bit thick to be biting the hand that feeds you.

    The Scottish Parliament is an embarresment. The standard of debate could barely be lower. The only thoughtful contributions coming from David Mcletchie (the cerebral, super cool scottish tory leader, who could easily be a national tory leader one day) and Robin Harper (the Green Party leader).

    Other than that, you’d be aswell getting a bunch of highschool kids to shout insults at each other.
    Quite perversly, if any political party is to benefit from the circus, it’d probably be the Tories. The other parties have been in the spotlight, and not come out looking very good at all.

  64. Monkey:

    You are entitled to your opinion, but I am not going to debate your recollections of the Scottish parliament referendum. In any case, I doubt if anybody is reading this thread any longer.

    You can come and debate the issues on my blog http://skakagrall.com if you wish. I assume you don’t have your own one.

  66. Lori

    Those pesky spam people – just cleared it.

    However, your spam bot type clearer is none too easy to comprehend

    >a new “nofollow”

    not sure how to tag that on to the dreaded ‘Texas poker’ we had – not grasped it at all for now.. just have to avidly search and delete the rogues asap for now…

    Appreciate your advice tho’ and will hope to finish them off well soon

Comments are closed.