I’ve ceased to keep count of the number of sleazy stories attached to Boris Johnson

Making grubby jokes about this Chris Pincher’s name is far too lame to do. It’s too depressing. This has all gone on too long. I suppose at least he resigned when it became clear that alcohol wasn’t going to be a good enough excuse for an alleged second round of sexually inappropriate behaviour by the Tory deputy chief whip.

Like many, I’ve ceased to keep count of the number of sleazy stories attached to Boris Johnson’s person and his administration.

Suffice to say that with the resignation of Pincher, one can only conclude that the government appointed by Johnson is suffering collective arrested development. Unlike First World War infantrymen, we are not lions being led by donkeys so much as the hopeless and depressed led by sexually incontinent, delinquent, morally grubby, 15-year-olds of dubious intellect.

Amanda Baker

Edinburgh

John Rentoul’s summary of Tony Blair’s five-point plan for Labour if it is to get back into government, begins with the “need to work across party boundaries to seek solutions”. The necessity of consensual politics is of paramount importance when the country is faced with the level of threats posed by climate change, international conflict and economic uncertainty that are likely to be with us long into the future.

Attempts by the leader of the opposition, in the early days of the pandemic, to work in such ways were rebuffed by a prime minister who continues to use bluster, obfuscation and lies in gaming the adversarial system of our politics to his advantage. Although the majority of people might believe that it is constructive to be reasonable and adaptable, acting in such a way is nigh on impossible when facing an unprincipled and slippery operator like Johnson.

Relying on the nation’s dissatisfaction with Johnson will not be enough; the nation is in desperate need of principled, inspirational and pragmatic leadership that is backed with clear, strategic plans that can be enacted in the short-, medium- and long-term. Whether we have politicians able to carry that weight remains to be seen but the scale and nature of our national and global problems will require consensual agreement over many of the pressing issues if we are to find sustainable solutions to them.

Graham Powell

Cirencester

That our politicians, and particularly our ennobled generals, openly speak about mobilising for a war with Russia is simply criminal. As history has shown, it is invariably the elite who survives in comfort. See Volodymyr Zelensky. I have not heard a single voice advocating for negotiations with Russia, however distasteful this may seem. And only negotiations can resolve the historical conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Never Nato and its delusion of an all-out war.

The world has experienced the horrors of two world wars with millions of lives lost, the last one finally ending with Hiroshima and Nagasaki being obliterated by nuclear bombs. Do we really need a third world war with most likely total destruction? Zelensky’s refusal to negotiate has nothing to do with courage. He does a disservice to his country and his people. And our political elite supports this.

Gunter Straub

London

The EU’s decision to grant “candidate status” to Ukraine proves – if proof was ever needed – that the EU’s real agenda in Ukraine has been, not to help Ukraine defend itself, but to wage a proxy war against Russia. While one state providing military support to another does not itself establish a proxy relationship, even if the beneficiary is at war, elements of such a relationship emerge when a sponsor is able to achieve its objective without committing its own forces to the conflict.

Helping Ukraine defend itself is indeed a just cause, and aiding the country is clearly permissible under international law. But the EU is doing more than just helping Ukraine defend itself: it is using the Ukrainian war as a pretext to facilitate the eastern expansion of EU and Nato, although Article 2 of the Lisbon Treaty denies it such a role.

Randhir Singh Bains

Essex

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment, sign up to our free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here

Actress Jane Fonda makes an interesting, but unrealistic point with her analogy of a vagina and an AK-47. The Republican Party has always taken great pleasure in painting themselves as the party of less government interference. Yet when it comes to the topic of pro-choice and Roe v Wade, the long arm of government is restricting a woman’s right to have an abortion.

And while abortion kills, so do AK-47s, which have taken the lives of countless innocent people, including children. Nevertheless, the GOP doesn’t want to offend the NRA nor their members in fear of losing their support. Therefore the military-style assault weapon is still legal to purchase. However women would no longer have to worry about the government interfering with abortions if we could wave a magic wand and redefine a vagina as an AK-47.

JoAnn Lee Frank

Clearwater, FL