Keith Vaz

Whether it's legal or not I don't think this is how an MP should conduct himself. He should be ashamed of himself exposing his wife and children to this, bad enough if your husband is caught using prostitutes but rent boys, sick in my opinion.

firecracker me too.

That was re your post at 17:41.

I assume you don't know anything about Vaz's relationship with his wife. For all I (and probably you) know, she knows about it and turns a blind eye.

Over the years, I've often been amazed at the 'agreements' some couples have. Some of them admit to doing things in private, which I certainly wouldn't want to do, but that's their business.

Incidentally, why are 'rent boys' worse than prostitutes?

Grannyknot,you emphasised absolute privacy and posted the link but now call it splitting hairs .

You have a problem with homosexuality Firecracker if you do not accept male and female prostitutes are equal

may as well leave it daphne, never any point in trying to hold a discussion with a homophobic poster on the subject of homosexuality

Like Caesar's wife we always expect our politicians to be above suspicion. Whether we should is something else. Of course we have no idea what happens in other people's homes, but if he has lied to his family about his sexuality you can't help wondering if there is anything else he is not being entirely truthful about.

Not that simple Deeda, if this had been about Vaz and a female prostitute I would agree. If you remember only one MP came out in the eighties , did you read the homophobic post from firecracker? Imagine what it was like in the eighties and nineties , to want to be a politician and be gay. I know how gays suffered in the eighties , there was the terror of AIDS and terror of catching AIDS from a homosexual . Many chose to remain silent, marry and get on with life . Easy for us to dismiss it thirty
Years on.

I feel so sorry for him, his wife, children and all close to him

If this had happened in France everyone would have shrugged their shoulders and said 'so what?' That is if their press even bothered to report it, or set the honey trap.

Have not yet read up on this in the press. Has the man broken any laws? Has he lied and used public money fraudulently? Has he made pious proclamations stating paid for sex between consenting adults is wrong?

If not then what he does in his personal, spare time, privately is his business not ours.

It happened in his own home, he has supported the gay community so no hypocrisy , it is not illegal to pay for sex, there was talk of poppers but they are legal drugs, there was talk of cocaine but he said he wouldn't take cocaine . Seems what he has done to bring all this wrath and mockery upon himself is not be a popular politician .

I think what angers me greatly is he was filmed and recorded in his own home , the one place we should all feel safe and believe to be safe , and this with the support of a newspaper which hacked people's telephones

in his own home that is the worst betrayal of his wife.

I don't really care about him, I've always thought that he was a sanctimonious prig, but I feel so sorry for her and for their children.

I agree that a politician, like anybody else, is entitled to a private life and I do feel some sympathy for Vaz and his family.

However, I don't agree with Corbyn that this is purely a "private matter". Vaz is Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committe which was conducting an inquiry into prostitution and making recommendations as to the laws relating to it. He has also talked publicly about the dangers of drug-taking, yet it appears he brought up the issue of "poppers" when he met the male escorts and seemed to have a fairly relaxed attitude towards drug taking. Some people feel that makes him unsuitable to have any say in discussions regarding the legal status of certain drugs.

There is also the issue that in effect he was leading a "double life" which presumably he would not wish to be disclosed to his wife and children or the general public. That being the case, would it not, had it been discovered by somebody else, have made him vulnerable to political pressure? Knowing this, I think he should have realised that he was not an appropriate person to be part of the Home Affairs Select Committee.

For those reasons, it's my opinion that his conduct is unacceptable and he should stand down.

I don't think there is any difference between a male and female prostitute but perhaps the words "rent boy" ("boy" in particular) conjure up visions of vulnerable young people being "rented out" against their will to predatory older men. Why isn't the term "rent girl" used - there have certainly been cases where under age girls are trafficked and forced into the sex industry, or vulnerable British girls are at first lured and then bullied into it.

anniebach I think I'm right in saying that Corbyn (as current leader of the Labour Party) was asked for his reaction to the revelations re Vaz, to which he responded he believed it was a "private matter". You also agree it is a private matter but I don't suppose anything he said would have satisfied you.

Well I have been called some things in my time but to be called homophobic by a Vaz fanatic that takes the biscuit, it's laughable political correctness gone mad.

I stand by my original post if I was a married woman with children and I found out my husband had been unfaithful with a female prostitute I would be devastated but to find out my supposedly straight husband had paid for sex with men be they young or old I would be sick to my stomach and I would think any normal woman would feel the sane.

For all you know, Mrs Vaz might be a bit more open-minded than you.

I haven't spotted any Vaz fanatics on this thread.

What this man chooses to do in his private life is of course his business, but surely his position on the Home Affairs committee is now compromised bearing in mind he has a vested interest which is now in the public domain?! As for drugs?!! Let's say. a grey area!!!
I agree, the term 'rent boys is an unfortunate term, conjuring up all sorts of nasties. I think it was one of these boys who went to the newspapers with this story complete with photos, which of course anyone who is anyone risks when indulging in this sort of activity. I can't believe that Mr Vaz was so naive not to realise the risk he was running! Perhaps it was plain arrogance, simple as that!

Actually Firecracker just to give you a different point of view to your own, I have heard women say that they feel more threatened by their husband having an affair with another women, than a bloke Personally I would feel just as sick either way a betrayal is a betrayal .......but none of us know about his private life we are all seeing it from our own eyes ... He could have an open relationship or his wife may know about his 'alternative lifestyle' and accept it, she could have a lover herself, who blooming knows is it our business ? ... I think 'famous' people are often arrogant enough to think they are invincible Vaz has always come across as arrogant and a bit superior, they should all be more flipping discreet with their personal lives if they are going to go outside the norms of family life Silly man

I thought on GN we were all encouraged to give our varied views on different subjects. Just because Firecracker has a different take on this subject from some people, what is wrong with that ?

I am all for Free Speech.

Did I do anything other than give an alternative view then Nankate ?

I share the sympathy for the family of Mr Vaz.

I don't agree that this as a purely private matter because of his role as Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee which was looking into prostitution. One of the issues under discussion was whether the current law which criminalises male and female prostitutes rather than the people who use them should be reversed. I don't see how anyone can argue there isn't a conflict of interests given the fact the Keith Vaz has been found to have used the services of these two men on at least two occasions. It seems that whilst he said he wouldn't use cocaine he was prepared to pay for it so the prostitutes could.

I agree in free speech NanKate , firecracker made a homophobic comment, this is my view,

What puzzles me is why a po,itician who pays for sex with a prostitute is considered unsuitable to sit on a committee which is discussing prostitution. There are twenty on the committee , he has no more influence than each of those.

How many times MP's are criticised for living in a bubble not in the real world , well prostitution and homosexuality are part of the real world.

Vaz fanatic ? Too funny, so wrong, I dislike hypocrisy and I think much of the criticism levelled at Vaz is hypocritical.

Firecracker, there are married men who pay female prostitutes because they want to commit buggery with a woman. Different for two men, no choice is there

I agree with iam64, definitely not the man for the job. Vaz was also being paid an extra amount of money for chairing this committee which came from the public purse.