David Blunkett affair

[Tinker]

Sad lonely man? None of our business? Discuss?

Must say, it would be more believable if she were the blind partner

JanH - what about Viagra in the water?

It's like a modern day Midsummer Night's Dream: Puck (probably a vengeful Alastair Campbell in disguise) drips stuff on everyone's eyelids and they shag the nearest Ass.

Shoulder to Shoulder with Aloha on my feelings about this whole damn thing, I am further ganshing my teeth at the thougt that he could well be perfectly innocent on the whole Nannymandering issue, too. I have been regularly applying for an annual work permit for an employee, and usually the application takes endless months to process. This year, we put it in as early as poss because we thought the introduction of a charge would lead to a rush, and it came back within a week. This is at the same time as the nanny's permit was in question, too.

Blunkett should resign or be pushed IMO. He has volunteered for public duty and his personal morality IS therefore of public relevance.

He is abusing his position by saying effectively "I am the home secretary, I am the law" and using these priveledges for his own personal and questionable ends.

I think he is a bully and am glad to see he mught have met his match in Ms Quinn who does not seem the type to just roll over.

I do think his personal agenda does affect his public life. I don't know how much (everyone is after all, influenced by their own private experiences), but he's the guy who is in charge of legislation surrounding contact and access issues isn't he? Does his department deal with the issue of whether obstructive mothers should be sent to prison/ made to do community service for blocking their ex's access to their children?

Whatever side of the fence you're on, on that particular issue, you have to notice that Blunkett has a bloody sharp axe to grind. Interesting that there have been no plans to jail/ community service men who wilfully let their children down week after week by not turning up for their contact visits, or don't pay their maintenance - same department, different priorities!

But I'm probably just being a conspiracy theorist! Or maybe it's a different department - the blessed Margaret Hodge's, perhaps?

What a bloody shower! And the other lot are even worse! I sometimes think the current batch of politicians were put there purely and simply because soap operas are running out of believable story lines.

And frankly, while I'm on the subject, I'm still absolutely mind-boggled by the sheer concept of anyone finding David Blunkett attractive enough to go to bed with. Beauty really is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it? Now Gordon Brown, I could understand! (But only just - and I am quite old!) Must stop thinking about this now, it's doing my head in...

Ugly men get the girls if they have POWER

or MONEY!!!

I cannot, cannot get over the fact that her husband seemingly didn't notice THREE YEARS of shagging, going to the Last Night of the Proms together, going on holiday together, weekends in his Derbyshire hideaway....not to mention fathering two children. It's SO bizarre.
I loathe all of Blunkett's policies, but don't think it is particularly bullying to want to see your own flesh and blood from time to time. I think that woman has such cheek!

is her husband infertile?

I think it is jumping to conclusions to think that Stephen Quinn was unaware of his wife's affair, isn't it?

I think her husband was in on it, encouraging affair in order to get babies because he was unsure he would be able to provide. Get babies and she will stay with me - his logic. He must have known.

Press were obviously on to it early on, lost of pics of them together.

santafio, i believe he had a vasectomy reversed

posy, have you read the whole thread? There is much speculation earlier that Blunkett was used, by both Quinns, as a sperm donor and was discarded as soon as child 2 was safely on the way.

Granted there is no hard evidence for this, but much circumstantial, and the timing and their behaviour now bears it out. Have a look also at the David Aaronovitch piece \link{http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/comment/0,11026,1366974,00.html\here} (am assuming you haven't already).

Incidentally, how did the information about the use of the train ticket and the driver, and the visa question, get out? Not from DB, obv; but she and her "friends" clearly had a vested interest in using them to try to force him to back away from making a public fuss. Exactly who is the bully in this case?

It's all very weird and yucky this. I agree though with Caligula re his position etc. She seems mad but he must be equally mad, surely? He's behaving like a depraved wronged mistress when actually, he had an affair with a married woman and must have known the possible outcomes. One of which was that she wouldn't leave her husband. How come we all vilify women when they have affairs with married men but it's OK for David? Surely he was in the wrong?(As was she, I agree) I can't see that anyone will be happy in the end as a result of court action though, least of all a) his son and b) his unborn child, if it is his and c) the mother of his children. I do think if it's waited this long it can wait another couple of months til she's had the baby.

My point being, sorry, that if you piss off and upset the mother of your child then you very likely also upset that child, especially if he's either 2 years old or unborn. David Blunkett is like a bull at a gate (ahem).

Urgh, what a revolting image.. Still think she's more wrong than him though ner ner ne ne ner

WWW, do you not think this is a calculated move on her part? The longer she leaves it, the longer it will be since he had contact with the little boy, the more likely it will be that a judge will say ah, well, he has got used to not seeing DB now, best not upset the status quo - ie exactly what happened to Bunglie and many others!!!!

The Quinn is a witch. nernerner from me too. Sorry!

It occured to me, that Mr Quinn may well have been complicit in the knowledge of the affair, I mean why else would you go on holiday with your pregant wife, the home sec and yourself?
I mean my DH would not run for that, whether I was editor of The Time Magazine or the local rag!
DB has allegedly according to the court report, had regular access to this young boy since he was born, since affair broke down, KFQ denied him access, he said he would not have chosen the legal route had there been another way.
The whole thing stinks of SET UP, she comes out of smelling vry dodgy indeed, and I think it will cost DB his job in the end, it will certainly end his chances of taking over as next PM, which is what I suspect he is/was being prepared for.
Personally I am not bothered by what or who he does, politicians are just people, if my DH had an affair would he be sacked or expected to resign? Certainly in his job he has immense influence over Air Traffic Control and thus over peoples lives...
So many subjective ways to look at it though
I like DB though, oddly but he is like kid in a candy shop at times or is that bull in a china shop?
Hmmm

I hate to say it, but I also tend to side with Blunkett on this one.

An affair is morally reprehensible (usually), but not illegal and shouldn't be a reason for a politician or anyone to be sacked. Thought Boris should have kept his job too, and that Howard was being more than a tad disingenuous when he said that the sacking was for the lying and not the affair. of course he lied about it: he's married.

Plus the access court thing is nasty. It didn't occur to me that it could have been calculated, but maybe it was.

I'm not on either of their sides, I think they've both behaved horribly. And if the husband is complicit, he's revolting too. None of them come up smelling of roses.

How lucky that we all have blameless lives!

None of them seem to have thought about the effects on these children at all. I'm sure they must have done, surely, but they don't give that impression. So depressing.

Going back to the original question I don't really care about his private life but if it leads to his downfall then that;s all to the good. IMO he is the worst Home Secretary we have had for a long time - he is trying to do away with trial by jury by keeping suspected terroists locked up with no trial, and he wants us all to have identity cards. He is a fascist - I dont mind what he does away from politics but I hope this is the end of him being home secretary

vict17 - do you really think his replacement (if he is replaced) will change those policies.

I remember when Blunkett replaced Straw - I felt relieved then. But it turns out that it doesn't actually matter who the figurehead in the home office is.

Caligulights - didn't mean to sound like I support him, I just feel a bit sorry for him.

DB's gone! Just heard he's resigned.

snowdonim, i think it was the remarks against his colleagues that got him in the end...

Agree 100% with Vict17 about his policies, but still think Kimberly is a witch to prevent him seeing his child after two years of watching him grow up, taking him on holiday etc etc. And yes, I bet she wants the longest poss gap so the boy can 'forget' him and the court will be less inclined to disturb the status quo so she can play happy families. I'd say it was all so chav, if I was allowed to