IT must be hard to be a Tory. Socially. Romantically. Sartorially. Harder still, if you are a Tory led by the likes of Boris Johnson, a man with a history so “colourful” he makes Elmer the patchwork elephant seem a bit monochrome.
Take the story that everybody has been talking about this week – the Glasgow Lord Provost and her expenses claims.
It should be an easy goal for opposition parties. The Daily Record printed an itemised list for them to take their pick from. All they had to do was learn what Shellac is, turn up at FMQs yesterday and read out the list with a suitably grave expression.
That, and try and convince themselves and the chamber that they think eight grand is a huge amount of money and not a standard bar bill at their local Conservative association.
READ MORE: FMQs: Nicola Sturgeon has her say on Glasgow Lord Provost
But there was a fly in the ointment for Tory backbenchers who have been eagerly waiting for their chance to drive on the moral high ground for quite some time.
It’s hard to strike the right tone when talking about another politician’s cost to the public purse – to really feel it in your gut – when Boris Johnson is your party leader.
Because the boy isn’t cheap. After all, he’s already cost the Conservative party Ruth Davidson, a parliamentary majority, one court case and the next independence referendum.
When it comes to registering his financial interests in Parliament, Johnson has a shambolic record. So much so, that earlier this year House of Commons bosses ordered him to be “re-schooled” on declaration procedures – after he “forgot” to inform them of rental money he received from a property he part-owned.
This came after he forgot to tell them about book royalties’ cash and another NINE income streams he had boosting his bank account.
Add into that the controversy around his “close friendship” with Jennifer Arcuri – the businesswoman who has never made a profit but received grant funding, it is alleged, because of her mayoral pal – and you’ve got a prime (ministerial) example of somebody whose attitude to public money and public interest is woeful.
Of course, these grants look like small change compared to the £300 million he wasted on the Boris busses, the £30m cost of the failed garden bridge project and the 300 grand he pissed up the wall on defunct water cannon.
And as Prime Minister, he shows no sign of developing a sudden care for public money.
It will be years from now until we know the true cost of the No-Deal Brexit that Johnson is planning for and pursuing.
In the end, there was only one man who could be trusted to stand up and talk about fiscal responsibility with tax-payers cash with a straight face. Enter Adam Tomkins, expert in all things farcical.
Grave expression – check. Brass neck – check.
He asked the First Minister – nay, told her – that Eva Bolander was guilty of “ripping off” Glasgow and should resign.
The First Minister gave a diplomatic answer, acknowledging that the Lord Provost had reflected on some of her expense claims and came to the decision herself to repay some of the money.
But her inner monologue could be heard clearly for those listening closely enough.
“RIP OFF?! What a f**king cheek. Next to your big daft Prime Minister, Eva Bolander is an absolute bargain, mate.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here