LORD Geidt stated that the reason for his resignation as ethics adviser to the Prime Minister was his opposition to government plans to break international law by breaching World Trade Organisation rules.

In effect, this latest underhand scheme by Boris Johnson was simply the straw that broke his adviser’s metaphorical back and Lord Geidt, a former private secretary to the Queen, has allegedly been very unhappy in his role for some time now due to Partygate, the Downing Street refurbishment scandal and Johnson’s re-writing of the Ministerial Code.

Lord Geidt’s resignation follows Sir Alex Allan’s departure from the same post in 2020, following the Prime Minister’s arrogant dismissal of his findings into the bullying of civil servants by an intimidating Home Secretary. This means that Mr Johnson has – not surprisingly to anyone with more than a passing interest in politics – seen two ethics advisers quit in a relatively short space of time due to his cavalier relationship with the truth, total lack of responsibility and disdain for democracy. As Tory MP, William Wragg observed (with apologies to Oscar Wilde) “to lose one adviser on ministers’ interests may be regarded as a misfortune. To lose two looks like carelessness.”

READ MORE: Lord Geidt: Who is Boris Johnson's former ministerial interests adviser and why did he resign?

It appears that this most mendacious, slothful and conceited of prime ministers will – again utterly unsurprisingly – take the easiest way out for him, as he always does, and abandon the post of ethics adviser in his government. Let’s face it, who would ever want a post where your remit is to advise Boris Johnson on the moral principles that govern his behaviour? It would be easier preaching tolerance and inclusion to Nigel Farage or warning Al Capone about the perils of crime.

The Prime Minister is an amoral and wholly unscrupulous human being who follows in the footsteps of his abrasive and narcissistic nonconformist hero across the sea, Donald Trump, in an obvious inattention to detail, populist propensity for leaving carnage in his wake and utter disdain for those outside of his immediate social circle.

To paraphrase the comedian Frankie Boyle, in order to create Boris Johnson the scientists had to inject Hitler’s DNA into a panna cotta – a crude yet unerringly accurate representation of the current Tory party leader.

Johnson’s damaging legacy will last for a generation or more as the UK increasingly resembles a slowly sinking Titanic. Scottish independence is the only political lifeboat at our disposal and we must abandon this toxic Union or leave our children and grandchildren to suffer the appalling consequences.

Owen Kelly

IT’S hardly surprising that an unethical proven habitual liar like Boris Johnson is considering scrapping the post of ethics advisor. In fact I was surprised to learn that Johnson had an ethics advisor in post given his disgraceful and unscrupulous behaviour throughout his premiership.

Lord Geidt is the second ethics advisor to resign within two years. Geidt accused Johnson of threatening to make a mockery of the code of conduct for ministers and of being put in an “impossible and odious position”. Lord Geidt’s sudden resignation may have been a shock for the government but it didn’t surprise me at all! It’s just another unedifying fact in Boris Johnson’s colourful and controversial premiership.

READ MORE: Scots goods 'to be hit with EU tariffs' if Boris Johnson sparks trade war

Boris Johnson, a man bereft of any moral rectitude and who has single-handedly trashed standards in British public life and left it in the gutter, knows that he is incapable of change and that if he appointed a third ethics advisor, it would end in yet another resignation.

Sandy Gordon

THE article on the Patrick Grady situation by Xander Richards makes it crystal clear that neither your journalist nor the paper has a clue what is really going on here, though clearly the Mail does, and also knows exactly how to manipulate the situation and gullible politicians like Jackie Baillie (Calls for Blackford’s resignation after Grady support, Jun 19).

It would have been a good idea for Mr Richards to have read the adjudication on this incident announced by the independent panel which examined the issue and adjudged that the incident merited a two-day suspension.

READ MORE: Angus Robertson defends Ian Blackford over Patrick Grady case

The adjudication also mentions mitigations they took into consideration, none of which make it into your article. These might also have been worthy of expansion in the report. One relates to Patrick Grady’s behaviour in the aftermath of the incident, in that he accepted the approach was wrong and desisted. Another related to the stress he had suffered through the release of series of leaks to the media and their source.

In short, though nobody would condone Mr Grady’s action, the article was virtually devoid of context or balance. And the notion of support towards behavioural change entirely absent.

Douglas Turner