The outgoing London mayor has joined in with Zac Goldsmith’s personal attacks on a man once warmly praised for his approach to the issue of Islamic terror in a magazine he edited

It may seem as if he left the job many months ago but Boris Johnson has, in fact, yet to complete his eight exceptionally ordinary years as London mayor. And he’s managed to find some time from his busy Brexit and covert Tory leadership manoeuvres to parrot the dubious attack lines of his chum and fellow Old Etonian Zac Goldsmith, who hopes to succeed him at the helm of City Hall. Johnson was at it on Tuesday before an adoring crowd of Tory activists when helping Goldsmith re-launch his “action plan” in Southfields, and he’d been at it on Monday too in his Daily Telegraph column.

In both cases the celebrity politician, who’s been described by former Tory MP Matthew Parris as “sly and dishonest,” by former fellow Telegraph columnist Simon Heffer as “so self-serving that he cannot be relied on to put any other consideration first” and by his former editor Max Hastings as “a far more ruthless, and frankly nastier, figure than the public appreciates,” trotted out the now familiar checklist of smears and innuendos about Labour’s Sadiq Khan and supposed “links” to extremists, which now effectively comprises the entirety of Goldsmith’s miserably negative campaign.

Johnson is now paid £267,000 year for his Telegraph output. Imagine getting all that money just for writing down what Lynton Crosby’s little soldiers tell you to. After you’ve finished doing that, travel with me back in time to 2005. That was, of course, the year of the 7/7 London Bombings, when Islamist terror claimed the lives of 52 people in the capital. It was also the year that Khan, a Muslim of course, was, in May, first elected to parliament.

The new MP for Tooting quickly made a good impression, at least according to the Spectator magazine’s Parliamentarian of the Year judging panel. In naming Khan their Newcomer of the Year, those judges unanimously praised Khan for:

The tough-mindedness and clarity with which he has spoken about the very difficult issues of Islamic terror. Some cited a certain theatricality in his voice, with one judge calling it a “strong, physical voice.” Others praised his energy, likening him to a steel spring, a rubber band or a coiled leopard. But the award mainly reflects the eloquence and ability with which he has represented a part of society that is in need of cogent representation.

The editor of the Spectator at that time was none other than Boris Johnson and that description “coiled leopard” has a rather Johnsonian ring, not to mention a certain likeness to the term “greased panther,” which “Boris” has jokingly used about himself.

Could it be that Johnson was a member of the judging panel that so glowingly endorsed Khan for his “eloquence” and his “tough-mindedness and clarity” when speaking in parliament about Islam and terrorism in Britain? I await a reply from the mayor’s office. Let’s hope it can reassure us that Johnson is not, as those former colleagues of his so witheringly claim, the sly, nasty, dishonest and self-serving individual they describe.

