Failure of the Elite (6): Boris’ Partygate – an Attack on Democracy
- lisaluger
- Feb 5, 2022
- 29 min read
Updated: Mar 21
(UK) What a start to 2022 for Boris Johnson! Hardly a day went by without another revelation about the parties at No. 10 Downing Street during the lockdown. At a time when people were banned from meeting anyone indoors who was not a member of their household or their support bubble, when people were only allowed to go outside for an hour for exercise and essential shopping and meet with no more than one other person.
As of 14 January 2022, we know of 16 parties. This includes several Christmas parties, including a Christmas quiz led by the Prime Minister, a few gatherings just to enjoy the beautiful weather in the garden of No. 10 Downing Street and to relax after a long and hard day. We also know of some leaving dos for valued staff. The last and most embarrassing farewell party, with a drinking bout and dancing until the wee hours of the morning, was for the Director of Communications, James Slack, on the eve of Prince Philip’s funeral. In the morning, the Queen sat alone in the choir stalls of Westminster Abbey due to lockdown regulations. What a contrast!
Source: How many lockdown parties were held in Downing Street? Timeline: the alleged Government gatherings. 14.1.2022. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59952395
There were reports of a drinking culture at No. 10 Downing Street and staff smuggling in alcohol from the nearby Coop in suitcases. The bottles were well-wrapped,so they would not rattle as they passed through security.
The British public reacted furious and enraged. Members of Parliament were bombarded with letters and emails from angry constituents who, at the time, could not see their seriously ill or dying loved ones, who had suffered hardship because of the lockdown rules but had complied in the interest of the common good. Media headlines condemned the ruling elite’s behaviour, who make rules but think they are above the law, loosely along the lines of “There are binding rules for the people. But for us, these rules are only non-binding options.” The prime minister has been accused of fooling the public.
Source: Downing Street Parties: How many wine bottles fit in a suitcase, and other questions. BBC. 1/14-22. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59959622
Denying, twisting the truth and playing dumb
Embarrassing, too, were the excuses and empty apologies.
Since the first reports of parties at No. 10 Downing Street surfaced, the prime minister has categorically denied the parties, or at least any knowledge of them, and insisted that all regulations had been followed at all times by him and his staff and cabinet members.
When video evidence of a party surfaced, he expressed outrage that such a thing had happened on his watch and condemned such behaviour strongly. He assigned Cabinet Secretary Simon Case to conduct an investigation. However, Simon Case soon stepped down from the task since he had apparently attended one of the parties.
Boris was confronted with further allegations, evidence of parties, and rumours of his own involvement. When it came out that Boris Johnson had also been to at least one of the parties, he said he had not known it was a party. He had thought the gathering was a work meeting with colleagues at the end of a long, hard day.
When the prime minister finally apologised, it sounded hollow, and no one believed him. He didn’t even have the decency to personally apologise to the Queen for the party on the eve of Prince Philip’s funeral but asked his office to do it for him instead.
Later, Boris Johnson explained that he had not known that the garden party on 20 May 2020, to which 100 people had been invited, had violated the lockdown rules. No one had told him that. Moreover, he categorically denied that he had been warned by several staff members that a party in the garden of No 10 Downing Street might violate the lockdown rules. The denial came after his long-time special adviser and close confidant, Dominic Cummings, released a statement agreeing to swear under oath that he and others had expressed concerns to the prime minister about a possible breach of the Covid rules. However, the prime minister ignored all warnings and allowed the party to go ahead. Yet, Boris insists that the 20 May 2020 garden party was a working meeting and no rules were broken.
Source: Boris Johnson: nobody warned me No 10 party was against the rules. The Guardian, 18 January 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/18/boris-johnson-nobody-warned-me-no-10-party-was-against-the-rules
How pathetic is this!!! First, the Prime Minister doesn’t know his own lockdown rules and regulations, which are known to everyone in the UK, and when they enlighten him, he decides to ignore them! Boris Johnson seems to support an entirely different government regime than one of democracy and the rule of law.
“Either my right honourable friend had not read the rules or did not understand what they meant, and those around him, or they did not think they applied to them. Which was it, Prime Minister?” Former Prime Minister Theresa May’s question to the Prime Minister in the House of Commons session on 31 January 2022
Internal Investigation – Let the fox guard the henhouse
The opposition and his own Conservative party members pressure him to resign after this farce. After all, there are votes to lose!
Nevertheless, the Prime Minister intends to sit it out. Boris Johnson and his close allies are asking all critics to wait for the report of Sue Gray, civil servant and Second Secretary of State at the Department for Equality, Housing and Communities. The idea is presumably to gain time and somehow grasp when and how the enquiry report will be published. There is actually hope for Boris Johnson in this regard. The independence and authority of Sue Gray are very questionable despite her excellent reputation.
Sue Gray was tasked to establish the facts about those allegedly involved when her boss, Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, who was initially entrusted with this investigation, had to step aside. He had taken part in a Christmas quiz in his office himself and was therefore involved.
Sue Gray has a reputation for being thorough and fair in her investigations. But what can she do when her hands are tied? She has no investigative powers. She can’t force witnesses to talk to her. She, therefore, has limited options to establish the facts of the case. Without the revelations in this 2nd week of January in the media and through leaks, she would not even know about most of the parties.
On the other hand, establishing the facts should not be tricky, as everyone going in and out of No. 10 Downing Street must be checked by security guards, and there are many cameras. Moreover, every presence and absence should be documented. So why is it taking so long to get data and facts?
Turkeys voting for Christmas!
Another question is, what will happen with the report? Sue Gray’s job is a fact-finding exercise. Therefore, it is not her job to pass judgement and draw political and legal consequences from the findings. So to whom does Sue Gray hand over her report, and who evaluates the findings? Who decides on guilty and not guilty?
Who decides what information is made public and in what form?
The answer, which leaves a logically thinking person stunned, is Simon Case and Prime Minister Boris Johnson!
How crazy is that? Like turkeys voting for Christmas!
The Prime Minister could use Sue Gray’s report as a get-out-of-jail-free card. Find a formal error! Query interpretations of the results! Ignore results or veto them! By the way, this is a common practice of the Prime Minister, as, for example, the enquiry into Priti Patel’s bullying behaviour towards staff has shown.
Boris Johnson refers everyone who demands clarification and consequences to the findings of the investigation, which are not yet available. Is he hoping that the scandal can be downgraded to minor misconduct, or does he possibly know that this report will not threaten him?
High-ranking officials, politicians, and media representatives rightly fear that the investigation findings could be scrutinised, modified, and reinterpreted by those involved in the events. They, therefore, suggested that instead, an independent person, e.g. a retired judge, should receive Sue Gray’s findings, review them and then make recommendations on how to proceed. Others called for a professional police investigation.
Source: The Guardian: No. 10 parties inquiry should have more independence, say former civil servants. 13.01.22. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/13/no-10-parties-inquiry-boris-johnson-sue-gray-former-civil-servants
This call for a neutral and objective assessment of enquiry findings is not just a question of decency or common sense. It is a question of separation of powers, the rule of law, and, ultimately, democratic principles.
How about a police investigation?
When reports emerged of parties at No. 10 Downing Street, concerned opposition MPs asked the Metropolitan Police (Met) to investigate. However, the Met declined to investigate the illegal parties, saying there was no evidence.
One email invited 100 staff to a “bring your own booze” event, which the prime minister admitted to attending. Video footage showed the No. 10 Downing Street press office members discussing how to describe the party if asked by the media. The subsequent resignation of Allegra Stratton, the press secretary. Were these deemed not enough evidence for the police to investigate? However, the Met did say they relied on Sue Gray’s report before launching their own investigation.
Even as more and more cases came to light and the Good Law Project called for investigations, the police still refused to investigate. Instead, they closed the case despite the blatant disregard for the lockdown rules at No. 10 Downing Street, the seat of government. It looks like the police simply believed the government’s assurances, i.e. the accused, that no rules were broken.
Seriously? Is this the usual procedure in criminal cases to believe the accused’s assurance that no law was broken more than circumstantial evidence and witnesses?!
In the meantime, the press has done much investigative work for the Met, and more evidence emerges daily.
The inaction of the Metropolitan Police seems to suggest that the police, like the ruling elite, have double standards. Not everyone is equal before the law! The Good Law Project is preparing to take legal action to force the Metropolitan Police to do their job.
However, there are indications that the police follow a particular strategy regarding compliance with Corona measures.
Police rely on persuasion – politicians on punishment
In a BBC interview, Justice Minister Dominic Raab said that the police do not usually investigate matters retrospectively for cases going back a year.
There is a core of truth in this untrue assertion by the Justice Minister. Of course, the police investigate offences that happened in the past and are not time-barred. Still, in the case of violations of the Covid regulations, the police do not routinely investigate retrospectively.
So what does the law say about investigating breaches of the Coronavirus Regulations?
According to Crown Prosecution Service guidelines, Covid offences fall under the less severe types of crimes, usually tried in a Magistrates’ Court. The sentencing powers are more limited, and there are also time limits for bringing proceedings. However, for covid offences, the time limit for initiating proceedings is three years of the alleged violation. But usually, the police issue a penalty notice where the offender can pay a fine to avoid criminal proceedings.
So under the law, the police can prosecute Covid violations and have done so in many cases, but not retrospectively.
No investigations were launched, and no criminal proceedings were initiated when individual political figures violated Covid regulations. Examples include when Dominic Cummings, then special adviser to Boris Johnson, travelled from London to Durham during the first lockdown; or when Matt Hancock, then health minister, was filmed kissing his assistant in the office during Covid social distancing regulations. It was a scandal but without legal consequences.
Police authorities said they generally avoided prosecuting Covid violations retrospectively. Instead, they preferred to talk to people and encourage them not to breach the regulations, and only as a last resort did they initiate proceedings and issue fines.
Nevertheless, it has been revealed that the Metropolitan Police have investigated several cases of Covid breaches and that more than a dozen Covid breaches have been prosecuted in Westminster Magistrates’ Court since December last year, including those involving parties.
Source: https://fullfact.org/law/dominic-raab-police-investigate-downing-street-party/ 08.12.2021.
So while the police relied on persuasion, politicians called for denunciation and punishment. In television interviews, Boris Johnson and his cabinet ministers, led by Home Secretary Priti Patel, urged the public to report their friends and neighbours to the police if they broke the lockdown rules, such as exceeding the number of friends or family allowed to meet. What hypocrites!
The police fined thousands of people for meeting friends and family members in parks and gardens in violation of the Covid contact restrictions. Perhaps the police should pay them back the money they were fined?
Peter Stefanovic, CWU News’ lawyer and filmmaker, has exposed this shocking hypocrisy in a brilliant video clip. See his tweet below.
After much public pressure, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick finally announced on Tuesday, 25 January 2022, that the Met would launch a criminal investigation into the parties at No 10 Downing Street. The Met’s decision was welcomed by many who hoped the Partygate affair could soon be cleared up. Sue Gray promised her full co-operation and to hand over her findings to the Met.
However, a few days later, when Sue Gray was about to present her report to the Prime Minister, she was asked by the Met only to publish a heavily redacted version of the report. In addition, the Met asked her to delete critical sections dealing with the most severe allegations and her most explosive findings.
Why on earth would the Met ask Sue Gray to redact parts of her independent report that everyone eagerly awaited?
The Met’s request caused public confusion and an outcry of incredulous anger. Opposition and concerned Tory politicians condemned the Met’s request, indicating a rigged game. The Met defended its decision by arguing that the full publication of the report would interfere with its investigation. However, the Met promised that Sue Gray’s report could be published in full once the police investigation was concluded.
Critics warned that this would mean a further delay of weeks, if not months, before the report was fully published. And that delay would benefit Boris Johnson, who hoped that everything would be forgotten by then, or at least the dust would have settled in the public’s eye.
Some Tory MPs are currently waiting for the publication of Sue Gray’s report to decide whether to join other rebels within the Conservative Party. This would mean that the Tories intend to replace Prime Minister Johnson with another Tory MP. To set the process in motion, 54 out of 360 Tory MPs (15 %) must submit their vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson in writing to the chair of the “1922 Committee”, the committee of Tory backbenchers. In the subsequent vote within the Tory parliamentary group, the prime minister must win at least 50 % of the votes if he wants to remain in office. However, the rebels are hesitant because if the prime minister gets the necessary votes, he will be immune from further motions of no confidence from his party colleagues for a year.
Therefore, undecided Tory MPs may have to wait for the police to complete their investigation.
This delay buys Boris Johnson time to work on critics within his own party and keep his party’s base in line by distracting them from the issue. This, in turn, would also keep constituency candidates threatened by the scandal in line with him.
No wonder his performance at Prime Minister’s Question Time in Parliament on Wednesday was upbeat and cheerful. When the Leader of the Opposition asked, he promised to publish the report in full, of course. He also laughed it off when the opposition demanded he resigns because a prime minister under investigation by the police for criminal activities was not fit to lead the country.
Although the Met’s request was not made public until two days later, on Friday, it can be assumed that Boris had prior knowledge of this.
Many Tory politicians privately expressed their concern that public trust in the political system was eroding.
Source: Downing Street Parties: Sue Gray won’t wait for police inquiry. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60177028
On Saturday night, 29 January 2022, critics demanded the Met be removed from the enquiry because of a conflict of interest. Dame Cressida Dick, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, is the most senior police officer in the country. Her immediate superior is Home Secretary Priti Patel, who owes her office to Boris Johnson. Priti Patel had extended Cressida Dick’s position as police chief for another two years in 2021, despite a series of scandals surrounding Cressida Dick. The plot thickens!
There are calls for another person, perhaps a retired police chief, to be put in charge of the Met’s investigation.
Source: Conservatives accused of ‘levelling up’ stunt to save Boris Johnson’s job. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/29/conservatives-accused-of-levelling-up-stunt-to-save-boris-johnsons-job. 29 January 2022.
What is the message of this tug-of-war over investigations into the government? Clearly, there is a lack of objective, independent scrutiny within the UK system of government. Is this perhaps related to British government officials considering their special position above the law to be God-given? The fair question is whether the people they represent see it that way too, or at least accept it.
Strategies to save Boris’ Bacon
After a week of turmoil (mid-January 2022) with calls for resignations from all parties, the Prime Minister is said to have locked himself in No. 10 Downing Street at the weekend to ponder how he might survive the conflict. Distraction is the tool of choice of all populists and also that of the British ruling elite.
– Operation Save Big Dog.
First of all, it is reported that he and those close to him have launched Operation Save Big Dog.
There are two aspects to this strategy.
Boris Johnson is determined to change the culture within No. 10 Downing Street to survive. It is unacceptable that officials drink alcohol and hold parties whilst restaurants and pubs are closed, and personal contacts are forbidden throughout the country. He certainly would hit the nail on the head with that one. But this is not a cultural change. So what is meant? Introducing a ban on alcohol on Government premises? But that already exists. A civil servant who goes shopping during his lunch break and wants to carry a bottle of wine back to the office for dinner at home gets into trouble. Everyone knows about this ban, including the party-mad lot at No. 10 Downing Street, because why else would they have smuggled the alcohol in suitcases past security?!
What else could cultural change mean? Decency? Law-abidingness? Integrity?
We hear that an overhaul of the prime minister’s top team is also under discussion. Some of his supporters think this could work; others say such a measure is too lax and does not address the crucial issues. Whatever is meant by that!
However, there are rumours, vehemently denied by Boris Johnson’s spokesman, that the PM will make some of his staff scapegoats, so they take the rap for him.
Who would be in the firing line?
According to The Guardian, Johnson’s First Private Secretary Martin Reynolds is among those most at risk. He has worked with Johnson for many years and has significantly influenced day-to-day decisions. However, he is facing dismissal for sending out the email inviting 100 staff to the infamous “bring your own booze” party in May 2020.
Also at risk is Chief of Staff Dan Rosenfield, who took over after Dominic Cummings and Eddie Lister left at the end of 2020. He is accused of approving the claim that no parties were held at No 10 Downing Street, which proved to be a serious strategic error.
Jack Doyle, who had been appointed director of communications after the departure of Lee Chain and James Slack, is at risk because the press office was the centre of the party and drinking culture. Doyle had offered his resignation when it was revealed that he had made a speech at the Christmas party on 18 December 2020. Johnson did not accept it then.
It will be interesting to see who will take the rap for Boris.
Sources:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-operation-big-dog-red-meat-nadhim-zahawi_uk_61e51df0e4b0a864b074bdbd Minister Denies Operations ‘Big Dog’ And ‘Red Meat’ Are Underway To Save The PM, 17 January 2022.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/16/operation-save-big-dog-who-is-in-line-of-fire-no-10-boris-johnson-partygate, 16 January 2022.
-Operation Red Meat – Diversionary tactics
Boris Johnson is desperately looking for diversionary scenarios, urging his party colleagues in the cabinet to come up with something to keep his backbenchers on his side – a strategy dubbed “Operation Red Meat”. But, of course, this is denied by the government and the Tories. However, what cannot be denied is the fact that frustrated constituencies are pressuring increasingly Tory MPs to distance themselves from the prime minister if they want to be re-elected.
As a result, diversionary tactics are staged every few days.
These include, for example, plans to scrap the BBC licence fee altogether. This a plan that would seriously jeopardise the future of the BBC as this is its primary source of income. Many Tory ministers and backbenchers, who have long criticised the BBC for its political coverage, would surely be delighted. It would kill two birds with one stone: distraction through media hype and closing ranks in the Conservative Party.
The BBC is trusted and admired nationally and internationally for the thoroughness and accuracy of its news, reporting and its wide range of programming for all ages. It is the oldest and largest national broadcaster in the world. It celebrates its 100th birthday this year (18 October 2022). The BBC is funded primarily by an annual television licence fee levied on all UK households, organisations and businesses that use its radio, television, online and iPlayer services. The fee is set by the government and voted on by parliament. In 2019, annual revenue from the licence fee was almost £3.7 billion, representing 76% of the BBC’s total revenue of £4.9 billion. (£159 a year per household, or £13 a month).
The government’s attack on the BBC threatens freedom of speech, press, and democracy. In its intention to abolish the national public service broadcaster, the government is attacking the principle of a democratic society. This entails ensuring access to fair, independent and balanced news media for all, broadcast media that should inform, educate and challenge, and exercise a degree of scrutiny over government and parliament. Holding those in power to account is an essential function of the news media. No wonder the BBC and other independent media are a thorn in the side of this government.
As Polly Toynbee writes in The Guardian (16 January 22): “Britain’s influence has been deliberately vandalised by Conservatives who talk mindlessly of “patriotism” while demolishing all the vehicles of national pride abroad: foreign aid has been cut right back, while the British Council – almost as old as the BBC – is to close 20 offices around the world. British academic influence has been battered by the needless withdrawal from the Erasmus programme, and scientists are locked out of Horizon research funding. Now the BBC is mortally threatened.”
Source: The BBC must defend itself with all its might against this mortal threat. The Guardian 16 January 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/16/bbc-culture-secretary-funding-licence-fee
On Sunday, 16 January 2022, Culture Minister Nadine Dorries threatened to abolish the licence fee permanently but softened her stance a day later. She announced that BBC licence fees would be frozen until 2024 and gradually increased in line with inflation after that. She justified the freeze by saying that this was necessary to help poor people who could not afford the licence fee and would face imprisonment if they did not pay.
This decision is less radical than was expected, even though the temporary freeze will leave the BBC with a funding gap of £285 million until 2027.
The BBC may be economically damaged, but it is safe for the time being. So it seems that either the government has realised that it is making a big mistake by trying to destroy the BBC, or the threat is a red herring from Boris Johnson’s current problems.
The unexpected announcement of easing pandemic measures also makes an excellent distraction and an electoral gift from the Tories to their constituencies.
In a surprise move, the beleaguered Boris Johnson announced on Wednesday (19 January 2022) that he would drop the Plan B measures as the country would have to live with the virus.
This would remove Covid regulations in England, including the requirement to wear face masks. Plan A measures (such as the recommendation to continue wearing face masks when indoors with many people and the need for travellers to undergo testing two days after entering the UK) will remain in place for now. However, Boris Johnson promised further relaxation of the travel rules would be announced soon.
Tory MPs who had opposed the entry restrictions were pleased, and this announcement is likely to help the prime minister gain more support.
Business bosses, at any rate, welcomed the news of the end of Plan B as this would give them an economic boost. But some academics and practitioners said it was too much liberation too soon. Royal College of Nursing CEO Pat Cullen linked the change's reason and timing to the prime minister’s political crisis and warned that the country could not rely on vaccines alone. The pressure on the health system was unrelenting, she said. Dr Susan Hopkins, the chief medical adviser to Public Health England, advised people to continue wearing masks on trains, undergrounds, buses, and busy indoor areas and to get tested regularly. London Mayor Sadiq Khan said that wearing masks would still be mandatory on the capital’s public transport despite the law being scrapped.
And, of course, immigration. Illegal migrants are always a red herring, and it always works!
In this respect, measures are in the pipeline that certainly have the potential for discussion.
It is rumoured that a policy to tackle the illegal channel crossing by migrants, which the government has long promised, could be launched soon. Home Secretary Priti Patel is expected to announce soon that the navy will be deployed to fend off boatloads of illegal migrants. However, critics amongst defence experts say that using forces in this way instead of focusing on threats from Russia and China would be a distraction from the real problems.
But dealing with refugees seems to be a better distraction from the PM’s failures for the British people than the tensions between Europe or the UK and Russia and China. As a result, foreign policy may be subordinated to the political well-being of the Prime Minister and the Conservative Party.
Even a series of long-overdue social measures and tax laws could be used to secure votes for the PM and his party and consign his transgressions to oblivion.
The long-awaited levelling-up policy to improve deprived towns and areas is imminent. This policy is much anticipated by Tory MPs, especially those who won their seats at the last election in 2019 when frustrated Labour supporters voted for the Tories because they were promised significant improvements in their living conditions. But unless Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, Minister for Levelling-up, come up ASAP with a clear strategy, the electorate would see those election promises as hollow and empty and attributed to current failings.
Pressed for time, Michael Gove’s Department for Equality, Housing and Communities issued a press release at the end of January saying 20 towns and cities in the original “Red Wall” (former Labour) constituencies in the north of the country would benefit from a supposedly new £1.5 billion fund. This announcement was to show that the government would fulfil its election promise of levelling up disadvantaged regions.
However, this announcement backfired severely. Gove’s ministry had to backtrack and admit that the new fund was not new money but money already approved in the autumn budget 2021. The statement was consequently torn apart by opposition politicians. They exposed it as a gambit on how far Johnson and his ministers were willing to go to get the “Red Wall” constituency Tory MPs to back the Prime Minister.
This hasty announcement also reveals another important point: the government is not remotely serious about equalising and reducing inequality in this country.
Reforming and overhauling the health system is proving extremely difficult. Covid has exacerbated the backlog in the NHS, i.e. the lengthening of waiting times for examinations and operations. Clearing the backlog in the NHS has been promised for a long time and is urgently needed. The planned increase in the National Insurance contributions is supposed to fund measures to reduce the backlog. But this will not be enough, according to experts. Presumably, Tory MPs will not be prepared to accept further tax increases or charges before the election. Therefore, this issue will probably not be a priority in the near future.
By contrast, the issue of fighting inflation could positively impact the approval ratings of the Tories and Boris Johnson. The cost of living has risen in the last year due to inflation, the rise in energy costs and the economic impact of Covid and Brexit etc., which is hitting low-income families particularly hard. So Boris Johnson could think about abolishing VAT. That would provide some relief. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak is expected to announce such a bill soon. This move could be a kind of “get out of jail” card for Boris Johnson – as long as Chancellor Rishi Sunak doesn’t take credit for it.
Source: Operation Red Meat: The Policy announcements to help save Boris Johnson and if they will work. https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/operation-red-meat-explained-boris-johnson-policy-announcements-1405473 17 January 2022.
Is the party soon over for Boris?
“Two years ago, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was on top of the political world. Today he looks like a dead man walking.” So commented the Washington Post on 13 January 2022 on the PM’s recent scandals. The Post warned that if the Conservative Party was not careful, it could soon step down as well.
Indeed, members of the Conservative Party are concerned about the impact the party-gate scandal could have on the party and whether they would be able to retain their seats in parliament. “Lead or step aside!” demanded a growing group of Conservative MPs.
– Loyal followers
Oddly, most of his cabinet members still stick behind him and defend him.
So does his loyal supporter Jacob Rees-Mogg – in his usual condescending manner. When Douglas Ross, the Leader of the Scottish Conservatives and a potential leader of a rebellion of Tory MPs, criticised Boris Johnson, Rees-Mogg made little secret of his contempt for his party colleague. In a television interview on Newsnight, he dismissively stated that Douglas Ross had always been an insignificant lightweight who had always been in opposition to the prime minister. That Ross has the full support of the Scottish Tory Party behind him and can be potentially dangerous to the government, something Rees-Mogg ignores for reasons of arrogance or loss of reality.
Other cabinet members praise Boris Johnson, point to the successes under his leadership and urge MPs to support him.
Among them is Nadine Dorries, the culture secretary. She is perhaps the most prominent supporter in the cabinet and across the party. However, she was recently brusquely expelled from a Tory WhatsApp group critical of Lockdown for trying to mobilise support for Johnson.
Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, owes her post and the fact that she still holds it to Boris Johnson. He dismissed allegations of bullying against her by Patel’s staff, saving her from negative headlines, investigations and dismissal.
Nadhim Zahawi, Minister of Education, a long-time ally of the Prime Minister, lets everyone know that Boris Johnson’s job is safe and what a successful Prime Minister he is. However, what precisely these successes were and whether they were of Boris Johnson’s doing, he does not explain so conclusively.
because
Boris Johnson’s so-called successes occurred when Dominic Cummings was running his activities. After losing his chief adviser, he stumbled from one misjudgement to the next.
Moreover, his successes are dubious. Any Tory leader would have won the last election against a divided Labour Party. The credit for the successful vaccination campaign goes mainly to the scientists and the NHS and not to Boris personally.
Under Johnson’s leadership, Britain has shrunk as a global power, a consequence of Brexit, which weakened relations with allies and key trading partners in Europe. But that is a different story.
– Intrigue, betrayal and race for government positions
In addition to the benefitting “cheerleaders” among the Conservatives, some distance themselves from the prime minister. Some hope for a chance to rise under a successor.
Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss are considered potential opponents to Boris Johnsen as PM. Both still (half-heartedly) support him but have already begun to position themselves for a likely leadership battle and are courting the support of Tory backbenchers.
Another motive for dismantling Prime Minister Boris Johnson could be revenge. After Boris Johnson dumped his long-time friend and compatriot Dominic Cummings, he sought revenge.
Cummings and his friends from Vote Leave supported Boris Johnson in the Brexit campaign and helped him win the 2019 election. When Boris Johnson came to power, Dominic Cummings joined him as a special adviser and his colleague Lee Cain became communications director. However, under the pressure of the Covid crisis, significant tensions and heated arguments arose between the Vote Leave faction and the Prime Minister’s wife, Carrie, and her friends. They argued about the direction the government should take. As a result, Boris cut his ties with Vote Leave, and both Dominic Cummings and Lee Cain left Downing Street in mid-November 2020.
Making an enemy of a friend with insider knowledge is always dangerous. Cumming’s revelations to the House of Commons Select Committee on 19 May 2021 about Boris’s incompetence shocked many. But none of this has hurt Boris Johnson’s position. Yet, Cummings continues to feed the media and whoever wants to hear damaging information about Boris Johnson.
But nothing, not even an unleashed Boris Johnson, can be as damaging and hurtful as what the Conservative Party is doing to itself right now. They have crossed red lines in their boundless fear of losing votes and power.
Tory fury spills over as Boris Johnson clings on
The current scenario has something apocalyptic about it from the Tories’ point of view. Tory MPs report being inundated by their constituents’ angry emails and phone calls. Conservative associations across the country report dissatisfied members and resignations in protest against Boris Johnson and the Conservatives’ unwavering loyalty to him.
Rightly, many Tory MPs fear that they will lose the upcoming local elections in May 2022 if Boris Johnson does not resign. One MP said, “The sad thing is that good MPs and people who work hard for their local constituents will have to pay the price (meaning Boris Johnson’s unsustainable behaviour) at the local elections in May.
“He’s a coward.”…” It’s the fact that he lied. If he had said I did it, I’m sorry, then that would have been fine. But he lied. He has lost everyone’s trust.” (Voice of Tory voters)
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/17/grassroots-tories-want-boris-johnson-to-quit
"In the name of God, go!"
This disapproving attitude of many Conservative party members came to a head for all to see during Prime Minister’s Question Time in Parliament on Wednesday, 19 January 2022. Boris Johnson faced a Tory MP defecting to the Labour Party benches in front of the rolling TV cameras on that dramatic day. On that same day, one of the most senior Tory MPs and ex-ministers, David Davies, called on Boris Johnson to resign (“In the name of God, go!”).
Rumour has it that in January 2022, some 30 Tory MPs declared their support for a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister. More party colleagues are expected to withdraw their trust in the PM following Sue Gray’s enquiry findings. The decision of many Tory colleagues on whether to support or oust Boris Johnson depends on whether they believe he will bring them vote losses or vote gains in the 2022 local elections.
And this is where the government comes in. The crackdown on rebels among the Conservatives is perfidious.
Tory MPs report that some of them have been threatened with funding cuts. The planned redrawing of parliamentary constituencies next year, when several constituencies are likely to be dissolved, has also been used as a disciplinary measure to crush the rebels. Ministers had pressured and intimidated them into abandoning their plot against Boris Johnson. A senior Tory MP, William Wraggs (chairman of a House of Commons committee), accused the government of blackmail. He said the rebels had been threatened with the withdrawal of government investment in their constituencies.
MPs reported that ministers, advisers and staff at No.10 Downing Street had encouraged the press or social media to publish embarrassing stories about those suspected of withdrawing confidence from the prime minister. Wakeford, who defected from the Tory party to Labour, said he was threatened and coerced into supporting the government. If he didn’t, then he would not receive the funding for the promised school in his constituency. Meanwhile, other MPs have come forward, accusing the government of putting pressure on them by threatening to deprive them of funds for their constituencies.
The idea that some country areas are denied promised funding for schools, roads and other projects because their MPs are unwilling to stand by the failing prime minister is intolerable to any Democrat.
LibDem leader Sir Ed Davey accused Boris Johnson of behaving more like a mafia boss than a prime minister. Labour deputy leader Angela Raynor called for a thorough investigation.
However, the government denied any wrongdoing. Boris Johnson said he saw no evidence of blackmail. He refused to investigate the Tory MPs’ allegations until they produced evidence to support their claims. This could prove difficult as the party’s whips know how to pressure MPs without leaving a trail.
The job of a whip is to get MPs in line to ensure that they vote the way the party leadership wants them to. The name “whip-in” probably comes from an old hunting term where whippers were tasked with keeping the pack of hounds in line. The whips are known to use intimidation and promises of promotion to ensure that potentially dissenting MPs are brought into line.
This time, the whips may have overstepped the mark, as the allegations of blackmail and threats to withhold funds for their constituencies or cancel long-promised projects border on criminal behaviour and fraud. A red line has again been crossed.
And this time, they may not get away with it. The beleaguered MPs plan to release a secretly recorded conversation with the Chief Whip, Mark Spencer, and to supply news stories to back up their claims of intimidation.
Sources: In the Name of God: Go. Tory fury spills over as Boris Johnson clings on. The Guardian.19.1.2022. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/19/boris-johnson-faces-growing-demands-to-quit-from-tory-backbenchers?utm_term=61e8ec53ac83a81938ee24ff2deb4078&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayUK&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=GTUK_email Boris Johnson: I have seen no evidence of blackmailing. BBC 20.1.22. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60068612
What if the whole partygate scandal is a diversion from something much worse?
Yes, the parties at No. 10 Downing Street are outrageous, and the Prime Minister and his colleagues are laughing in our faces. But what if this partygate scandal is just a red herring of something much more severe?
George Monbiot of @DoubleDownNews warned that the government is taking away our freedoms in a big way without us realising it. Here’s a link to his podcast tweet.
He reminded us that a Bill is currently going through its final stages in Parliament, the Police Bill. This bill threatens our democracy. It contains measures to stop and ban all forms of protest in the country. They include banning all forms of non-violent protest used throughout history worldwide. They also include new powers for the police to stop and search people and ban certain people from participating in demonstrations even if they have not committed a crime. If this law is passed, our fundamental democratic rights will be taken away.
Therefore, it is extremely worrying that this bill could be quietly introduced into parliament with hardly any discussion in the media. The voices of the opposition went unheard, and with its large 80-vote majority in parliament, it was easy for the government to push this bill through. Fortunately, the members of the House of Lords, which has to confirm bills, showed more democratic understanding and sent the bill back to the House of Commons with proposed amendments for further discussion and voting. This will buy more time.
So while everyone, media, parliamentarians and the country as a whole, stare spellbound and paralysed at the government’s brazen misconduct, human and civil rights are being curtailed, unnoticed by the public.
The nationality and border protection legislation is another repressive piece of legislation. With this new Bill, the British government wants to overhaul the asylum and immigration system, allegedly to make it fairer and more efficient. In reality, it gives the Home Secretary new powers to turn away refugees and asylum seekers coming to the UK for protection and to deport undesirables. In addition, there are plans to strip British citizens of their citizenship and make them stateless without first informing them.
Opposition politicians and many national and international organisations, such as UNHCR (the UN Refugee Agency) and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), have expressed serious concerns. They believe the measures envisaged in the draft law are glaringly flawed and likely to have severe consequences for people fleeing persecution and violence. The Bill contravenes the 1951 Refugee Convention, the treaty that has protected refugees for decades (of which the UK is a signatory) and other legal obligations of the UK. This bill would drastically undermine the country’s international standing. With this Bill, the Home Secretary seeks to criminalise, detain and push back people seeking protection, including children and survivors of torture and sexual violence. This bill would make the UK one of the most refugee-hostile countries in the world. Instead of improving protection for the persecuted, refugees would be discouraged from entering the UK by any means necessary.
Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, has already promised 18 more such measures under the Police Act.
This is disturbing, frightening news. There should be an outcry in the media and society. But nothing of the sort is happening. A wise rule is: When everyone looks at one point, look around! Distraction is of the essence for magicians, thieves and for politicians.
We would therefore do well to be vigilant to protect our democracy. We need to be careful not to be distracted by parties, scandals and the Prime Minister’s silly clownish performances, or his outrageous and irritating behaviour whilst at the same time the most draconian laws are being introduced and enforced.
Boris Johnson is only a representative of a system
Whether he falls or not, either now or later, Boris Johnson is badly wounded as a politician and as the prime minister. Patrick Cockburn’s analysis in i-news of Johnson’s place in history sums it up: “But a wounded populist is a dangerous thing, as Donald Trump has shown as he spews out calls to arms to rally his core supporters. Johnson is reacting in a somewhat similar fashion, threatening the BBC, one of the few remaining British institutions with real prestige in the world with defunding and sending the Royal Navy to stop refugees crossing the Channel. The egotism and irresponsibility about Johnson at bay that is breathtaking, and it will probably get worse. He may not have started the decline of Britain, but he has certainly speeded it up.”
Source: Patrick Cockburn’s Dispatches. What will be Johnson’s place in British history? Expert analyses on world news. I-news, 22.01.2022.
Okay, that may be true. But we must be careful and remember that it is not the behaviour and attitude of a single person like Boris that does injustice to a democratic country. It is the elitist system he represents and upholds. Another elitist prime minister could soon replace Boris, and the show would go on. As long as this elitist governing system is maintained, there will be one rule for them, the elite, and a completely different rule for us, the people. There will be no accountability and no honest leadership working in the interest of the people. (LL)
Update 4 February 2022: After I’d finished writing this article (31 January 2022), a turbulent week followed that brought more chaos for the PM, Downing Street and the parliament. So I’ll include some key issues.
First, on Monday, the watered-down report by Sue Gray still managed to reveal that the Met are investigating no less than 12 party events, including one in the PM’s Downing Street flat. Gray also blamed leadership and judgment failures for the scandal and excessive alcohol consumption in Downing Street offices.
In his statement to Parliament, Boris Johnson accepted the findings and promised a shake-up of Downing Street operation. However, he faced criticism from his own side and the opposition. A beleaguered Johnson attacked the opposition leader, Keir Starmer, unfairly. He used an incorrect conspiracy theory from an extreme far-right website to smear him. He accused Keir of failing in his former Director of Public Prosecution role to persecute Jimmy Saville, the worst child sex abuser in history.
This erroneous claim backfired severely. The PM was hit by a storm of protests, including his own MPs and lawyers of the victims of Saville’s abuse. The Saville smear dominated political debate, and his Cabinet ministers were forced to defend Johnson.
On Thursday, and within 24 hours, Boris Johnson lost five of his Downing Street key staff. First, his long-standing top policy aide, Munira Mirza, resigned, giving her reason for her resignation Johnson’s use of false claims of the child abuse case to score political points. Further Downing Street resignations followed. Some (Doyle, Rosenfield and Reynolds) by mutual agreement, others (Elena Narozanski, political advisor from the No 10 Policy Unit) could take no more.
Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-boris-johnson-emails-tory-mps-promising-to-listen_uk_61fd43e6e4b09170e9d01acf, 4 February 2022. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60254837. What do key resignations mean for the PM? 4 February 2022.
And so, the story continues to run. But Johnson stubbornly will not go but fights on. He is causing more and more damage to our democracy by doing so. People will simply lose trust, not only in Tory politicians but also in democracy and our political system. LL
My analysis is divided into several areas and includes:
Comentários