I agree with all of that. But there he is, saying he’ll resign but stay on as caretaker PM. Why is he even saying that, in the teeth of all the facts? He should have walked to the lectern in Downing St and resigned by now. He’s irrationally hanging on for something, he probably doesn’t even know what.
He should by all rights go, and he almost certainly will go. But if he’s given an inch of wiggle room he’ll take it for all it’s worth. And if the Tory party were collectively capable of being ruthless with an obvious liability, he would have gone at least 4 weeks ago when they had the chance to vote him out. So who know what madness might yet ensue?
I’m wondering the status of the Northern Ireland Protocol now, which passed second reading (I frankly have no idea if that means it has passed its last vote) was the pusher for all of this, with pincher, bungabunga parties and other such things just the main excuses.
And whether the next PM will continue down that scorched earth path which might have led to the case of sanctions from the US and the EU against the UK, the rogue state that Johnson was leading, and whether it will continue in that direction.
I’ve just heard that Johnson is resigning as party leader, but not as Prime Minister. Which might be the far more blacker of the turns from this octopus of shitbaggery.
I’m not sure we have to look any further than vanity and egotism to explain much of this. Traits that are common in many politicians.
I personally don’t hate Boris but for sure he was unsuited as PM and probably as an MP.
What his careers advisors should have said at an early age was “go into academia” He would have made (and could still make) an excellent professor of classics.
He truly loves that world and is literate, articulate, entertaining and incisive when he talks about it. Students would learn so much from him and he’d have no real executive power to misuse. It was a lose-lose for both politics and academia.
(and that’s always the biggest difference I see with Trump and Boris, I cannot imagine a position in this world where Trump actually makes an honest, genuine contribution to the betterment of a nation, for Boris I can)
If that’s second reading in the Commons, then no - now it goes to the Lords. Whether there will be room on the timetable before the summer recess may be debatable, but whenever it gets there, there will be opposition, and even if the relevant ministers stick with it (assuming anyone wants the job), they can’t argue this bill* was mandated by the last general election (which would give the Commons ultimate power to overrule the Lords after a year). It could be stuck in the ping-pong phase between them for a while.
*Which isn’t the NI Protocol itself, that’s already in law and in effect for the last 18 months. This is an amendment, supposedly intended as a negotiating ploy with the EU over the administrative implementation, the government having discovered (surprise, surprise) that it creates obstacles to trade between NI and the rest of the UK, and that the DUP would rather collapse NI government institutions than see it continue.
I really do not think this. Johnson only serves Johnson, any betterment will have been by mistake, any money given out, to keep silence and buy loyalty. He only serves to cause division to keep himself in power. Directly and indirectly he’s taken the UK from 13th (2014) richest country in the world to the 36th (2021). The mans a monster, just diverting with some knockabout tomfoolery, evil comes most successfully dressed as a clown.
And getting unjustified freebies on expenses for a girlfriend is likely to land academics on hot water too. I suppose an ability to winkle money out of donors is as welcome in academe as in politics - though not for personal perks like treehouses and £800 a roll wallpaper.
It would have been better if Boris Johnson pursued a career as one of those ‘personality’ historians that we see on the BBC. Striding confidently in and out of impressive classical buildings and up and down steps expanding effusively about historical figures.
Whether Boris cuts the mustard academically amongst classical scholars is another matter. I suspect he is a light weight. But then a TV friendly personality trumps rigour when popularising history.
It would have been far better for the country if his talents were directed away from important matters of state. The politics of the country is far too important to be left to clowns like him.
Except under him, evil doll Nadine Dorries cut BBC4 to the bone, going from a channel showing world leading self produced documentaries, to now repeats of hits of the 70s, such as On the buses and The Likely lads. I’m not sure if the BBC produces any documentaries anymore after that.
And is privatising Channel 4 because it’s not ‘value for money’ to the taxpayer even though the taxpayer doesn’t contribute a single penny to Channel 4. I have a lot of friends at Ch4 - they are absolutely furious with her and I don’t blame them.
Westminster systems are much more nimble on this sort of thing than the US one.
First, you’re either in or you’re out, supporting the PM or not. If you announce that you no longer support the PM, but will stay on in office, odds are you’d be sacked by the PM the next day, as Gove discovered. (Is this the second or third time Gove knifed Boris in the back? It’s hard to keep track.)
Second, the PM can put a new person into the position right away. No need for confirmation hearings. A new minister is expected to be on top of their remit right away, just as in the case of a shuffle or a new government.
I misspoke earlier about second reading. That’s just the debate on the general principle/desirability of such legislation, so it’s even further from approval than I thought: now it goes into committee for line-by-line scrutiny, so all the intricacies of differentiating checks, labelling and other paperwork for different products, red and green channels and all the rest of it. Then it goes back to the full House for third reading and final sign-off to the Lords. It could go on till Christmas, even if whatever new regime sticks with it.
Nah. This is just politics. Brutal politics, but just politics. The Tories will put Boris’ head on a spike, there will be a nasty leadership fight leaving lots of blood on the floor, and the winner will toddle off to Buck House, kiss HM’s hand, and all will be well. (Maybe. Sorta.)
So, apropos this whole “staying on as caretaker” thing… What’s the usual procedure for immediate replacement of a Prime Minister? Even absent this sort of ugly politics, there’s always the possibility of a PM dying in office or something, and so there must be some way to ensure continuity. Is there a “vice PM”? And if there is, wouldn’t that person be the “caretaker”?
