UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[Torrain]

Presumed leadership challenger, and Foreign Relations Committee Chair, Tom Tugendhat joins the fray:

"The PM put the governance of the UK at risk to a single, severe Covid outbreak. That is to say nothing of the lack of respect it showed for the British people or the Queen.

I have made my position clear to those who need to hear it"

[CumbrianLefty]

Of course it will be before the by-election…

It’s a big flaw in the system that it can be triggered by accident.

I wouldn't rule out "tactical" withdrawal of some letters to ensure it doesn't happen before June 23rd.

[MABA 2020]

Another one - Elliot Colburn, who's seat is uber-marginal with the Lib Dems (under 650 votes), has put his letter in.

I have to wonder whether going home for constituency surgeries over the weekend may have provided the motivation to get him over the line...

Source: https://twitter.com/TomLarkinSky/status/1531270078674751489

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1531275275056578561?s=20&t=LwkjoIz...

Is there any leg to this rumor, or is ElectionMaps just talking out of his ass?

Hmmm I don't buy it

[brucejoel99]

And most importantly - there's a real sense that Brady wouldn't announce the vote until the recall is over (both in fear of the bad press that overshadowing the jubilee would bring, and because not enough MPs would make it back to London in time for a vote, which is held within 24 hours of it's announcement).

Where does this sense come from? Rule-breaking obviously isn't beyond the Tories, yeah, but that in particular would go a long way to violating the spirit of Brady's role, which comes with no oversight except the 1922's confidence, & he seems like exactly the type who takes the role too seriously to not do something that may displease members, like sit on letters. (Not to mention, the ship has sailed for the Tories to avoid looking bad for spending the entire Jubilee mired in infighting.) I just think that it's as simple as he doesn't have the numbers yet, but will start placing the calls to confirm that he does just as soon as he does, at which point, at least one MP is guaranteed to ensure that it'll obviously then leak out to the press:

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1531351074422067202
The "senior Tories" who talked to the FT estimate the number of letters to be in the low-40s right now, so in any event, Brady will clearly have the numbers no later than the Tories getting absolutely rekt yet again in the upcoming by-elections.

[Torrain]

And most importantly - there's a real sense that Brady wouldn't announce the vote until the recall is over (both in fear of the bad press that overshadowing the jubilee would bring, and because not enough MPs would make it back to London in time for a vote, which is held within 24 hours of it's announcement).

Where does this sense come from? Rule-breaking obviously isn't beyond the Tories, yeah, but that in particular would go a long way to violating the spirit of Brady's role, which comes with no oversight except the 1922's confidence, & he seems like exactly the type who takes the role too seriously to not do something that may displease members, like sit on letters. (Not to mention, the ship has sailed for the Tories to avoid looking bad for spending the entire Jubilee mired in infighting.) I just think that it's as simple as he doesn't have the numbers yet, but will start placing the calls to confirm that he does just as soon as he does, at which point, at least one MP is guaranteed to ensure that it'll obviously then leak out to the press:

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1531351074422067202
The "senior Tories" who talked to the FT estimate the number of letters to be in the low-40s right now, so in any event, Brady will clearly have the numbers no later than the Tories getting absolutely rekt yet again in the upcoming by-elections.

Calling a vote while parliament is in recess would be chaotic - MPs will return to their constituencies for the recess, meaning they are scattered from the Isle of Wight to Aberdeenshire. Most can easily make it back to London in 48 hours, but calling a vote in the evening for the following day (as per the precedent of the past two VONCs) would cause bedlam. Especially on a bank holiday weekend, and amid a historic level of disruption to aviation (EasyJet, one of our major carriers, has cancelled a myriad of flights, putting extra strain on an already manic week). The odds are that a number of MPs wouldn’t make it back, or when they did get back, at 1 or 2am, the first thing on their mind would be replacing Brady!

Beyond that, the Jubilee really is seen as that big of a deal in some corners, especially among the older, social conservatives who make up the party membership. We’re talking about the party that suspended Parliament for a week in order to celebrate it! Brady clearly believes in the rules, but I don’t think he would see it as incongruent to wait until Parliament was sitting again to inform the party and call the vote.

That being said - it’s still unclear, and probably unlikely, that he’s got enough - we really may be waiting until the by-elections.

Edit: on a specific source for Brady waiting - I could point to several articles, for Yahoo, the Guardian etc, but they all just say the same thing, that this is the expectation. It seems to be one of these assumed things, that an MP said to a journalist off the record, and has been repeated over and over.

[Blair]

Leadsom comes out against the PM and pretty much says it’s game over.

Significant as she was the one who put her name to the effort to save Paterson and she has clearly wanted to return to Government for some time- also a noted Brexiteer and Boris Backer.

She is however not a complete headbanger- she was one of the strongest voices for reforming Parliaments attitude to harassment.

[YL]

Leadsom comes out against the PM and pretty much says it’s game over.

Significant as she was the one who put her name to the effort to save Paterson and she has clearly wanted to return to Government for some time- also a noted Brexiteer and Boris Backer.

She is however not a complete headbanger- she was one of the strongest voices for reforming Parliaments attitude to harassment.

Her letter does suggest she is now in the anti-Johnson camp ("unacceptable failings of leadership that cannot be tolerated") but it doesn't actually call for him to go nor does it say she's written to Brady...

[CumbrianLefty]

It does seem like the dream scenario for the Tories opponents - Johnson wins a confidence vote, but unconvincingly - is very much a live one. I note that some of the blue team are starting to hope that he "walks" in that scenario - nothing is impossible from such an unpredictable man, but all the prior indicators are that he will hang on for grim death and almost literally have to be prised out of No 10.

Genuinely, few could have foreseen that such a stunning victory in the last GE would turn to ashes in the mouth so totally. Even barely a year ago, the Tories were making big gains in local elections - that was almost unprecedented for a party in power for over a decade. Hubris begating nemesis, indeed.

[Torrain]

Leadsom’s position is annoyingly vague - no letter or call for resignation. But she’s one of a number of MPs who’ve moved from publicly stating that it was time to “move on”, to open criticism of Johnson, which shows how much the mood has changed in the past week.

She’s joined by a number of other MPs with similar statements on the unacceptability of partygate today (the five I’m aware of are Andrew Selous, Andrew Murrison, John Lamont (PPS to Liz Truss), Kate Griffiths, Mark Garnier), who’ve broken cover for the first time.

There’s obviously something brewing, but it’s hard to gauge exactly just how strong the sentiment is. Increasingly, I’ve got the sense that a VONC is highly likely, but that Johnson is still favoured - for now.

[Torrain]

In contrast to the vague criticism above, we have another confirmed letter. The member for Carlisle, John Stevenson.

While most rebels have come from either Lib Dem-Tory marginals, or Tory seats with landslide-proof majorities, Carlisle is typically a Labour-Tory marginal and with the exception of a strong 8,000 vote majority in 2019, typically has a margin of 2,000 votes. 

Full statement here: https://mobile.twitter.com/John4Carlisle/status/1531612657077436421

By Tom Larkin’s count - that’s now 28 public letters, with public critics of Johnson (letter writers, plus those who are just “concerned”) in the mid 40s.

[YL]

There are actually a few in Labour-facing seats; of those listed as "Yes" on Election Maps UK's tracker I'd note the following in addition to Stevenson:

Aaron Bell (Newcastle under Lyme)
Julian Sturdy (York Outer)
Steve Baker (Wycombe)
Tim Loughton (East Worthing & Shoreham)
Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East)

The last four might not be thought of as traditional Lab/Con marginals, but they're all red on Election Maps UK's current "nowcast" map, and that isn't exactly a landslide scenario.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

If Boris is knifed, I don't think he'll go quietly: the behaviour of Kevin Rudd after he was removed comes to mind.

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1531655679911636993?s=20&t=K-gLjW...

[Blair]

It does seem like the dream scenario for the Tories opponents - Johnson wins a confidence vote, but unconvincingly - is very much a live one. I note that some of the blue team are starting to hope that he "walks" in that scenario - nothing is impossible from such an unpredictable man, but all the prior indicators are that he will hang on for grim death and almost literally have to be prised out of No 10.

Genuinely, few could have foreseen that such a stunning victory in the last GE would turn to ashes in the mouth so totally. Even barely a year ago, the Tories were making big gains in local elections - that was almost unprecedented for a party in power for over a decade. Hubris begating nemesis, indeed.

The toad squatting over British Politics as he was called.

The first big flashing red sign was when he delivered a completely gibberish full conference speech which no real plan or policies and was seen as a genius. I did remember thinking it seemed very strange and not the speech that someone who was then expected to rule for a decade would give.

[Blair]

Hilarious briefing that Boris will call a snap election- something ofc that would be most likely rejected by the Queen, and which would happen under the old election boundaries.

The results from Wales alone would knock back their majority by a good chunk…

[brucejoel99]

Hilarious briefing that Boris will call a snap election- something ofc that would be most likely rejected by the Queen, and which would happen under the old election boundaries.

The results from Wales alone would knock back their majority by a good chunk…

If BoJo went to the Palace right now & requested that HM dissolve Parliament, would 28 letters of no-confidence publicly submitted to Brady so far out of the 54 that are required to trigger a vote that he'd likely win rn by a 2/3rds+ or so margin anyway be enough reason for her to believe that her PM no longer has the House's confidence & justify a delay or refusal?

[Estrella]

Hilarious briefing that Boris will call a snap election- something ofc that would be most likely rejected by the Queen, and which would happen under the old election boundaries.

The results from Wales alone would knock back their majority by a good chunk…

If BoJo went to the Palace right now & requested that HM dissolve Parliament, would 28 letters of no-confidence publicly submitted to Brady so far out of the 54 that are required to trigger a vote that he'd likely win rn by a 2/3rds+ or so margin anyway be enough reason for her to believe that her PM no longer has the House's confidence & justify a delay or refusal?

It's not so much about the PM not having confidence of the House:

In so far as this matter can be publicly discussed, it can be properly assumed that no wise Sovereign—that is, one who has at heart the true interest of the country, the constitution, and the Monarchy—would deny a dissolution to his Prime Minister unless he were satisfied that:
(1) the existing Parliament was still vital, viable, and capable of doing its job;
(2) a General Election would be detrimental to the national economy;
(3) he could rely on finding another Prime Minister who could carry on his Government, for a reasonable period, with a working majority in the House of Commons.

Tories still have an ample majority, so the current Parliament definitely qualifies as "vital, viable and capable of doing its job". If the 54th letter arives, Boris somehow loses the vote and decides to exit with a bang, the third point applies.

[TheTide]

A confidence vote could be imminent, as in hours rather than days or weeks. My basis for this is somewhat paradoxical - the usual drama mongers on social media are being a bit more low key about it. In more 'normal' times they drum things up.

[MaxQue]

A confidence vote could be imminent, as in hours rather than days or weeks. My basis for this is somewhat paradoxical - the usual drama mongers on social media are being a bit more low key about it. In more 'normal' times they drum things up.

I strongly doubt Brady will call it during recess, just before the Jubilee.

[brucejoel99]

Hilarious briefing that Boris will call a snap election- something ofc that would be most likely rejected by the Queen, and which would happen under the old election boundaries.

The results from Wales alone would knock back their majority by a good chunk…

If BoJo went to the Palace right now & requested that HM dissolve Parliament, would 28 letters of no-confidence publicly submitted to Brady so far out of the 54 that are required to trigger a vote that he'd likely win rn by a 2/3rds+ or so margin anyway be enough reason for her to believe that her PM no longer has the House's confidence & justify a delay or refusal?

It's not so much about the PM not having confidence of the House:

In so far as this matter can be publicly discussed, it can be properly assumed that no wise Sovereign—that is, one who has at heart the true interest of the country, the constitution, and the Monarchy—would deny a dissolution to his Prime Minister unless he were satisfied that:
(1) the existing Parliament was still vital, viable, and capable of doing its job;
(2) a General Election would be detrimental to the national economy;
(3) he could rely on finding another Prime Minister who could carry on his Government, for a reasonable period, with a working majority in the House of Commons.

Tories still have an ample majority, so the current Parliament definitely qualifies as "vital, viable and capable of doing its job". If the 54th letter arives, Boris somehow loses the vote and decides to exit with a bang, the third point applies.

But Parliament is inherently no longer "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job" if somebody who does command the confidence of a majority in the House of Commons says as much (or else most requests for a snap election, like Feb. 1974, 1966 or 1955 under Liz, would never have been approved), hence my inquiry about a pre-trigger dissolution request.

[Blair]

Hilarious briefing that Boris will call a snap election- something ofc that would be most likely rejected by the Queen, and which would happen under the old election boundaries.

The results from Wales alone would knock back their majority by a good chunk…

If BoJo went to the Palace right now & requested that HM dissolve Parliament, would 28 letters of no-confidence publicly submitted to Brady so far out of the 54 that are required to trigger a vote that he'd likely win rn by a 2/3rds+ or so margin anyway be enough reason for her to believe that her PM no longer has the House's confidence & justify a delay or refusal?

It's not so much about the PM not having confidence of the House:

In so far as this matter can be publicly discussed, it can be properly assumed that no wise Sovereign—that is, one who has at heart the true interest of the country, the constitution, and the Monarchy—would deny a dissolution to his Prime Minister unless he were satisfied that:
(1) the existing Parliament was still vital, viable, and capable of doing its job;
(2) a General Election would be detrimental to the national economy;
(3) he could rely on finding another Prime Minister who could carry on his Government, for a reasonable period, with a working majority in the House of Commons.

Tories still have an ample majority, so the current Parliament definitely qualifies as "vital, viable and capable of doing its job". If the 54th letter arives, Boris somehow loses the vote and decides to exit with a bang, the third point applies.

But Parliament is inherently no longer "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job" if somebody who does command the confidence of a majority in the House of Commons says as much (or else most requests for a snap election, like Feb. 1974, 1966 or 1955 under Liz, would never have been approved), hence my inquiry about a pre-trigger dissolution request.

It would not smell right and would be seen as him trying to avoid a leadership contest by triggering a general election- it’s another question whether it would actually be rejected but there’s generally opposition to allowing PMs to use elections in such a transparent manner at times like these.

[Blair]

The Lord Geidt saga is very boring and what I hate the most about Westminster.

He served for ages as the Queens Private Secretary so he isn’t some random Tory activist but he knew what happened when he signed up as ethics chief for Boris and this is what the third time he’s done this stupid ‘why are you not following the rules, I”m very upset’’ exchange of letters and briefing about quitting in protest.

I’m sure he sees this as some grand act of service to the establishment…

[YL]

Yeah, the Lascelles Principles only stop a dissolution if there's an alternative PM available, so I think they only stop a Johnson General Election gambit once the Conservative Party actually has a new leader.  I don't think that was the scenario being floated; rather the idea is that Johnson, after losing or nearly losing a Tory VONC, comes out with some "the MPs have spoken, but let's now ask The People" line and goes to the country.  Alternatively, he does it to pre-empt the Tory VONC.  In either of those scenarios I think the Queen agrees to the dissolution.

[Pericles]

Yeah, the Lascelles Principles only stop a dissolution if there's an alternative PM available, so I think they only stop a Johnson General Election gambit once the Conservative Party actually has a new leader.  I don't think that was the scenario being floated; rather the idea is that Johnson, after losing or nearly losing a Tory VONC, comes out with some "the MPs have spoken, but let's now ask The People" line and goes to the country.  Alternatively, he does it to pre-empt the Tory VONC.  In either of those scenarios I think the Queen agrees to the dissolution.

That can't be right, surely? It would be obvious that there would be an alternative who can win the confidence of Parliament-the winner of the leadership election. I don't see why the identity of the individual would need to be known if it's a fact that they will exist.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Yeah, the Lascelles Principles only stop a dissolution if there's an alternative PM available, so I think they only stop a Johnson General Election gambit once the Conservative Party actually has a new leader.  I don't think that was the scenario being floated; rather the idea is that Johnson, after losing or nearly losing a Tory VONC, comes out with some "the MPs have spoken, but let's now ask The People" line and goes to the country.  Alternatively, he does it to pre-empt the Tory VONC.  In either of those scenarios I think the Queen agrees to the dissolution.

That can't be right, surely? It would be obvious that there would be an alternative who can win the confidence of Parliament-the winner of the leadership election. I don't see why the identity of the individual would need to be known if it's a fact that they will exist.

I think knowing the identity of the individual is pretty key to knowing if they would be able to command the confidence of parliament, like let's say the PM reject's boris's call for a snap election. Are you going to trust Boris to be caretaker prime-minister while the conservative leadership contest happens ?