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

[OSR stands with Israel]

Johnson's (few?) remaining supporters apparently saying he is serious about his threat to dissolve the current parliament "if that is what it takes".

I mean, it is still most likely a total bluff and even if he attempts that it will surely fail. But even so it is far from unbelievable that he might give it a go. Yet again, it would be just desserts for a party that in large measure voted for him to be PM *despite knowing what sort of person he was*.

Has the Fixed Terms Act been repealed cause if it isn’t then Boris would not be able to go through with this threat

It was repealed a few months ago.

Lol

[soundchaser]

Johnson's (few?) remaining supporters apparently saying he is serious about his threat to dissolve the current parliament "if that is what it takes".

I mean, it is still most likely a total bluff and even if he attempts that it will surely fail. But even so it is far from unbelievable that he might give it a go. Yet again, it would be just desserts for a party that in large measure voted for him to be PM *despite knowing what sort of person he was*.

This seems like a great way to get PM Kier Starmer. So if that’s what Boris wants, then by all means.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Boris Johnson doesn't do resignations.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Worth noting that the PM does not have the unrestricted power to dissolve Parliament when he/she wishes: a request must be made to the Sovereign, who can refuse. The rules governing this at present are the so-called Lascelles Principles, submitted by terrifying Mid Century Arch-Flunkey Sir Alan Lascelles (a.k.a. 'Tommy', a.k.a. 'Senex') in an anonymous letter to The Times in 1950. Quite a few of the scenarios being floated around at present happen to violate both active parts of the Lascelles Principles, which would presumably mean a refusal.

[Хahar 🤔]

How did repealing the Fixed-Term Parliament Act work exactly? I'm far from an expert on British constitutional law, but my understanding was that the royal prerogative to dissolve the legislature was a matter of common law, which once codified by the Coalition was forever annulled because the legislature cannot create common law.

[afleitch]

Worth noting that the PM does not have the unrestricted power to dissolve Parliament when he/she wishes: a request must be made to the Sovereign, who can refuse. The rules governing this at present are the so-called Lascelles Principles, submitted by terrifying Mid Century Arch-Flunkey Sir Alan Lascelles (a.k.a. 'Tommy', a.k.a. 'Senex') in an anonymous letter to The Times in 1950. Quite a few of the scenarios being floated around at present happen to violate both active parts of the Lascelles Principles, which would presumably mean a refusal.

What's unique about this situation is the lemmingisation of senior and junior ministers which has never happened before. If the Cabinet can't move him and they resign then the 1922 Committee can only remove him as party leader. He ends up a political cuckoo.

The System is fairly flexible, but it's not really designed well for this sort of politician. As we know the monarch can technically fire him but that's a crisis in itself.

[LabourJersey]

Worth noting that the PM does not have the unrestricted power to dissolve Parliament when he/she wishes: a request must be made to the Sovereign, who can refuse. The rules governing this at present are the so-called Lascelles Principles, submitted by terrifying Mid Century Arch-Flunkey Sir Alan Lascelles (a.k.a. 'Tommy', a.k.a. 'Senex') in an anonymous letter to The Times in 1950. Quite a few of the scenarios being floated around at present happen to violate both active parts of the Lascelles Principles, which would presumably mean a refusal.

What's unique about this situation is the lemmingisation of senior and junior ministers which has never happened before. If the Cabinet can't move him and they resign then the 1922 Committee can only remove him as party leader. He ends up a political cuckoo.

The System is fairly flexible, but it's not really designed well for this sort of politician. As we know the monarch can technically fire him but that's a crisis in itself.

Most certainly won't happen but that would genuinely hilarious if the Queen fired BoJo. A historically profound refutation of his leadership

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Worth noting that the PM does not have the unrestricted power to dissolve Parliament when he/she wishes: a request must be made to the Sovereign, who can refuse. The rules governing this at present are the so-called Lascelles Principles, submitted by terrifying Mid Century Arch-Flunkey Sir Alan Lascelles (a.k.a. 'Tommy', a.k.a. 'Senex') in an anonymous letter to The Times in 1950. Quite a few of the scenarios being floated around at present happen to violate both active parts of the Lascelles Principles, which would presumably mean a refusal.

What's unique about this situation is the lemmingisation of senior and junior ministers which has never happened before. If the Cabinet can't move him and they resign then the 1922 Committee can only remove him as party leader. He ends up a political cuckoo.

The System is fairly flexible, but it's not really designed well for this sort of politician. As we know the monarch can technically fire him but that's a crisis in itself.

Most certainly won't happen but that would genuinely hilarious if the Queen fired BoJo. A historically profound refutation of his leadership

Remember when he lied to her about prorogation? Such an innocent time.

[MaxQue]

Worth noting that the PM does not have the unrestricted power to dissolve Parliament when he/she wishes: a request must be made to the Sovereign, who can refuse. The rules governing this at present are the so-called Lascelles Principles, submitted by terrifying Mid Century Arch-Flunkey Sir Alan Lascelles (a.k.a. 'Tommy', a.k.a. 'Senex') in an anonymous letter to The Times in 1950. Quite a few of the scenarios being floated around at present happen to violate both active parts of the Lascelles Principles, which would presumably mean a refusal.

What's unique about this situation is the lemmingisation of senior and junior ministers which has never happened before. If the Cabinet can't move him and they resign then the 1922 Committee can only remove him as party leader. He ends up a political cuckoo.

The System is fairly flexible, but it's not really designed well for this sort of politician. As we know the monarch can technically fire him but that's a crisis in itself.

Well, the Monarch may have to take a decision anyways in the coming weeks. She can hope she won't have to, but she cannot help events or context.

[DINGO Joe]

Apparently the cabinet ministers at No. 10 are in two separate rooms, the loyalists and the rebels.  Hoping for a fight to the death.

[Joe Republic]

This is already a few hours* (* years, effectively) old, but LOL nonetheless:

https://twitter.com/jackmirkinson/status/1544688153797197826?s=21

[TheTide]

Priti Patel amongst the rebels.

[soundchaser]

Priti Patel amongst the rebels.

Any excuse to kick someone out of their home.

[MABA 2020]

Okay at this point it's clear that this is all over, and I thought he would last at least to the autumn

[afleitch]

Larry the cat currently refusing to go in.

[Torrain]

ITV’s deputy political editor is painting a picture of a deeply deluded man.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1544752417757138949

[Yeahsayyeah]

Why can't the parliament do vote of no confidence?

[KaiserDave]

Why can't the parliament do vote of no confidence?

Then there's an election, right?

[Blair]

Of course the stubborn old goat won’t quit even if half the cabinet quit.

Looking forward to Fabricant as Chancellor and Carrie Johnson as Home Sec.

The scale of the junior positions quitting is insane- there are no junior ministers at the Education other than a Baroness!

[Blair]

Why can't the parliament do vote of no confidence?

No point yet- that’s the nuclear option if his party fail to do the job.

[YL]

Why can't the parliament do vote of no confidence?

Then there's an election, right?

Not necessarily if there's an alternative PM available.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why can't the parliament do vote of no confidence?

Oh it's an option if events head in one particular direction. But we aren't there yet.

[Torrain]

I have this vague feeling that a vote of confidence in the Commons is no longer unlikely, if Johnson survives until tomorrow morning.

The Government would still be 99% assured of a win, but it would let Starmer do two things. Firstly, it lets him look genuinely proactive in trying to bring a government that is publicly falling apart. And secondly, it forces Tory MPs to either break the whip (and almost certainly be turfed out of the party), or put their support for what is still Boris Johnson’s government ion the public record.

Maybe that’s totally off the reservation - my nerves are fried after an insane day in Westminster, but I don’t think it’s out of the question.

[Cassius]

Even Achilles wasn't this bloody minded.

[soundchaser]

Even Achilles wasn't this bloody minded.

If Johnson manages to slither his way out of this week alive, I move we change the term "Pyrrhic victory."