This Wretched Hive Of Scum And Villainy

[Torrain]

And another one (3rd public submission today, 4th in the last 24 hours)

https://mobile.twitter.com/garystreeterSWD/status/1488920944949317646

"I cannot reconcile the pain and sacrifice of the vast majority of the British Public during lockdown with the attitude and activities of those working in Downing Street."

[TheTide]

The two previous situations of this:

IDS had about five public letter writers when the 25 necessary were in.

May had about 25 when the necessary 48 was reached.

Split the difference and that's a ratio of about 3 1/2-1 private to public letters, which could suggest that there are around 40 letters in on the basis of the current public number.

[Blair]

How long is a letter valid ? and what is the proccese of withdrawing a letter ?

Since Sir Graham Brady became chairman of the 1922 Committee, letters remain active indefinitely, unless a member actively withdraws it, or said member leaves the Parliamentary Party (through suspension, resignation, death or defection). Previously a letter was valid for one year, and then lapsed, according to this report from the New Statesman, from around the time May’s leadership troubles.

It’s unclear whether a letter can be verbally withdrawn, or if a second letter stating an updated position must be sent. If I come across a better answer to that question, I’ll update this post.

Hmm. given that physical letters are accepted with the only authentication being a signature i'm suprised some pranksters hasn't tried to forge MP letters to trigger it.

He now accepts emailed letters. It’s a bizarre system. Really bizarre.

It’s only marginally better than the old system.

[Torrain]

BBC article tonight suggests they can report a minimum submission of 17 letters total (including the 9 public submissions so far).

As ever, given the secrecy involved, it’s unclear if/how many additional letters have been submitted privately, without chatting to a BBC journalist.

(At this point the total could be pretty much anything under the threshold, although I’m inclined to believe Conservatopia’s figure of around 27 total letters is plausible).

[MaxQue]

How long is a letter valid ? and what is the proccese of withdrawing a letter ?

Since Sir Graham Brady became chairman of the 1922 Committee, letters remain active indefinitely, unless a member actively withdraws it, or said member leaves the Parliamentary Party (through suspension, resignation, death or defection). Previously a letter was valid for one year, and then lapsed, according to this report from the New Statesman, from around the time May’s leadership troubles.

It’s unclear whether a letter can be verbally withdrawn, or if a second letter stating an updated position must be sent. If I come across a better answer to that question, I’ll update this post.

Hmm. given that physical letters are accepted with the only authentication being a signature i'm suprised some pranksters hasn't tried to forge MP letters to trigger it.

He now accepts emailed letters. It’s a bizarre system. Really bizarre.

It’s only marginally better than the old system.

Doesn't he only accept emailled letters if the Parliament is in recess?

[EastAnglianLefty]

It's worth noting that both the Whips Office and the shadow whipping operation being run by Burns et al. are quite happy to make threats and use intimidation tactics. That wasn't unknown before, but the extent of it seems to have increased.

That probably means that there's a greater chance those submitting letters will do so without announcing it. Some circumstantial support for this can be found in the fact that most of those who have announced letters are people the Whips have less authority over (veterans no longer being considered for ministerial office and select committee chairs elected by their peers.)

[Torrain]

Big day for the Chancellor today. He’s announcing the government support package to deal with the cost-of-living strain, and giving a Downing Street press conference at 5pm.

Obviously these are fairly standard parts of his remit - but given that he’s talking to the press for an extended period, right before the 6 O’Clock news, you have to imagine he’ll have a carefully worded response on the Boris situation. It’ll probably make the headlines either way.

 

[Torrain]

Interesting tidbit from the Times’ Whitehall Editor:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1489295239365939201

Even if the Chalk wasn’t/isn’t serious about resigning, the fact that cabinet ministers can extract concessions just for staying in their jobs doesn’t sound sustainable.

[TheTide]

Big day for the Chancellor today. He’s announcing the government support package to deal with the cost-of-living strain, and giving a Downing Street press conference at 5pm.

Obviously these are fairly standard parts of his remit - but given that he’s talking to the press for an extended period, right before the 6 O’Clock news, you have to imagine he’ll have a carefully worded response on the Boris situation. It’ll probably make the headlines either way.

 

He more or less rebuffed Johnson on the Saville remarks.

[Torrain]

Big day for the Chancellor today. He’s announcing the government support package to deal with the cost-of-living strain, and giving a Downing Street press conference at 5pm.

Obviously these are fairly standard parts of his remit - but given that he’s talking to the press for an extended period, right before the 6 O’Clock news, you have to imagine he’ll have a carefully worded response on the Boris situation. It’ll probably make the headlines either way.

 

He more or less rebuffed Johnson on the Saville remarks.

Yeah - he's walking a tightrope at the moment. His 'I wouldn't have said it' stuff seem to be about as far as he's willing to go, (while still stressing his 'full support') but it's probably about as pointed as you can get within the government right now.

[Torrain]

The consensus among journalists seems to be that Johnson was planning to replace 2 or 3 of those who resigned today, but panicked and brought all the removals forwards when Mirza resigned on principle.

Unfortunately for Johnson, the narrative seems to have gotten away from him, and his attempts to rebrand "Johnson looses key ally" to "Johnson brings promised shakeup to Downing Street" appear to have failed.

There appears to be an attempt by Boris loyalist MPs to spin the resignations, but the spin has itself become part of the story.

https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1489337562921684995
https://twitter.com/paulbranditv/status/1489334059725688835?s=21

[Torrain]

Sunak has written an editorial for The Sun's Friday edition. 

As has been the case over the last couple of days, he seems to be getting as close to launching a leadership campaign as you can from within the cabinet...

We have always been the party of sound money — we will always continue to be on my watch — and that is the only kind of party I am interested in.

[Torrain]

Aaron Bell - 2019 MP who criticised Johnson directly in the Commons, and who Times reporters suggest submitted a letter a week ago, has confirmed submission of his 1922 letter.

He’s the tenth to do so publicly.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AaronBell4NUL/status/1489617282968002570

[EastAnglianLefty]

Interestingly he put the letter in 3 weeks ago, but is only announcing it publicly now - presumably those plotting against Johnson want to keep up a constant stream of announcements to build momentum and win over waverers.

[Torrain]

Speaking of momentum…

Former schools minister Nick Gibb has joined the rebels tonight.

He’s written a letter in conjunction with an editorial for the Telegraph, where he starts by commending Aaron Bell.

The fact that both men both submitted letters on the same day is, I’m sure, a truly massive coincidence .As is the fact that Bell went public just before the 5pm news, while Gibb went public just before the 10pm news…

If you have a free article, I’d consider having a read of his op-ed. While he concedes Johnson retains some support among the party faithful, he argues that the outrage of his constituents, and Johnson’s loss of both moral and political authority have neutered his premiership. He quite rightly suggests that nothing serious can be done about the cost of living crisis while Johnson is running a whipping operation 24/7.

*

Outside the editorial, Gibb going public is kind of a big deal. He’s the definition of ‘party faithful’, and is one of the longest serving ministers since the party gained control in 2010. That includes  a 6 year term served continuously under Cameron, May and Johnson. He’s viewed as moderate, unassuming, and has been a Boris ally. All indications from the Whitehall press is that he wasn’t on anyone’s list of potential troublemakers.

[TheTide]

https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1489735930822934538?s=20&t=Ohmo-0...

[Torrain]

Over 40 already? If that’s true (always hard to gauge true number of letters, but the Telegraph have a good track record with partygate), could Monday be d-day?

Also - the Times suggests the Cabinet are in disarray.

The cabinet descended into rancour over Boris Johnson’s future last night after both Sajid Javid and Rishi Sunak rebuked the prime minister.

One cabinet minister called for Johnson to dismiss Sunak, and two others accused the chancellor of being “on manoeuvres” after he criticised the prime minister for a personal attack on Sir Keir Starmer.

It all sounds more House of Cards than reality, but if any cabinet were to squabble like this - it would be this one.

(Also, I’d bet good money that if any minister called for Sunak to go, to his face, it has to be Dorries).

[TheTide]

40 or so would be in line with a 3-1 ratio of private to public letters. Which, as I noted, is roughly in line with the ratio when you average out those seen during the IDS and May leadership challenges. Maybe that's the thinking of the above quoted source too.

Here's another thing we don't know about the process - if the 54th reached Brady tonight or tomorrow, would he announce it or at least inform Johnson immediately, or would he wait until Monday? This is important as announcing it on a Friday or at the beginning of the weekend would effectively make it a days long campaign. The vote against May was announced and concluded during the same day (although there was some speculation that she had been informed prior to then, on the basis of her body language at some appearance or other).

[TheTide]

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1489707173596831752?s=20&t=xOV19p...

[Torrain]

40 or so would be in line with a 3-1 ratio of private to public letters. Which, as I noted, is roughly in line with the ratio when you average out those seen during the IDS and May leadership challenges. Maybe that's the thinking of the above quoted source too.

Here's another thing we don't know about the process - if the 54th reached Brady tonight or tomorrow, would he announce it or at least inform Johnson immediately, or would he wait until Monday? This is important as announcing it on a Friday or at the beginning of the weekend would effectively make it a days long campaign. The vote against May was announced and concluded during the same day (although there was some speculation that she had been informed prior to then, on the basis of her body language at some appearance or other).

My understanding is that the PM is informed first (May certainly was, and pretty sure IDS was too). May’s confidence vote was announced in the morning and held in the evening. Similarly, IDS’s vote was announced on 28/10/2003, and held the next day. But as you say, the latency period between reception of the last letter, and the announcement, is the big question.

Roughly 12-24 hours between announcement and vote seems to be the norm - but the weekend is weird, and I wouldn’t put it past the rebels (if they’ve got an accurate count) to hold the last letters until Monday so they can avoid this thing becoming a 48 hour frenzy of last minute promises and back-door deals.

[Conservatopia]

I actually don't want the letters to reach 54 because most likely Boris would win the vote.

[TheTide]

Not my original quip, but Boris Johnson would be the third Prime Minister in a row to be brought down by Boris Johnson.

[CumbrianLefty]

40 or so would be in line with a 3-1 ratio of private to public letters. Which, as I noted, is roughly in line with the ratio when you average out those seen during the IDS and May leadership challenges. Maybe that's the thinking of the above quoted source too.

Wasn't the public-to-private ratio slightly higher with May than IDS, though? If that trend has carried on (and there is of course no guarantee that it has) we might still be a wee bit off.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

I find it very weird that some Tories are trying to pivot blame towards Corrie Johnson almost painting her as a lady Macbeth like figure that led Boris astray despite it making little sense.

[TheTide]

Johnson is appointing MPs (Guto Harri and Steve Barclay) as his staff replacements, which seems odd.