When Will It All Go Wrong For The Tories/ Johnson?

[Bayum]

Per the Max Hastings quote upthread, remember who the alternative was.

Someone who actually seemed bothered about the lives of other people than himself you mean?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Per the Max Hastings quote upthread, remember who the alternative was.

Indeed so. Remembering who it was as the figurehead of the Soviet-style Momentum group that was anathema to a large percentage of the population did the Labour Party no favours whatsoever and even Corbyn was not liked by many of the Labour voting electorate, reflected in the drop to only 32.1% of the vote.

 

[edwin_m]

I'm now thinking that a Corbyn premiership would, indeed could, not have worked out as badly. Brexit would not have been embraced in the way that Johnson and co did, ensuring maximum problems between us and the E.U., particularly France. Johnson's utter hypocrisy on Ukraine, when the possible sanctions on the Russian kleptocracy that might work have been totally undermined by the turning of blind eyes to the Russian fortunes pouring into the London property market over the last twelve years, wouldn't have been replicated by Corbyn, etc etc. On covid, who knows?

Someone who actually seemed bothered about the lives of other people than himself you mean?

Indeed so. Remembering who it was as the figurehead of the Soviet-style Momentum group that was anathema to a large percentage of the population did the Labour Party no favours whatsoever and even Corbyn was not liked by many of the Labour voting electorate, reflected in the drop to only 32.1% of the vote.

I believe that Corbyn would probably have made a less bad PM than Johnson, especially if he'd had to go into coalition which would have moderated some of the more extreme ideas. But it's important to remember that at the time he was being depicted as a demon by the Tory press, and the (lack of) policy on Brexit didn't appeal to either side of that divide.

 

[nw1]

BJ has always had 0 personal integrity unless it involves him yet the buffoon was still voted in by the British electorate.

43% of the British electorate that actually voted on that grotty wet December day*. His presence is merely an artefact of the first past the post system, Corbynphobia (as said above), plus the fact that in 2019 many of us were still convinced that Brexit would somehow magically solve this country's problems.

I'd support what @Busaholic is saying here, and go further to suggest that Corbyn would have been tamed by the consensus government (with Blairites, Lib Dems and even perhaps Tories having influence) which would likely have resulted. Remember there would have been no chance of a Corbyn majority, the only realistic outcome was Labour being the largest party in a coalition. If he'd have tried to go too far I suspect a VONC would have been easily forced. Who knows, we might have had 3 months of Corbyn, and then if he was that bad, we'd have got a new and more moderate leader. If he wasn't, he'd have carried on. It's almost certain that any Brexit under a Corbyn/Labour/coalition government, were it to have happened at all, would have been a lot softer than Johnson's.

* Some interesting weather facts:
May 1, 1997 - warm and sunny
June 2016 - one of the dullest and wettest Junes in recent years
December 12 2019 - dull and wet
January 31 2020 (Glorious Brexit Day) - dull and wet

I don't believe in God, but.....

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I believe that Corbyn would probably have made a less bad PM than Johnson, especially if he'd had to go into coalition which would have moderated some of the more extreme ideas. But it's important to remember that at the time he was being depicted as a demon by the Tory press, and the (lack of) policy on Brexit didn't appeal to either side of that divide.

That does not address the matter of Momentum, once in the seat of Government metaphorically represented by their new MP acolytes. Couple this with a leader such as Corbyn, be very careful in what you wish for.

 

[edwin_m]

That does not address the matter of Momentum, once in the seat of Government metaphorically represented by their new MP acolytes. Couple this with a leader such as Corbyn, be very careful in what you wish for.

I thought about this long and hard in 2019, and eventually lent my vote to Labour when it was pretty clear that they couldn't win and the LibDems had messed up what should have been a strong challenge. In my view the risks from Johnson and his fellow Tory extremists were greater than those posed by Momentum, and I've seen very little since that might change my mind.

 

[43096]

I believe that Corbyn would probably have made a less bad PM than Johnson, especially if he'd had to go into coalition which would have moderated some of the more extreme ideas. But it's important to remember that at the time he was being depicted as a demon by the Tory press, and the (lack of) policy on Brexit didn't appeal to either side of that divide.

If Corbyn had been PM, then if you think lockdowns have been bad under Johnson, multiply that be several orders of magnitude. Look at what Drakeford and Murrell are doing and multiply up.

The left has never represented "the people", they can't resist wanting to control people's lives. They'd have got very turned on at the thought of what they could do in a pandemic. It is, after all, only a short hop from Corbyn's ideology to communism.

That does not address the matter of Momentum, once in the seat of Government metaphorically represented by their new MP acolytes. Couple this with a leader such as Corbyn, be very careful in what you wish for.

Exactly that.

 

[GC class B1]

I thought about this long and hard in 2019, and eventually lent my vote to Labour when it was pretty clear that they couldn't win and the LibDems had messed up what should have been a strong challenge. In my view the risks from Johnson and his fellow Tory extremists were greater than those posed by Momentum, and I've seen very little since that might change my mind.

I agree entirely and also voted Labour.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm now thinking that a Corbyn premiership would, indeed could, not have worked out as badly.

Ummm... can you imagine how a Corbyn Government would have responded to the current Russian threat against Ukraine? "But it's not been proven in a court of law that those Russian troops on the border aren't just there to have tea and biscuits. Let's not jump to conclusions. But to show our Ukrainian friends that we care about them, we're sending them 5000 woolly jumpers."

 

[davetheguard]

Something more Gaullist and dedicated to British prestige

Britain deserves a patriotic party that's not obsessed with markets and austerity.

Some would say that -and I'd agree with them- that this government has done more damage to British prestige in the eyes of the world than any other of my lifetime.

What is "patriotic" about picking fights will our allies; damaging our country's international trade; and destroying our reputation for pragmatism and fair play by threatening to break international treaties that this very government has negotiated and signed up to?

 

[nw1]

I thought about this long and hard in 2019, and eventually lent my vote to Labour when it was pretty clear that they couldn't win and the LibDems had messed up what should have been a strong challenge. In my view the risks from Johnson and his fellow Tory extremists were greater than those posed by Momentum, and I've seen very little since that might change my mind.

I never thought there was a risk from Momentum in all honesty, as I said a minority Labour government would have been tamed as it would easily have been brought down had it tried to be too extreme. Same with a minority Johnson government too, such an outcome wouldn't have been nearly as damaging. IMV majority governments are A Bad Thing as they are too powerful and can do too much damage.

I voted Lib Dem tactically in a Tory/Lib Dem battleground seat; my vote was firmly a Stop Johnson/Stop Brexit vote. A wasted vote, but hey-ho, that's FPTP for you...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2022 ==

Some would say that -and I'd agree with them- that this government has done more damage to British prestige in the eyes of the world than any other of my lifetime.

What is "patriotic" about picking fights will our allies; damaging our country's international trade; and destroying our reputation for pragmatism and fair play by threatening to break international treaties that this very government has negotiated and signed up to?

Quite, and, as well as the lockdown hypocrisy, that's the other reason why Johnson needs to go soon (by whatever means, either resignation or being forced out). We need to get a completely fresh set of people in government (even if they are more moderate Tories), denounce the Johnson years publicly, build bridges with the countries and international organisations the government has upset, and move on from this embarrassing period in British history.

 

[dosxuk]

The left has never represented "the people", they can't resist wanting to control people's lives.

Equally, the right has also never represented "the people" - they represent big business and the class hierarchy - they can't resist wanting to control people's lives where it will make them richer.

 

[nw1]

Equally, the right has also never represented "the people" - they represent big business and the class hierarchy - they can't resist wanting to control people's lives where it will make them richer.

I think there is bad in this respect on both the left and the right, but more particularly the right. While I can understand some critiques of the left, I fail to understand any statement that the right somehow represent "the people".

How does implementing harsh monetarist economic policies which caused rioting and 3 million unemployed represent "the people"? How does closing down the mines represent "the people"? How does demonising gay people and blaming them for AIDS represent "the people"? How does the poll tax represent "the people"? How does hardline Cameron-Osbornite austerity represent "the people"? And how does breaking ties with our closest neighbours and shortages of stock in the shops represent "the people"? All things done by right-wing Tory governments since 1979.

And big-state authoritarianism isn't solely the preserve of the left. Look at Pinochet, Orban, Erdogan and Patel. All, to varying degrees, big-state authoritarians - and all firmly on the right of the political spectrum.

 

[edwin_m]

If Corbyn had been PM, then if you think lockdowns have been bad under Johnson, multiply that be several orders of magnitude. Look at what Drakeford and Murrell are doing and multiply up.

The left has never represented "the people", they can't resist wanting to control people's lives. They'd have got very turned on at the thought of what they could do in a pandemic. It is, after all, only a short hop from Corbyn's ideology to communism.


Exactly that.

I happen to disagree with you and some of the more voluble contributors to this forum on lockdown, so again I don't believe whatever Corbyn might have done would have been worse than what Johnson actually did. I consider that we would have been far better if lockdowns had been imposed earlier, including allowing them to be lifted earlier with fewer Covid casualties but also much less impact on people's lives and the economy. This is another failing of Johnson's - not taking decisive action when needed.

 

[yorksrob]

Some would say that -and I'd agree with them- that this government has done more damage to British prestige in the eyes of the world than any other of my lifetime.

What is "patriotic" about picking fights will our allies; damaging our country's international trade; and destroying our reputation for pragmatism and fair play by threatening to break international treaties that this very government has negotiated and signed up to?

In some respects yes. However, the constant sell offs and off-shoreing over the last forty years have also damaged British prestige.

 

[Cowley]

I happen to disagree with you and some of the more voluble contributors to this forum on lockdown, so again I don't believe whatever Corbyn might have done would have been worse than what Johnson actually did. I consider that we would have been far better if lockdowns had been imposed earlier, including allowing them to be lifted earlier with fewer Covid casualties but also much less impact on people's lives and the economy. This is another failing of Johnson's - not taking decisive action when needed.

Although it’s a comment on the way things have been done over the last couple of years and they are valid in the context of this thread, we’re going to have to park the Covid stuff there after this because I’m sure we all know what’ll end up happening if we don’t!

Hopefully you’ll all understand why I’m saying this.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As for the other Tory governments since 1979, well Thatcher didn't appear to care about the effects of the closure of industry on job losses, so hardly surprising she got hardly any support in ex-industrial areas. I'd say Thatcher appealed not just to the SE, but also affluent areas of the north, and rural areas too (small-c conservatism; rural areas were not especially harmed by Thatcher).

There's a difference between 'not caring' and 'believing that continuing to subsidise industries that cannot make a profit does more harm than good in the long run'.

Going forward however I don't think all is so good for the Tories. People will start to realise that the Cult of Brexit will not solve their problems

I'd say very few people were expecting Brexit to solve all/most of their problems. Lots of Brexiters were expecting Brexit to cause a return of much decision-making to the UK Parliament/Government, and an end to free movement. Whether or not you think those are or aren't good things, it's hard to deny that Brexit has achieved both of them. I would therefore suggest that Brexit is not going to cause as much disillusionment and loss of support for the Tories as you seem to be hoping.

, and in fact make their life harder, for one thing. Also people will realise that the Tories are still a hardline economic-right-wing party with things like the National Insurance hike.

Well that's the first time I've seen anyone make out that raising taxes in order to pay to improve health and social care is a hardline right-wing policy. I was always under the impression that raising taxes to pay for nice services for us all was normally thought of as a left-wing thing. You learn something new every day..

 

[alex397]

Someone who actually seemed bothered about the lives of other people than himself you mean?

Agreed. I wasn’t the biggest fan of Corbyn, but I felt he actually had some morals compared to the selfish buffoon we are now suffering with. The sooner he is replaced by a more moderate Tory (or even better in my probably very unpopular opinion, a more socialist leader from another party) the better.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Quite, and, as well as the lockdown hypocrisy, that's the other reason why Johnson needs to go soon (by whatever means, either resignation or being forced out). We need to get a completely fresh set of people in government (even if they are more moderate Tories), denounce the Johnson years publicly, build bridges with the countries and international organisations the government has upset, and move on from this embarrassing period in British history.

I wonder if there have been other occasions where this now-regularly-mentioned new "in vogue" crime of "hypocrisy" came to the fore in days long gone in relation to those "at the top".

When Churchill made the offer to the Irish Republic that Ulster would be ceded to the republic if they abandoned their neutrality and joined in the war against the Nazis?

When Cromwell decided that the Levellers had served their purpose, when he took action against them?

Still, none of these bear the same stigma and abhorrence as the crime of attending events that carried a maximum stricture of a fixed penalty notice.

 

[AM9]

Well that's the first time I've seen anyone make out that raising taxes in order to pay to improve health and social care is a hardline right-wing policy. I was always under the impression that raising taxes to pay for nice services for us all was normally thought of as a left-wing thing. You learn something new every day..

The raising of NI (a tax) was the chosen option for funding elderly care that meant that the majority of the working population would pay, enabling the wealthy to pass on their wealth by inheritance whilst the plebs pay for their care. It isn't even progressive as a tax as between c.£9.5k to c.£50k it is 12%, - double the salary to £100k, it falls to 7%, double the salary again to £200k it's down to £4.5%.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

We need to get a completely fresh set of people in government (even if they are more moderate Tories), denounce the Johnson years publicly, build bridges with the countries and international organisations the government has upset, and move on from this embarrassing period in British history.

When we talk about the last 2 years, are we thinking of the same period in British history? I'm thinking of the period when we hosted COP26 and secured much more action to combat climate change than ever achieved before, achieved a faster vaccine rollout and therefore were able to open up our economy again more quickly than almost any other Western democracy, have done far more against Russian aggression than most of Europe, achieved a Brexit deal that is far from perfect but still represents successful navigation to a much changed status for the UK - something that is not easy to do - and still appear to be on relatively good terms with most countries that we would normally regard as allies.

More realistically, any period of history is going to have good and bad things in it. I've just pointed out some of the good things. Obviously there were bad things too - some of which you've rightly hinted at - but to exclusively focus on the bad things to the point of wanting to denounce the last few years just seems daft and totally unbalanced. And it also seems to me a bit cancel-culture-ish. Yeah, we didn't like some things that happened in the last 2.5 years, so let's just denounce the whole period. Seriously????? Is this what Left-wing politics in the UK has descended to?

(As an aside can you imagine what Putin would be thinking if, while he busies himself with threats to launch an unprovoked invasion of a foreign democratic country at the same time as continuing an appalling crackdown on free speech in Russia, the UK decides to spend it's time denouncing the last 2 years of its own history).

 

[nw1]

I'd say very few people were expecting Brexit to solve all/most of their problems. Lots of Brexiters were expecting Brexit to cause a return of much decision-making to the UK Parliament/Government, and an end to free movement. Whether or not you think those are or aren't good things, it's hard to deny that Brexit has achieved both of them. I would therefore suggest that Brexit is not going to cause as much disillusionment and loss of support for the Tories as you seem to be hoping.

But do the so-called advantages of Brexit (which to me, are a disadvantage - restricting freedom of movement in particular seems an incredibly retrograde, backwards step) outweigh the disadvantages (harder trade, more bureaucracy, problems with supplying goods to shops, etc?) It probably won't be the main thing causing loss of support for the Tories (Johnson himself and his behaviour, and the economic fallout from Covid, will be far bigger factors) but it will be something of a factor.

Well that's the first time I've seen anyone make out that raising taxes in order to pay to improve health and social care is a hardline right-wing policy. I was always under the impression that raising taxes to pay for nice services for us all was normally thought of as a left-wing thing. You learn something new every day..

But now is not the time to raise general taxation for people on average incomes, when you have energy price hikes anyway and general financial insecurity in the wake of Covid. A true left-wing approach (as opposed to, for example, what the Labour Party would actually do, which might be something different) would be to raise taxes for those who could afford them and leave other people alone. Raising the higher bands of income tax would be a fairer approach, while leaving people on average incomes alone.


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2022 ==

When we talk about the last 2 years, are we thinking of the same period in British history? I'm thinking of the period when we hosted COP26 and secured much more action to combat climate change than ever achieved before, achieved a faster vaccine rollout and therefore were able to open up our economy again more quickly than almost any other Western democracy, have done far more against Russian aggression than most of Europe, achieved a Brexit deal that is far from perfect but still represents successful navigation to a much changed status for the UK - something that is not easy to do - and still appear to be on relatively good terms with most countries that we would normally regard as allies.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. I've already mentioned why the form of Brexit we got was a bad idea; I've already mentioned Johnson's hypocrisy and bad character; and that's before we get to things like the Elections Bill and Policing Bill which appear to be attempts to reduce opposition to the government by legal means. For the other things you mention, I suspect that an alternative UK government, whether Labour or 'moderate' Tory, would have done the same job or better.

I don't think everything Labour, or socialists, do is good either; I am no dyed-in-the-wool leftist though I do lean left. There are various Tories from the past who I think were perfectly decent individuals with reasonable policies: Major, Heseltine, Ken Clarke, and Heath to name a few - so I don't automatically think that someone is automatically a 'bad' politician because they are a Tory. As I've said already, a softer Tory government with more honest people would be a vast improvement on what we have.

 

[Busaholic]

If Corbyn had been PM, then if you think lockdowns have been bad under Johnson, multiply that be several orders of magnitude. Look at what Drakeford and Murrell are doing and multiply up.

From everything I know about Corbyn that's a totally distorted view. He is close to his brother Piers and we all know what he thinks about lockdowns!! J.Corbyn's views on the EU and Brexit, in 2019 at least, may also have been very similar and his opinions on 'greenness' are probably from The Good Life era, amended for the Vegan Age, of growing your own vegetables etc rather than Greta Thunberg's. Mark Drakeford would hardly be a Corbyn disciple: like comparing Dominic Grieve to Boris Johnson.

 

[Bayum]

If Corbyn had been PM, then if you think lockdowns have been bad under Johnson, multiply that be several orders of magnitude. Look at what Drakeford and Murrell are doing and multiply up.

Moot point and speculation. BJ put the lockdown in place and that’s what we got.

 

[baz962]

Andrew Neil on now on channel 4 , change to the programme. Boris Johnson, has he ran out of road.

 

[nw1]

From everything I know about Corbyn that's a totally distorted view. He is close to his brother Piers and we all know what he thinks about lockdowns!! J.Corbyn's views on the EU and Brexit, in 2019 at least, may also have been very similar and his opinions on 'greenness' are probably from The Good Life era, amended for the Vegan Age, of growing your own vegetables etc rather than Greta Thunberg's. Mark Drakeford would hardly be a Corbyn disciple: like comparing Dominic Grieve to Boris Johnson.

Yes, one has to consider the libertarian-authoritarian axis as well as left-right. Jeremy Corbyn is perhaps relatively libertarian, though it's hard to know as he never got power so any comment on Corbyn as PM is just pure speculation.

 

[brad465]

When will things go wrong for Johnson, if/when Cummings finishes "fixing the drains" (there are similar articles in the Mail and the i):

Dominic Cummings says it is his ‘duty to get rid’ of Boris Johnson

Former No 10 chief adviser describes effort to remove PM from office as ‘sort of like fixing the drains’

www.theguardian.com

Dominic Cummings has said it is his “duty to get rid” of Boris Johnson as prime minister, describing it as “sort of like fixing the drains”.
The prime minister’s former chief adviser called his former boss a “complete ****wit” whose only preoccupations were “Big Ben’s bongs” and “looking at maps” to “order the building of things” in his honour.

Cummings, who has sent evidence to the Cabinet Office inquiry led by Sue Gray, said it was imperative Johnson was removed from office. Speaking to New York magazine, he called it “an unpleasant but necessary job” and said it was legitimate to remove a prime minister who had won a big election victory if they were not up to the job.
Johnson is expected to be handed a heavily redacted version of the Sue Gray report into alleged breaches of lockdown rules in Downing Street early next week, as allies briefed over the weekend that an operation to save him from a vote of no confidence was winning round MPs.
The prime minister is expected to travel to Ukraine on Tuesday and release the long-awaited levelling up white paper on Wednesday as a show of purpose to his restive MPs.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ris-johnson-rivals-tackled-another-tough-week
The foreign secretary, Liz Truss, one of those in contention to replace Johnson should he be forced out, said on Sunday Johnson was “absolutely” the best person to lead the Conservative party into the next general election.
“There is no contest. There is no discussion,” she said. “He has achieved an 80-seat majority for the Conservative party. He has delivered on the Covid vaccine programme, the booster programme, he’s delivered on Brexit and he will do a fantastic job winning the next election for the Conservative party.”
Johnson’s chief of staff, Dan Rosenfield, was in the spotlight on Sunday as the Sunday Telegraph revealed he had been at the first day of the England v India Test at Lord’s on 12 August, three days before Taliban forces entered the Afghan capital.
Rosenfield, along with the cabinet secretary, Simon Case, and Johnson’s principal private secretary, Martin Reynolds, is among those expected to be criticised in the redacted version of Gray’s report – which the Metropolitan police have asked to be stripped of details of the most egregious alleged rule-breaking while a police investigation is carried out.

Johnson has told angry MPs he will oversee a full clearout of the No 10 operation, which the Guardian understands could include a number of close allies of his wife, Carrie Johnson, who have had a power base in No 10 since the departure of Cummings and his associates.
Cummings revealed one of the most damaging No 10 lockdown gatherings on his Substack, where Reynolds had emailed staff inviting them to drinks in the garden and to “bring your own booze”. Cummings has said Johnson was warned about the gathering, which the prime minister has admitted to attending but claims to have thought it was a work event.

The former adviser told New York magazine Johnson was driven entirely by what would be in the papers the next day. “In January 2020 I was sitting in No 10 with Boris and the complete ****wit is just babbling on about: ‘Will Big Ben bong for Brexit on 31 January?’” he said.
Asked if it was fair that he was mounting a campaign to remove his former boss, Cummings said: “What’s fairness got to do with anything? It’s politics. All this is not fair. The fact that someone wins an election doesn’t mean that they should just stay there for years, right? If you’ve got a duffer, if you think someone can’t do the job, or is unfit for the job.

“You know, as he said to me: ‘I’m the ****ing king around here and I’m going to do what I want.’ That’s not OK. He’s not the king. He can’t do what he wants. Once you realise someone is operating like that then your duty is to get rid of them, not to just prop them up.”
Cummings also told the magazine Johnson acted as if considering “what would a Roman emperor do? So, the only thing he was really interested in – genuinely excited about – was, like, looking at maps. Where could he order the building of things?”
Cummings said Johnson fantasised about “monuments to him in an Augustine fashion”.

 

[bspahh]

When will things go wrong for Johnson, if/when Cummings finishes "fixing the drains" (there are similar articles in the Mail and the i):

Dominic Cummings says it is his ‘duty to get rid’ of Boris Johnson

Former No 10 chief adviser describes effort to remove PM from office as ‘sort of like fixing the drains’

www.theguardian.com

These reports are based on this interview with Cummings in New York Magazine.

 

[edwin_m]

There's a difference between 'not caring' and 'believing that continuing to subsidise industries that cannot make a profit does more harm than good in the long run'.

The UK could have followed the example of Norway and used the oil money to benefit the whole country and to prepare for a post-oil future, including such things as transitioning coalmining communities to more sustainable employment. As it was, the seeds of our current divided society were sown by policies that benefitted the affluent but left large swathes of the country out in the cold.

I wonder if there have been other occasions where this now-regularly-mentioned new "in vogue" crime of "hypocrisy" came to the fore in days long gone in relation to those "at the top".

When Churchill made the offer to the Irish Republic that Ulster would be ceded to the republic if they abandoned their neutrality and joined in the war against the Nazis?

When Cromwell decided that the Levellers had served their purpose, when he took action against them?

Still, none of these bear the same stigma and abhorrence as the crime of attending events that carried a maximum stricture of a fixed penalty notice.

At the risk of repeating what's already been said in response to your previous posts...

It's about perception and trust, not the seriousness of the actual crime. If people see that those who set the rules for the rest of us are flouting them themselves even on a non-serious, it raises the question of whether they can be trusted with something more serious. It is also highly offensive to those who followed the rules, such as people who couldn't see dying relatives or go to their funerals.

 

[dgl]

Looks like Boris now has the report, I reckon if it is not released in full, wheather in exonerates him or not, then it will not go well for him.
Saying, "the report says we did nothing wrong" and then not release the evidence to prove it could be his death sentance.