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

[jfollows]

Number 10 says it's going to appoint a replacement for Geidt; it's hard to see candidates queueing up for the job interview. The first one resigned because Boris Johnson ignored his conclusion that Priti Patel broke the ministerial code, and the second one resigned because he realised he was just a powerless patsy. Number 10 is "surprised" because he said he wanted to stay in the job on Monday, which makes it more likely that the questions for MPs made him think well about his role yesterday.

 

[Typhoon]

Number 10 says it's going to appointment for Geidt; it's hard to see candidates queueing up for the job interview. The first one resigned because Boris Johnson ignored his conclusion that Priti Patel broke the ministerial code, and the second one resigned because he realised he was just a powerless patsy. Number 10 is "surprised" because he said he wanted to stay in the job on Monday, which makes it more likely that the questions for MPs made him think well about his role yesterday.

I would be interested in his actual words. There is a world of difference between 'Please, Prime Minister, let me stay in the job' and 'Your actions have made it very difficult for me, I would like to stay in the job but ...'

As regards candidates, there may not be a shortage of candidates, it is the short of the right candidates that is the problem. There are plenty who will accept a peerage for doing what they are told; Owen Paterson is probably at a loose end; and, if you want a job doing badly, you turn to Chris Grayling.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As regards candidates, there may not be a shortage of candidates, it is the short of the right candidates that is the problem. There are plenty who will accept a peerage for doing what they are told; Owen Paterson is probably at a loose end; and, if you want a job doing badly, you turn to Chris Grayling.

Grayling is unfortunate to have the same surname of a type of fish and when in charge of the Transport brief, was very much "a fish out of water".

 

[Typhoon]

Grayling is unfortunate to have the same surname of a type of fish and when in charge of the Transport brief, was very much "a fish out of water".

I'm currently reading the second book by The Secret Barrister, it appears that transport wasn't the first time that happened.

 

[Shrop]

As regards candidates, there may not be a shortage of candidates, it is the short of the right candidates that is the problem. There are plenty who will accept a peerage for doing what they are told; Owen Paterson is probably at a loose end; and, if you want a job doing badly, you turn to Chris Grayling.

There's always Gove, he's pretty adept at taking on new tasks that he knows nothing about, and then upsetting many people once in position. Quite a trait of senior ministers in this Government in fact

 

[Typhoon]

There's always Gove, he's pretty adept at taking on new tasks that he knows nothing about, and then upsetting many people once in position. Quite a trait of senior ministers in this Government in fact

I take your point but I'm not sure that he has given up leadership ambitions (or even something like deputy leader or one of the Great Offices of State, once he has worked out who the favourite will be and comes out in support of them). He is in quite a powerful position at the moment with the 'Levelling Up' money, where he doesn't quite seem to have grasped the concept of 'level'.

One reason I mentioned Grayling is that Johnson owes him, having practically offered him the chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee (which was not in his gift) and it blew up in their faces. Having had two ethics advisors resign, a third would be rather careless so he needs someone who can be relied on to ignore indiscretions. I suppose Williamson is in the same boat, justifies the knighthood in retrospect!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I take your point but I'm not sure that he has given up leadership ambitions (or even something like deputy leader or one of the Great Offices of State, once he has worked out who the favourite will be and comes out in support of them). He is in quite a powerful position at the moment with the 'Levelling Up' money, where he doesn't quite seem to have grasped the concept of 'level'.

One reason I mentioned Grayling is that Johnson owes him, having practically offered him the chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee (which was not in his gift) and it blew up in their faces. Having had two ethics advisors resign, a third would be rather careless so he needs someone who can be relied on to ignore indiscretions. I suppose Williamson is in the same boat, justifies the knighthood in retrospect!

The role is illusory anyhow so doesn't really matter who they put in it he won't take any notice. Furthermore his sycophantic ministers are just brushing it aside in the media anyhow with the usual line the PM is getting on with the job.

Im of the view now that he can survive almost anything chucked at him as he is such damaged goods. He will only go if the will of the people demand it through a GE and even then based on current performance labour haven't got the firepower to get a majority so they need a loose pack with the liberals.

 

[Lost property]

The role is illusory anyhow so doesn't really matter who they put in it he won't take any notice. Furthermore his sycophantic ministers are just brushing it aside in the media anyhow with the usual line the PM is getting on with the job.

Im of the view now that he can survive almost anything chucked at him as he is such damaged goods. He will only go if the will of the people demand it through a GE and even then based on current performance labour haven't got the firepower to get a majority so they need a loose pack with the liberals.

Boris has been finished for a long time and, given three word mantras have become popular of late, "Toxic for Tories " was a welcome addition. He won't resign under any circumstances, and he's still got a lot of, albeit dwindling in numbers, sycophants surrounding him plus he simply appoints others when required.

As for Labour, well they do have more than a few who are perfectly capable of going on the attack, and to be honest, I feel they are constrained at times by Starmer, but for a GE result, nice though an overall majority would be, I think it's more realistic to expect a coalition of some form, certainly involving the Lib Dems, when the UK population, those who are still, and always will be, waiting for his grandiose election "promises " to materialise, and those who lost family during lockdowns when "work events ", as in getting legless, were taking place show their sentiments and he's forced to leave.

Quite looking forward to the farewell speech at the podium, probably saying how wonderful he is, and the stage glycerine tears on Carries cheeks.

 

[Shrop]

I take your point but I'm not sure that he has given up leadership ambitions (or even something like deputy leader or one of the Great Offices of State, once he has worked out who the favourite will be and comes out in support of them). He is in quite a powerful position at the moment with the 'Levelling Up' money, where he doesn't quite seem to have grasped the concept of 'level'.

Yes, the prospect of Gove as PM is horrific. He has a very hard temperament, which many seem to misinterpret as strength. And he only manages to get away with being as "hard" as he is because he lives a sheltered life well away from reality. In a competitive business where rules about bullying actually apply (unlike No.10), and where strength rather than hardness also apply, he wouldn't last long. Just like many other blinkered ministers wouldn't. But I do recognise that quite a few of the top jobs in big businesses are actually occupied by people who are pretty far removed from reality. Very sad reflection of our society.

 

[jfollows]

Anyone with any integrity won't take Geidt's job, and anyone without integrity shouldn't. The only way out that would work for me would be if the role is beefed up, and in particular that the job holder reports to a committee of the House of Commons and not the prime minister.

Apparently Geidt wrote a longer resignation letter which isn't being released; presumably because it's damaging to Boris Johnson. I think this will mis-fire, however, because I'd expect instead the letter will be leaked before long anyway, and will appear in the absence of any "damage control measures" from Number 10.

EDIT I was wrong, the letter has been released at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22061443/lord-geidt-to-pm.pdf; in part it says:

This week, however, I was tasked to offer a view about the government’s intention to consider measures which risk a deliberate and purposeful breach of the ministerial code. This request has placed me in an impossible and odious position. My informal response on Monday was that you and any other minister should justify openly your position vis-à-vis the code in such circumstances. However, the idea that a prime minister might to any degree be in the business of deliberately breaching his own code is an affront. A deliberate breach, or even an intention to do so, would be to suspend the provisions of the code to suit a political end. This would make a mockery not only of respect for the code but licence the suspension of its provisions in governing the conduct of Her Majesty’s ministers. I can have no part in this.

In response, Boris Johnson says:

You say that you were put in an impossible position regarding my seeking your advice on potential future decisions related to the Trade Remedies Authority. My intention was to seek your advice on the national interest in protecting a crucial industry, which is protected in other European countries and would suffer material harm if we do not continue to apply such tariffs. This has in the past had cross party support. It would be in line with our domestic law but might be seen to conflict with our obligations under the WTO. In seeking your advice before any decision was taken, I was looking to ensure that we acted properly with due regard to the ministerial code.

The Trade Remedies Authority (independent, but apparently powerless) stated that tariffs on Chinese steel which the UK imposed (following similar action by Donald Trump) are illegal, but the appropriate department (DiT) overruled this with emergency legislation and the tariffs were in place but due to expire and likely to be extended again at the end of June. It appears that this is the basis for Geidt's resignation.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Boris has been finished for a long time and, given three word mantras have become popular of late, "Toxic for Tories " was a welcome addition. He won't resign under any circumstances, and he's still got a lot of, albeit dwindling in numbers, sycophants surrounding him plus he simply appoints others when required.

As for Labour, well they do have more than a few who are perfectly capable of going on the attack, and to be honest, I feel they are constrained at times by Starmer, but for a GE result, nice though an overall majority would be, I think it's more realistic to expect a coalition of some form, certainly involving the Lib Dems, when the UK population, those who are still, and always will be, waiting for his grandiose election "promises " to materialise, and those who lost family during lockdowns when "work events ", as in getting legless, were taking place show their sentiments and he's forced to leave.

Quite looking forward to the farewell speech at the podium, probably saying how wonderful he is, and the stage glycerine tears on Carries cheeks.

Much as the hoped-for aspirational departure is oft-repeated, let us all remember that it was the poor showing of the Labour Party at the last General Election that sees the Conservatives with such a large majority in the House that ten, not two, lost by-elections would still leave the Conservatives with a large overall majority until the next election.

 

[Howardh]

Much as the hoped-for aspirational departure is oft-repeated, let us all remember that it was the poor showing of the Labour Party at the last General Election that sees the Conservatives with such a large majority in the House that ten, not two, lost by-elections would still leave the Conservatives with a large overall majority until the next election.

It was a strange election in that one topic masked all others. Maybe next time things will be more normal, if it were tomorrow then I suggest that who can best steer us through the cost of living crisis will win.

 

[Typhoon]

A Downing Street spokesperson said the prime minister was considering the nature of the role and recommendations made by Lord Geidt before deciding how to appoint a new person to the role.

Why do I fear that it will be diluted?

source https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61827319

 

[windingroad]

Why do I fear that it will be diluted?

source https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61827319

Oh, probably. Although is there really much left to dilute? One of the reasons Boris Johnson survives is that he has absolutely no shame, and has (correctly) realised you can mostly ignore institutional pressure and precedent.

 

[dgl]

It'll be more a case of the job being "what can we let Boris get away with without getting in trouble"
Will be a real easy job as there is nothing that they won't let him get away with.

 

[Gloster]

It is being suggested that Lord Geidt resigned because he was asked about a matter concerning steel tariffs, which should really be a matter for a law officer and (probably) lies outside of his remit. The government can now spin it as being a case of him blocking a move, which may well be against the law, that would go down well in the Red Wall areas as it appears that the government is trying to save British jobs, despite Labour, the Civil Service, the European Union, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all trying to stop them.

A Mr A.Capone is tipped to be the next government Ethics Advisor.

 

[Busaholic]

One reason I mentioned Grayling is that Johnson owes him, having practically offered him the chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee

Could the country afford the cyanide pills that would have to be issued to the populace in mitigation?

 

[nw1]

Much as the hoped-for aspirational departure is oft-repeated, let us all remember that it was the poor showing of the Labour Party at the last General Election that sees the Conservatives with such a large majority in the House that ten, not two, lost by-elections would still leave the Conservatives with a large overall majority until the next election.

As I've said before, though, successive elections can have very different results, depending on what happens during the term. Compare, for example, 1992 and 1997. Or, indeed, 2005 and 2010.

The key question for the Tories is "can we win the next election?" I suspect Johnson is one of the least likely of the senior party figures to achieve that.

 

[windingroad]

Personally I'm pretty pessimistic about the next election. This government has been one of the worst in my lifetime and yet it hasn't really suffered the drop in support you might expect. If Labour can only just about muster tepid poll leads, I think they're going to struggle.

 

[nw1]

Personally I'm pretty pessimistic about the next election. This government has been one of the worst in my lifetime and yet it hasn't really suffered the drop in support you might expect. If Labour can only just about muster tepid poll leads, I think they're going to struggle.

Though I think there is a fair chance of a Labour-Lib Dem pact. That's the best chance right now I think.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jun 2022 ==

It was a strange election in that one topic masked all others. Maybe next time things will be more normal, if it were tomorrow then I suggest that who can best steer us through the cost of living crisis will win.

Which I doubt is Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson Esq.

 

[brad465]

It is being suggested that Lord Geidt resigned because he was asked about a matter concerning steel tariffs, which should really be a matter for a law officer and (probably) lies outside of his remit. The government can now spin it as being a case of him blocking a move, which may well be against the law, that would go down well in the Red Wall areas as it appears that the government is trying to save British jobs, despite Labour, the Civil Service, the European Union, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all trying to stop them.

That might be the reason, although I think it's more likely that it was a random excuse drawn up because the real reason may have been more severe, and/or Lord Geidt didn't want to be questioned about standing by Johnson over a number of other unethical acts.

 

[The Ham]

Personally I'm pretty pessimistic about the next election. This government has been one of the worst in my lifetime and yet it hasn't really suffered the drop in support you might expect. If Labour can only just about muster tepid poll leads, I think they're going to struggle.

There maybe some shock results. In 2015 the local elections for my ward had Tories get 75% of the vote, 2022 it was just 45%.

2015 general election 65% Tory vote for the MP, 2019 this had fallen to 60%. However the UKIP vote had also dropped from 8% to 0%, and it's unlikely much of that later vote had gone to the Lib Dems.

Our local MP has publicly supported Boris, and that may well harm his reputation (for example the local Facebook post of their most recent photo opp in hi-viz was almost all negative comments).

I would be surprised if they lost at the next election (but then I could see it happening too) however there's a load of Tory seats which would be at much higher risk than that one and you don't need many to opt to not vote and/or some tactical voting and the number of Tory seats could fall quite quickly.

Whilst probably a bit of an unexpected outcome, but 100 Lib Dem MP's in the current climate might not be impossible. As whilst Labour could do OK in London and the North, in much of the South and South West they tend to be in third place. As such if they gain some seats across each of Surrey, Hampshire, Sussex, Kent, Buckinghamshire, Berkshire, Somerset, Wiltshire, Dorset, Devon and Cornwall; that could be (assuming an average of 3 per county) 36 seats (which would likely give them a total of a little over 50 seats).

However if that average increased to just 4 seats per county that would rise to 48 and push their total to potentially higher than their best previous result of mid 60's.

Tories may still hold ~200 seats and Labour ~250 (so not a large increase for Labour) but with it being rare that there's a big Labour and Lib Dem vote when competing against the Tories even small shifts away from the Tories can have a significant impact on how well they do.

Of course the Tories could hold onto power, however there's a lot which has made people not like them (Partygate, cost of living, Brexit, scandals, etc.) and so there's quite a few reasons not to vote for them.

Whatever the result it'll be a difficult one to call and interesting to see the result.

 

[daodao]

100 Lib Dem MP's in the current climate might not be impossible.

LOL. The Lie Dems flatter to deceive. I would be very surprised if they win more than 30 seats at the next general election; a total of 20 is more likely, with some losses as well as gains. While the LDs can pull off spectacular byelection successes, as in North Salop, at a general election, in rural/suburban England, right-leaning voters will take fright at the possibility of a socialist party gaining power and will revert to voting Tory. There is also the bogeyman north of the border to consider, if the Labour party do not make it absolutely clear that they will deal with the SNP only at arms length. No pacts or co-operation should be countenanced at a UK level with parties that wish to destroy the UK.

 

[Snow1964]

LOL. The Lie Dems flatter to deceive. I would be very surprised if they win more than 30 seats at the next general election; a total of 20 is more likely, with some losses as well as gains. While the LDs can pull off spectacular byelection successes, as in North Salop, at a general election, in rural/suburban England, right-leaning voters will take fright at the possibility of a socialist party gaining power and will revert to voting Tory. There is also the bogeyman north of the border to consider, if the Labour party do not make it absolutely clear that they will deal with the SNP only at arms length. No pacts or co-operation should be countenanced at a UK level with parties that wish to destroy the UK.

A lot depends on negative voting, basically saying current Government needs to go, and where is it best to use a second choice vote.

There are whole swathes of semi-rural Southern England, South West, South Midlands that are fed up with current lot. Middle and upper tax payers (but not the top few percent) are being hammered by this Government.

There is also a big perception in these areas that they are being taxed higher to cover the levelling up agenda. And of course extra tax for no benefit where you live is always going to be a vote loser.

 

[Shrop]

A lot depends on negative voting, basically saying current Government needs to go, and where is it best to use a second choice vote.

It's a terrible situation when we're so vulnerable to negative voting. But it sums up lot about why the UK isn't a lot better than we are, when PMQ is dominated every time by MPs putting each other down, rather than putting their heads together to find ways to improve the many issues we face.
I've long said we need a new system and never more so than now. I'm no great LibDem supporter, but I do firmly believe our present system is a disaster, mainly because it's so fraught with negativity, and I can't see that something like proportional representation could possibly make it any worse than it is now.

 

[Typhoon]

There is also a big perception in these areas that they are being taxed higher to cover the levelling up agenda. And of course extra tax for no benefit where you live is always going to be a vote loser.

Unfortunately, unlike the woman at the party conference much quoted by Russell Howard, they will see this as 'levelling down' - their banks, pubs, shops (even post offices) are being closed; bus services cut; library services decimated - and, currently, they may no longer feel 'comfortable' financially. The current Conservative strategy seems to be to try retain the 'Red Wall' seats with levelling up money, assuming the traditional 'blue' vote stays loyal, as they have nowhere else to go.
Two possible flaws. The 'Red Wall' seats may be retained but only with a steady flow of money. The 'blue' vote (who also deliver leaflets, staff stalls at fetes, attend events, spread the word) can vote LibDem at by-elections to make their irritation known, or can stay at home at any election.

Labour made the mistake of ignoring their core vote for years (and, at least is some parts of the country, still are), if the Conservatives start to do the same, we could be heading for a turbulent few years.

 

[nw1]

Unfortunately, unlike the woman at the party conference much quoted by Russell Howard, they will see this as 'levelling down' - their banks, pubs, shops (even post offices) are being closed; bus services cut; library services decimated - and, currently, they may no longer feel 'comfortable' financially. The current Conservative strategy seems to be to try retain the 'Red Wall' seats with levelling up money, assuming the traditional 'blue' vote stays loyal, as they have nowhere else to go.
Two possible flaws. The 'Red Wall' seats may be retained but only with a steady flow of money. The 'blue' vote (who also deliver leaflets, staff stalls at fetes, attend events, spread the word) can vote LibDem at by-elections to make their irritation known, or can stay at home at any election.

Labour made the mistake of ignoring their core vote for years (and, at least is some parts of the country, still are), if the Conservatives start to do the same, we could be heading for a turbulent few years.

To be honest I see big losses in the 'Red Wall' for the Tories too. Various factors caused the Tories to win last time there: dislike of Corbyn; the personality cult of Johnson; and in a few of the more socially-conservative seats, the cult of Brexit, perhaps.

I doubt any of those factors will play a part next time. More likely is that voters will blame the Tories for the cost of living crisis and the failure of the empty promises that Brexit and 'levelling up' would make their lives better.

I would guess half the 'red wall' seats gained by the Tories will switch back to Labour, notably in the more metropolitan Greater Manchester/West Yorkshire/South Yorkshire areas. With Labour winning the north-west Cumbria unitary authority, those seats are under question too. More socially-conservative seats such as Grimsby and Hartlepool will probably stay Tory but I doubt that will be enough. Add to that some southern seats are almost certain to flip Lib Dem (e.g. Winchester) and others could flip as a result of tactical voting.

 

[windingroad]

Unfortunately, unlike the woman at the party conference much quoted by Russell Howard, they will see this as 'levelling down' - their banks, pubs, shops (even post offices) are being closed; bus services cut; library services decimated - and, currently, they may no longer feel 'comfortable' financially. The current Conservative strategy seems to be to try retain the 'Red Wall' seats with levelling up money, assuming the traditional 'blue' vote stays loyal, as they have nowhere else to go.
Two possible flaws. The 'Red Wall' seats may be retained but only with a steady flow of money. The 'blue' vote (who also deliver leaflets, staff stalls at fetes, attend events, spread the word) can vote LibDem at by-elections to make their irritation known, or can stay at home at any election.

Where this all falls down is that the sums of money the government would need to invest in the North to 'level up' are an order of magnitude larger than they are actually investing. So I suspect ultimately people in the North will feel let down when they notice that nothing much has really changed, and people in the South will still feel aggrieved because any rebalancing is perceived to come at a cost to them.

 

[ainsworth74]

Our local MP has publicly supported Boris, and that may well harm his reputation (for example the local Facebook post of their most recent photo opp in hi-viz was almost all negative comments).

Yes I've noticed similar. Social Media is a terrible way of judging things (if it wasn't then Jeremy Corbyn would have been PM for instance) but it is noticeable that twelve months ago whenever my MP (2019er Jacob Young) tweeted things he'd usually get a half dozen or so positive comments and maybe a half dozen or so negative. In the last couple of months he pretty much only gets negative with perhaps one or two positive comments at most. Occasionally its all negative.

Presumably, however, he's still seeing things which suggest he's okay as he certainly hasn't changed his tune and is backing Boris to the hilt no matter what the caterwauling on Social Media might say!

 

[nw1]

Yes I've noticed similar. Social Media is a terrible way of judging things (if it wasn't then Jeremy Corbyn would have been PM for instance) but it is noticeable that twelve months ago whenever my MP (2019er Jacob Young) tweeted things he'd usually get a half dozen or so positive comments and maybe a half dozen or so negative. In the last couple of months he pretty much only gets negative with perhaps one or two positive comments at most. Occasionally its all negative.

Presumably, however, he's still seeing things which suggest he's okay as he certainly hasn't changed his tune and is backing Boris to the hilt no matter what the caterwauling on Social Media might say!

Or maybe that's a sign that he's a sycophant and/or politically illiterate. Your seat, I guess, would be a Red Wall marginal which could flip back, so I think he would be well advised to change tack and quit the brown-nosing if he wants to retain it.

I don't think it's just social media: opinion polls show a majority for a Johnson resignation; pretty much everyone I speak to has a negative view of Johnson; and I heard (possibly on here) that many people in Tiverton would normally vote Tory but will not this time with Johnson still in power.