Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Gups]

Agree with that piece - it's also why I can't see how the "come clean and apologise" approach can work. I think it normally is the best solution to a story like this and it's something apparently Tories and cabinet ministers are pushing as the only solution. I'd expect Johnson to make some statement today before PMQs.

But I can't think of a way he can come clean and say sorry that would be convincing given the last couple of months and all the denials/obfuscations, that wouldn't contradict his previous statements or that wouldn't basically admit that he broke the law (as did his aides and some senior and junior civil servants).

Edit: Also probably a bad sign if Conservative Home are speculating on the timing of a resignation
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2022/01/if-johnson-has-to-quit-is-it-best-he-does-so-quickly.html

Agree. The best defence would have been (alongside a grovelling apology) that the attendees all worked together in the same buidling and so it was felt to be different/less risky than for people working at home. Not sure if that's true or not but I can't really think of anything else.

[Sheilbh]

Also not a great set of front pages:


I think that leaves just the Express that hasn't had a scoop on this story and is still doing the Iraqi spokesman act

[Richard Hakluyt]

Just to add to the fun the VIP fast lanes for PPE supplies have been found to be unlawful :

https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/1481216152462401536?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1481216152462401536%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Flive%2F2022%2Fjan%2F12%2Fboris-johnson-no-10-party-pmqs-keir-starmer-labour-coronavirus-latest-updates-covid-live

[Tamas]

Just to add to the fun the VIP fast lanes for PPE supplies have been found to be unlawful :

https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/1481216152462401536?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1481216152462401536%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Flive%2F2022%2Fjan%2F12%2Fboris-johnson-no-10-party-pmqs-keir-starmer-labour-coronavirus-latest-updates-covid-live

There's hope for this country yet.

I guess this will make it more expedient for the rest of the Tories to declare Johnson as the scapegoat for everything that didn't go well during the pandemic, and wash their hands over all the stolen money and the deaths once they kick him out, and for the second time in so many years pretend like a brand new party takes over when Sunak becomes PM.

[Sheilbh]

I'm going to wait for some other lawyers (not just the claimants) to read this because from reading that my first take is they won on the point that the VIP Lane was in breach of EU procurement law on fair and equal treatment. But there's no remedy because the court found that even without the VIP Lane, these contracts would have been awarded because of how they scored on volumes of PPE and price.

So the process wasn't right, but it didn't change the result.

It's not the first time I think the GLP have over-egged a pretty technical victory (and also, I think, not been clear on the difference between administrative and criminal law).

[The Larch]

Pretty damning NYT op-ed on Boris Johnson and England's slow slide into authoritarianism.

Boris Johnson Is Revealing Who He Really Is
By Moya Lothian-McLean

Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, bruised by scandal and faced with an alarming rise in coronavirus cases, is refusing to change course. "We have a chance," he bullishly proclaimed on Jan. 4, "to ride out this Omicron wave without shutting down our country once again."

Public health experts may disagree. Yet Mr. Johnson is at least being consistent — not only with his conduct throughout the pandemic, where lockdowns were a last resort and restrictions were to be shelved as soon as possible, but also with the political platform that elevated him to the highest office. After all, this is the man who rose to power — bringing about Brexit in the process — on the promise to restore "freedom" and "take back control."

Undeterred by the pandemic, Mr. Johnson has been quietly pursuing that agenda. But instead of reforming the country's creaking democracy and shoring up Britons' rights, he and his lieutenants are doing the opposite: seizing control for themselves and stripping away the freedoms of others. A raft of bills likely to pass this year will set Britain, self-professed beacon of democracy, on the road to autocracy. Once in place, the legislation will be very hard to shift. For Mr. Johnson, it amounts to a concerted power grab.

It's also an answer. Mr. Johnson is a political chameleon, and his true ideological bent — liberal? one-nation Tory? English nationalist? — has long been a subject of speculation. Now he has, beyond any doubt, revealed who he really is: a brattish authoritarian who puts his personal whims above anything else. And whatever his future, Britain will be remade in his image.

Amid the chaos wrought by the pandemic, Brexit tumult and increasing questions about the stability of Mr. Johnson's individual position, the full scale of the impending assault on civil liberties has — understandably — not yet come into focus for much of the British public. The list of legislation is long and deliberately overwhelming. But pieced together, the picture is bleakly repressive.

First, there's the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, a draconian and broad piece of legislation that effectively bans protest in England and Wales. The police would be equipped to shut down demonstrations that create "serious disruption." Those who break this condition, which could be done just by making noise, would face prison sentences or hefty fines. Combined with other measures, such as outlawing traditional direct-action tactics like "locking on," the bill could eventually make it almost impossible to attend a demonstration without committing an offense.

Yet it goes beyond protest, putting minority groups in the cross hairs. New trespass provisions, which make "residing on land without consent in or with a vehicle" a criminal offense, would essentially erase nomadic Gypsy, Roma and Traveler communities from public life. And the expansion of police powers would not only allow officers widespread access to private education and health care records, but also pave the way for suspicionless stop and search. Ethnic minority communities, disproportionately singled out for police attention, are likely to bear the brunt of such overreach.

Similarly punitive is the Nationality and Borders Bill. Stiffening Britain's already hawkish immigration policy, it seeks to criminalize asylum seekers who take unsanctioned routes: Refugees who arrive by boat, for example, could face up to four years in prison, regardless of the validity of their claim for safe haven. And if claimants escape traditional jail, they would be kept in concentration camp-style housing and offshore processing centers, sites long denounced by human rights activists.

Not even British citizens are safe from the dragnet. A provision slipped into the bill in November by its architect, the home secretary, Priti Patel, would endow the government with the power to remove British citizenship from dual nationals without notice. Those singled out might not even have recourse to the law: Proposed reform of the Human Rights Act would make it easier for the government to deport foreign nationals and deny them claims of mistreatment.

Such draconian measures, in time, are sure to be contested. But the government has a plan for that: draining the life blood from democracy. There's the Elections Bill, which — alongside potentially disenfranchising millions through the introduction of mandatory voter ID — aims to furnish the government with new powers over the independent elections regulator, sealing up the political process. Unless substantially amended, the bill could have constitutionally far-reaching consequences.

The urge to centralize power also underlies the Judicial Review and Courts Bill, which would enable Mr. Johnson and his ministers to overrule judicial review findings that challenge their agenda. The Online Safety Bill, ostensibly designed to regulate Big Tech, is yet to be introduced to Parliament. But many free-speech advocates fear that it could be used to silence critics on social media, censoring those reporting details Mr. Johnson's government would rather keep from public view. No more pesky judges or overly inquisitive journalists interfering with government business.

It's a truism that nations sleepwalk into tyranny, and England — the most politically powerful of the nations that make up Britain — is no exception. For decades it has possessed all the necessary ingredients: ever more spiteful nationalism, press fealty sold to the highest bidder and a fervent, misplaced belief that authoritarianism could never set up shop here, because we simply wouldn't let it.

In this event, though, concerted opposition to Mr. Johnson's plans has not materialized. Establishment politics have been no match for the determination of Mr. Johnson and his allies: A hefty and largely supportive Conservative majority means that even when the Labour Party has decided to oppose legislation, its votes have barely counted. And despite valiant efforts by a coalition of grass-roots groups and the initial groundswell of the "Kill the Bill" protests, a mass movement opposing these bills has failed to come together. Instead, a miasma of grim inevitability has settled in.

That's dangerous, not least because this authoritarian assault is so comprehensive that once settled as law, it will prove very tricky to unpick. Like many leaders who seek to transcend the constraints of democracy, Mr. Johnson may not foresee a future where he isn't the one calling the shots. But the miserable shadow his power grab will cast over Britain is likely to last far longer than the tenure of the would-be "world king" himself.

His place in the history books, however, is secured. He will forever be the libertine whose pursuit of personal freedom and "control" saw his countrymen robbed of theirs.

[Sheilbh]

Can't see anyway Johnson survives this now - looks like Starmer was very effective and the Tories were very quiet.

Edit: And given the rhythm of leaks so far it feels like we'll get pictures or videos now

[Tamas]

So Johnson has admitted he was at the 20 May party and apologised effectively saying he didn't know it was a party.

As Starmer rightly replied:

There we have it. After months of deceit and deception, the pathetic spectacle of a man who has run out of road. His defence ... that he didn't realise he was at a party is so ridiculous that it's actually offensive to the British public.

He's finally been forced to admit what everyone knew, that when the whole country was locked down he was hosting boozing parties in Downing Street. Is he now going to do the decent thing and resign?

[Sheilbh]

Also a really good example of why it doesn't work if the leader of the opposition calls for resignations every other week, however satisfying it is for partisans on social media.

This is a line of attack that Starmer and Labour have built for months, I think generally not got ahead of themselves and used his own words to indict him which is why it works.

Tory backbencher on the radio just saying Johnson's a dead man walking now.

[The Brain]

Which talentless liar will replace him?

[Tamas]

Which talentless liar will replace him?

Sunak, the successful businessman/banker now running the Treasury. His successful business acumen has manifested in two major breakthroughs: 1. being born into a rich family and 2. marrying into an ever richer family. If there is any Tory equipped to take over the mantle of understanding the common people from Johnson, it is him.

If she gets blessed with enough migrants which she can allow to drown into the Channel the next couple of weeks, Home Secretary Patel could also win the contest. She has her moral conviction going for her. Most of the Tories are nasty autocratic xenophobes because that's what buys them votes. For Patel they seem heartfelt, genuine principles to dedicate her life to.

There's also Health Secretary Javid, who can run on the platform of not being either of the above two persons, plus a record of far-right reckless comments kept in check by the lack of conviction put into them.

[The Brain]

I've got a good feeling about this.

[Syt]

Aw, I'm silently hoping for Jacob Rees-Mogg, just for the spectacle of basically having a Dickensian villain running the country.

[Sheilbh]

Sunak, the successful businessman/banker now running the Treasury. His successful business acumen has manifested in two major breakthroughs: 1. being born into a rich family and 2. marrying into an ever richer family. If there is any Tory equipped to take over the mantle of understanding the common people from Johnson, it is him.

His dad's a GP and his mum's a pharmacist. It's a well-off background. I'm not sure I'd say it's rich - while his father in law is one of the founders of Infosys

Then, yeah, grad scheme at Goldman Sachs, MBA in California (where he met his wife) and on to a hedge fund.

If she gets blessed with enough migrants which she can allow to drown into the Channel the next couple of weeks, Home Secretary Patel could also win the contest. She has her moral conviction going for her. Most of the Tories are nasty autocratic xenophobes because that's what buys them votes. For Patel they seem heartfelt, genuine principles to dedicate her life to.

No chance. Among conservative members she's polling at about 2% - which is the same level as Raab. I think a year ago, maybe, but she's not perceived as having a grip on the Home Office (and - to be honest the only Home Secretary I can remember who was perceived as having a grip on the Home Office is probably May, possibly David Blunkett too).

There's also Health Secretary Javid, who can run on the platform of not being either of the above two persons, plus a record of far-right reckless comments kept in check by the lack of conviction put into them.

What far-right comments? I think being Health Secretary right now will be a difficult job to use for a leadership pitch.

I think the favourites are Sunak and Truss - but I think they're pitching for similar votes among MPs and I think iit's possible to imagine MPs consolidating behind a "stop Truss" candidate. She reminds me of the Milibands in that I think members really rate her, but to the rest of the country she just comes across as a bit strange.

But in Tory leadership election the only time I can think of when the favourite won was Johnson in 2019 (May, Cameron, IDS, Hague, Major, Thatcher all started as second-tier candidates). So being favourite might not be a good thing - I wouldn't bet against them deciding to go for someone with "clean hands" like Hunt, or possibly Zahawi (who can run on his time as vaccines minister), or even someone very junior who it's felt has been overlooked like Penny Mordaunt doing surprisingly well. They might decide they want a "refresh" basically and go for someone who is minimally tainted by Johnson.

My money would be on Sunak but I'm not sure - him and Truss both have problems at both at the getting MPs to support them and the party members stage. Plus at some point I think Sunak is going to be asked what he knew about all these parties, given that he lives next door. Which is why I do keep thinking it might actually be someone who isn't seen as a front-runner yet.

[Gups]

Which talentless liar will replace him?

Sunak, the successful businessman/banker now running the Treasury. His successful business acumen has manifested in two major breakthroughs: 1. being born into a rich family and 2. marrying into an ever richer family. If there is any Tory equipped to take over the mantle of understanding the common people from Johnson, it is him.

If she gets blessed with enough migrants which she can allow to drown into the Channel the next couple of weeks, Home Secretary Patel could also win the contest. She has her moral conviction going for her. Most of the Tories are nasty autocratic xenophobes because that's what buys them votes. For Patel they seem heartfelt, genuine principles to dedicate her life to.

There's also Health Secretary Javid, who can run on the platform of not being either of the above two persons, plus a record of far-right reckless comments kept in check by the lack of conviction put into them.

I don't think Sunak was born into a particularly rich family. His Dad was a GP and his mum a pharmacist. He did go to a posh private school though. He is the front runner along with Liz Truss.

Patel isn't in the contest. Javid has a chance but not a big one. Probably about 5th or 6th favourite if he decided to stand.