Chinese
Docklands
development
signed off by
Johnson on
brink of
collapse
How can we expect the world to take
seriously as foreign secretary Liz Truss,
whose only notable achievement has
been to spend £500,000 of taxpayers’
money on flying herself to Australia?
Why should anyone respect as culture
secretary Nadine Dorries, who bids for
glory by hefting an axe over the BBC?
Jacob Rees-Mogg would have seemed
behind the times in a cabinet led by
Lord North.
Meanwhile, the Tory back benches
are occupied by able and responsible
people who are denied office because
the prime minister fears that they
despise him. Which, of course, they do.
If I write in anger, it is because it
seems shaming that our nation’s
government daily makes promises and
threats that nobody believes, or is
expected to; which treats the seat of
power as a mere venue for revelry by
night; that regards public money as
roulette chips, to be tossed on
whichever number seems to offer
a chance of winning through
to Tuesday.
Good people in public life still exist, of
all political persuasions, who do not lie
very much. We must restore them to
their rightful place at the head of our
affairs. For the very credibility of our
democracy, parliament must
demonstrate that it will not indulge
systemic deceit, such as characterises
Johnson’s performance as almost
certainly the most disreputable national
leader in our history.
The experiment in celebrity
government to which the Conservative
Party committed us has failed, and is
seen by the world to have failed. The
foremost task for a successor is to
restore Britain’s reputation as a serious
country.
Our pain in the years ahead — and
there cannot fail to be economic pain —
will not be assuaged by the spectacle of
the ex-prime minister skipping lightly
across the landscape, amassing a fortune
from his memoirs and from his stellar
gifts as an entertainer.
“You see?” Icarus will say, with that
confiding, irrepressible, guilty-
schoolboy grin which has borne him to a
preposterous altitude of fame and
power. “It was all a jolly jape, wasn’t it?”
Not for the British people, Boris. Not for
the British people.associates. Because I have been fiercely
critical of Johnson for a decade and
more, I am sometimes said to hate him.
This is not so. When I wrote a memoir
about my time as a newspaper editor, I
included his picture in a spread of
“favourite colleagues”.
Some months ago The Washington
Post telephoned me to demand,
accusingly, what I could say in my own
defence for having once employed
Johnson. I responded that he is a
brilliant journalist. It seems reasonable
to judge a reporter and entertainer by
wholly different standards from those
that should be applied to a prime
minister.
Never for a moment, three decades
ago, did it occur to Boris’s colleagues
that he might occupy public office. His
weakness of character, mendacity and
awesome selfishness made him patently
unfit for it.
Three years ago I heard a voter tell a
BBC Radio 4 reporter during a street
canvass that she was rooting for Johnson
“because he will make politics fun!”. He
certainly accomplished that; has
provided a feast of it.
But politics, or rather government, is
not meant to be fun. It is about
delivering responsible, civilised,
considered policies and administration,
in difficult times. Beyond the prime
minister’s own frivolity, he has
appointed to prominent cabinet roles a
gallery of people whose only claim on
public office — excepting Michael Gove,
Rishi Sunak and a handful of lesser
ministers — is loyalty to Johnson and to
Brexit.He is weak of
character,
awesomely
selfish and
mendaciouspeople, who will not find it funny
for long”.
Johnson’s premiership has indeed
appeared comic only to foreigners.
When he telephones Vladimir Putin, to
demand that he holds off invading
Ukraine, the Kremlin rocks with mirth.
When he trades insults with Emmanuel
Macron, he does not anger the French
people; instead he merely bewilders
them, that the “rosbifs”, the nation of
Trafalgar and Waterloo, should have
sunk to this.
American friends display a solicitous
compassion when they mention the
incumbent of the office of Winston
Churchill. Nearer home, a distinguished
historian emailed me last summer,
observing that he had determined
Johnson to be “the most morally
debased leader Britain has had since the
18th century”.
Ah, say his admirers — and there are
still an astonishing number of them,
mostly sorts who wear red trousers in
the golf club bar — it is no longer grown-
up to talk about “morality” in public life.
All politicians are as bad as each other.
Boris is no worse than the rest. Did not
Tony Blair lie, to get us into the 2003
invasion of Iraq? Did not Anthony Eden
lie, to justify the 1956 invasion of Egypt?
Yes, both did deceive, and have been
justly excoriated for doing so. Yet I
would argue, as a historian, that no
prime minister in the past century, with
the possible exception of David Lloyd
George, has shown himself a more
deplorable human being than Johnson.
And the “Welsh wizard” had
extraordinary achievements to his
credit, to set against his eventual
moral collapse.
Whatever their faults, nobody
seriously suggests that Blair, Gordon
Brown, David Cameron, Theresa May,
like James Callaghan, John Major and
Margaret Thatcher before them, were
not decent people. Beyond personal
ambition — which of course is always
there, in anyone who rises so high — all
cherished aspirations for other people,
for Britain, for what we may still call the
public interest.
By contrast, the one consistent strand
in Johnson’s life is that he has never
cared for anyone save himself. He
sooner or later betrays every woman,
group and cause with which heA
t the tail end of the 19th
century GA Henty made a
fortune from penning
dashing historical tales for
boys. There is a scene in Held
Fast for England, about the
1779-83 siege of Gibraltar, that I
revisited the other night.
An admiral addresses a quartet of
respectful teenagers: “A gentleman will
never tell a lie, lads, to screen himself
when he has got into a scrape. I wouldn’t
keep the smartest young officer in the
service on board a ship of mine if I
caught him telling a lie, for I should
know that he would not only be a
blackguard but a coward. Cowardice is at
the bottom of half the lying of the
world.”
How quaint, you say. How absurdly
Victorian! Yet it seems fair to suggest that
if Boris Johnson, in his schooldays, had
read that improving volume and taken
the old seadog’s words to heart, he
might not now be on the cusp of eviction
from those notorious gold-wallpapered
Downing Street married quarters.
The hero of the Bullingdon Club,
Houdini of the boudoir, most
implausible prime minister in Britain’s
history is at last approaching the end of
his piece of string.
Downing Street has been many things,
but never before a set for such a sitcom
as has been played out there for the past
two years. There have been more
parties, jokes, lies, banana skins than the
creators of Yes, Prime Minister dared to
write into their TV farce.
My question, today, is not: what was
Johnson thinking of? Boris has never
changed. He is the same brilliant priapic
clown he was before he thrust himself to
centre stage, as star of Oh! What A Lovely
Brexit. The issue, instead, is what was
any sane person thinking, to suppose
him an appropriate person to be our
national leader. I wrote in 2019 that the
Tories, in their terror of Jeremy Corbyn,
had anointed “a cavorting charlatan ...
foisted a tasteless joke upon the BritishMAX
HASTINGSselected as a developer —
marketed the Royal Albert
Docks to prospective tenants.
Days later, staff from the GLA
and London and Partners had
dinner with Bates.
After a Channel 4 News
investigation in November
2014, the London Assembly
approved a motion saying it
was “deeply concerned” by
Johnson’s failure to address
concerns about the tendering
process. He rejected a motion
for an independent inquiry.
Bates has previously said
she advised ABP on only a
voluntary basis and never
received any payment.
Xu said the project had
suffered due to “factors [ABP]
had no control over”. He
added: “At the same time, we
have been clear we are now
seeking a suitable partner for
ABP London and positive
discussions are ongoing with
several interested UK parties.
We maintain that the outlook
for the Royal Albert Dock
project remains strong.”lawyers that she helped ABP
identify sites for development
in 2008. She registered a UK
company called London
China ABP the same year.
ABP says it never formed part
of the company. In April 2011,
Lady Bates became an adviser
to Lord Wei, a British-Chinese
peer and David Cameron’s big
society tsar, and helped to
fund a staff member in his
office. Bates and Wei travelled
to ABP’s offices in Beijing.
Johnson’s deputy, Lord
Lister, later told the London
Assembly that he did not
believe that Johnson had met
Bates. Johnson had in fact
met her at least once during
the bidding process.
City Hall had its own close
ties to ABP. Its promotional
arm, London and Partners,
rented office space from ABP
in Beijing. In September 2011,
ABP and London and
Partners jointly hosted an
investment conference in
China, during which ABP —
two years before it wasthe time had only one project
to its name — a part-derelict
business park in Beijing.
Xu, the founder and chief
executive, once worked with
Wang Qishan, China’s vice-
president. Xu presented
himself as an Anglophile and
said that building in Britain
was at the heart of ABP’s
vision, “so you should tell
your Queen the UK should
join hands with China”.
ABP has close ties with the
British establishment. It was
advised by Li Xuelin, now
Lady Bates, a Chinese
millionaire who has donated
£206,000 to the Conservative
Party and married the Tory
peer and former minister
Lord Bates. Lady Bates, 60,
acknowledged via herbased in the British Virgin
Islands and allegedly owned
by the family of ABP’s chief
executive. City Hall has given
Dauphin until next month to
clarify whether it can
complete the project.
Opened in 1880, the Royal
Albert Docks were part of the
largest enclosed docks in the
world, and at the heart of the
British empire’s trading
network. But changes in
technology meant its use
declined and it closed in 1981.
As mayor, Johnson led the
process to find a developer to
revitalise the site. City Hall
put the contract out to tender
in May 2011. The following
year it shortlisted three firms:
two recognised British
developers and ABP, which atgolden key to the city during
a ceremony in 2013.
Today the site is mostly
abandoned. ABP has failed to
develop 93 per cent of the
4.7 million sq ft site, which
was supposed to include
offices, homes, retail units
and leisure facilities. It has
secured only a handful of
tenants for the 21-block
complex it has built.
The firm also defaulted on
loans, prompting Chinese
state banks to bail it out.
China’s biggest state-owned
conglomerate is suing in
connection with about
£45 million of unpaid debt.
On Friday it was reported that
the project’s biggest
financier, a Chinese bank,
had appointed administrators
to recover its investment.
The Greater London
Authority (GLA) triggered a
“final termination notice” in
August. This meant control of
the undeveloped land passed
to ABP’s guarantor, Dauphin
Holdings Group, which isOne of China’s biggest
property developments in
the West is on the brink of
financial collapse, with the
London authorities
threatening to seize the site
within weeks and a lender
calling in administrators.
During his time as mayor,
Boris Johnson personally
awarded a Chinese company
the right to redevelop the
historic Royal Albert Docks in
east London. Advanced
Business Parks (ABP),
which is based in Beijing and
run by a former Chinese
official, said it would invest
£2 billion in the area and
create 30,000 jobs.
Johnson said the deal
would herald a “21st-century
centre of trade and
investment” and mark a
return to London’s Docklands
heyday. He gave its chief
executive, Xu Weiping, aGabriel Pogrund,
Emanuele Midolo
and Sam Dunning£2,000,000,
Amount promised in investment by Chinese companyThe Sunday Times The Sunday Times February 6, 2022February 6, 2022 77
Has this experiment in celebrity government
given us the most disreputable leader in history?
ministerial code for the way Tory donors
initially covered the cost of the Johnsons’
renovations of their Downing Street flat.
CCHQ officials in the treasurer’s
department, who also want the Johnsons
out, are understood to be leaking intelli-
gence after becoming appalled by the cou-
ple’s use of party money.
Tory MPs blame Carrie for the flat
redecoration saga and wanted the prime
minister to move her friend Henry New-
man from Downing Street. He will now
leave No 10 and is likely to become an
adviser to his old boss Michael Gove.
A close ally of the prime minister’s wife
admitted she had been under huge stress
but said that the attacks on her had
brought her and Johnson closer together.
All the while, potential leadership
rivals are on manoeuvres. Daggers are
drawn between 10 and 11 Downing Street
after Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, twice
failed to back him over Savile.
Sunak’s team were angered that no one
in No 10 told them Mirza had resigned
when the news broke at 3.30pm on Thurs-
day, 90 minutes before the chancellor
was due to give a press conference. Sunak
said of the Savile comments: “Honestly, I
wouldn’t have said it.”
The chancellor’s team then failed to
give No 10 a preview of an article he had
written for The Sun in which he com-
pounded the criticism and appeared to
say he would do things differently if he
were leader. Members of Johnson’s
communications team were at Chez
Antoinette, a Westminster restaurant,
when the article appeared online.
Johnson tried to rebuild bridges, con-
sulting Sunak at noon on Friday about his
planned shake-up. But the chancellor’s
activities have irritated his colleagues and
cabinet rivals. One senior cabinet minis-
ter said: “Rishi has been far too blatant.
He’s a bit like a five-year-old boy who tells
the girl he likes to ‘please, please’ not kiss
him. He appears to be trying to hasten the
PM’s departure before things get properly
shit with the economy.”
His growing profile appears to have its
downsides. Last month Sunak took his
family to the London Dungeon museum.
The group, all wearing masks, were led by
a jester, who told them they had travelled
back in time. He turned to Sunak and said:
“You! What’s your name?” The chancellor
politely replied: “It’s Rishi.” The jester
said: “Is there a plot to blow up the Houses
of Parliament!?” Sunak said: “I hope not
.. .” Fellow guests giggled awkwardly
before the jester interjected: “Everyone
shout at Rishi: ‘Liar!’”
But Sunak has a lot of support. Mirza’s
husband, Dougie Smith, retains his No 10
pass, although allies of Johnson fear he
has already “turned”. Smith is said to
have told friends several months ago that
they would need to “get ready for Rishi”.
They pointed out that Smith had been
friends “for years” with Nick Gibb, the
former schools minister, who suggested
on Friday night that Johnson had lied
about the No 10 parties and should quit.
Sunak remains in a strong position. A
new Focal Data poll today, commissioned
by Hanover Communications, shows he
has the best chance of reaching voters in
the red wall seats that flipped to the Tories
in 2019 and outstrips his closest rivals in
the party’s southeastern heartlands.
Combining first and second preferen-
ces for the next prime minister puts
Sunak (35 per cent) ahead of Starmer
(33 per cent) and Johnson (30 per cent). In
the red wall Sunak is on 35 per cent com-
pared with Starmer on 32 per cent, and
Johnson on 29 per cent. Taking both first
and second preferences into account in
the Tory heartlands Sunak leads (50 per
cent) compared with both Johnson
(38 per cent) and Starmer (17 per cent).
The poll echoes a Survation survey for the
Labour Party, shared with MPs last week,
which found that only by keeping Johnson
in place could Starmer win the election. If
the Tories swapped Johnson for Sunak or
Liz Truss, Starmer would lose.
Downing Street believes Johnson is in
“the danger zone” and could well face a
vote of confidence in the next fortnight.
Some 54 MPs need to write to Sir Graham
Brady, chairman of the 1922 Committee of
backbenchers, to trigger a vote.
Johnson’s shadow whipping operation
believes that at least 35 letters have been
sent in by MPs, though they think it is
likely to be about 45, nine short of the tar-
get. Some MPs believe it could exceed 50.
Ministers will stand by Johnson for now
but are clear he would have to step down
if he receives a fixed penalty notice for
attending a lockdown party. “He would
have to resign,” said a still loyal cabinet
minister. “You can’t have the prime minis-
ter convicted of breaking his own laws.”
If his big reset does not work, Johnson
is understood to have been exploring
opportunities in the United States, which
would allow him to make $250,000 per
speech when he leaves office. His father,
Stanley, was recently overheard in the
Beefsteak Club, a gentlemen’s dining club
in central London, bemoaning at some
length his son’s money worries.
The desire to escape what has been a
punishing three-month psychodrama is
also shared by loyal Downing Street staff,
whose morale is at rock bottom. One No
10 official said: “People are saying to each
other: ‘Why can’t he just go?’ I’m at the
point where I just wish it was over, so I can
get on with the rest of my life.”
Dominic Lawson, page 22
Robert Colvile, page 24ILLUSTRATION: RUSSEL HERNEMAN, AFTER CLAIRE KEANE