Putin sees Ukraine war as
a spiritual mission
Roger Boyes
Page 30
Lawmaker can’t be lawbreaker so PM must go
Johnson won’t quit or be forced out but arguments over timing and loss of a clear electoral asset can’t disguise the truth
Comment
we cannot change prime minister
while it proceeds will prove
impractical.
And the argument that Johnson’s
downfall would give succour to
Putin? There seem to me two
objections to this. The first is that it
grants the Russian dictator a say in
British politics which I am unwilling
to accord him. I don’t care what does
or doesn’t please him. The other
objection is that our battle withPutin is precisely over the rule of law
and the defence of democracy. It
would be an odd thing if we failed to
adhere to that at home in order to
advance the case for it abroad.
Finally there is the assertion that
Johnson is an election winner with a
magic that others lack. This is not
the basis upon which MPs should
determine whether a prime minister
should remain in office having
broken the law he set himself. It is, of
course, something of interest mainly
to Conservatives and a purely
political calculation. But also, I
suspect, not a correct one.
It is much too early to predict the
result of the next election. It is true
that Johnson has found ways of
reaching voters that have eluded
other Tories. And it is true also that
the viable alternatives both inside
and outside the party don’t brim with
electoral appeal. But if the
Conservative Party thinks that
Johnson’s appeal to voters is
undimmed by what has happened, or
that it will quickly fade from public
memory, I think it is in for a shock.[email protected]policy towards Ukraine has been
commendable. There have been
lacunae — the policy on refugees in
particular — but overall he has been
clear-thinking and brave and has
shown leadership internationally.
However, his policy is that of his
government and of parliament.
Not just of him. He is prime minister,
not president.
Nor is this just some abstract,
constitutional point. I do not believe
that Britain changing its prime
minister would make the slightest
difference to the conduct or
outcome of the war in Ukraine. I am
confident that an alternative
Conservative prime minister would
carry on the policy of the
government with exactly the same
panache and effectiveness. In any
case, the struggle with Russia is
likely to go on for years. SuggestingBoris Johnson believes successful
political careers require a thick skinthe law is a resigning matter.
The strongest argument against
him resigning is that it would be
disproportionate. But it is not an
argument I can accept. There are
three serious failings of which the
prime minister has now been found
guilty. He has broken the law
himself. He has presided over
widespread lawbreaking among his
staff. And he has not told parliament
the truth about this lawbreaking. To
argue that all this is unimportant is
completely unacceptable.
Among other things, it involves
suggesting that breaking the Covid
laws was something that did not
matter very much. But that is quite
wrong. They were put in place
because breaking them could result
in someone dying. Which the prime
minister knows because he caught
Covid and almost did die.
I would completely understand if
the chancellor felt a sense of injustice
at being called to a meeting by
someone else and arrived to find
others there socialising, but the
rules, which his government set,
were the same for everyone. And in
any case, the prime minister does not
have this defence for the
management of his staff or his
attendance at other events. Or for
what he told the Commons.
Parliament relies on ministers
diligently taking trouble to inform
themselves of the facts and then
telling the truth to parliament about
it. At least one part of that did not
happen. If parliament decides that
this does not matter, a line will have
been crossed.
Along with the argument about
disproportionality is the one about
timing: the suggestion that it would
be wrong to remove Johnson during
the war in Ukraine. I do not accept
this, either.
I believe Johnson’s conduct ofT
he comedian Eddie Izzard
used to have a joke in one
of his shows about pears.
How they were only ripe
for half an hour, and you’d
always miss it. While you were out
they would go from rock hard to
mush, being at all times inedible.
This joke returned to me over the
last couple of weeks hearing
Conservative MPs talk about
whether the prime minister should
resign over breaking the laws that he
set. For a long period the argument
was that the time wasn’t yet ripe. We
needed to see what Sue Gray had to
say, and we would just have to be
patient and wait.
Then, while we were all looking
elsewhere, the position changed. It
was no longer too soon to move
against the prime minister, it was too
late. He was a war leader and we
would be giving succour to Vladimir
Putin and anyway this was all
months ago. Somehow the moment
when it was neither too early nor too
late had never arrived.
Here’s the fact and we’d better face
it. Boris Johnson will not go of his
own volition over the parties and it is
unlikely that MPs will force him to
do so. It is possible if, say, the
eventual Sue Gray report comes
after terrible local election results.
But for now at least it isn’t likely.
Anybody who thinks he will
simply decide that his position is
untenable has not been following his
career or understood his personality.
His view is that great political
careers require a thick skin, that they
go up and down, that political moods
change, that you barrel on and
provided you don’t look behind you,
people will be following.
And all the arguments against him
being deposed by Tory MPs remain.
There is a market failure in political
coups. While the benefits accrue to
everyone, the risk is borne only by
one or two people. Everyone pauses,
waiting for everyone else to move.
And there are always good
arguments for doing nothing.
There is a suggestion by some
commentators that had Rishi Sunak
resigned, as everything except the
crudest political reckoning suggests
he should have, then this calculation
would have changed. That he would
then have borne the risk and
everyone would have piled in behind
him. I don’t believe this is the case.
If the chancellor had decided to
resign it would certainly have put a
lot of public pressure on Johnson.However, I suspect the reaction of the
majority of Conservative MPs would
have been irritation. They would have
argued publicly that there is a
difference between a secretary of
state and a prime minister with an
election mandate. Privately (although
in ways that would find their way into
the media) they would have suggested
that Sunak lacked robustness and
that his resignation was based more
on vanity than principle.
So I don’t think the prime minister
is likely to resign and I don’t think he
will be forced to do so. But should
he? My view remains that he should.
Ministers set the law and breakingThe prime minister
has been found guilty
of three serious failings
Our battle with Putin
is precisely over the
defence of democracy
Daniel
Finkelstein@dannythefink
the times | Wednesday April 13 2022 V2 29