Independent Premium

As the anniversary of Boris Johnson’s supposed historic general election victory approaches, it is remarkable how rapidly his authority over his own MPs has evaporated. It is obviously the extraordinary pressure of events that so swiftly derailed so many of his plans. Yet it is also partly down to the sheer illogicality of some policies (notably Brexit), the increasing evidence of sheer incompetence and self-indulgence, which hardly inspires loyalty, plus the Conservative parliamentary party’s addiction to plotting, splitting and generally causing trouble.  As a “new” administration dating back only to last December, the Johnson government has suffered an unprecedented fall from grace – especially within its own supporters in the Commons. As an “old” government, an extension of Conservative or Conservative-led governments in power for more than a decade now it is perhaps more comprehensible. For whatever reason the government seems very tired.  So it is that the 5 November lockdown (an unfortunate date) is the setting for yet another major rebellion. When scores of your own backbenchers are willing to defy a three-line whip on such an important set of measures, then a nominal working majority of 87 becomes just that – notional, theoretical and no defence against the European Research Group, the China Research Group, the Northern Research Group or any of the other euphemistically-named factions that now dominate the Conservative backbenches.   More

According to Whitehall legend, Harold Wilson – one of the most wily of the many slippery characters to inhabit Downing Street – once ordered his cabinet secretary to conduct a leak inquiry into a titbit that he, Wilson, had himself fed to a compliant reporter. Wilson’s confected indignation and official investigations were, in other words, pure subterfuge. Leaks by No 10,  then as now, are regarded by No 10 as legitimate “media management”; those from elsewhere are grave breaches of confidentiality and of collective cabinet responsibility. They are certainly nothing new.  Which brings us to the current prime minister’s reported “fury” that the fact and main details of the latest national (ie English) lockdown were leaked to the press before he had a chance to tell the public or, indeed, the full cabinet and parliament. This time Boris Johnson’s annoyance seems genuine, if only because it further disrupted his weekend and pre-empted any spin he might have wanted to put on his latest U-turn. The press conference had to be swiftly arranged, was postponed twice and disrupted the nation’s Saturday evening television viewing plans. Little Mix and Strictly fans may never forgive the Conservatives. Mr Johnson’s marginal reputation for competence was further eroded. More

The dramatic suspension of a former leader of any mainstream political party is bound to be a traumatic event. There are few precedents for it – the last example of anything like it goes back to Ramsay MacDonald. Labour’s first prime minister had decided to form a “national” government with Conservatives and Liberals in 1931, to deal with a financial crisis, leaving most of his colleagues and the party behind. That was a bit much for his old comrades, who kicked him out, though MacDonald was apparently disappointed with their move.  MacDonald, though, was hardly loved by his party after his historic betrayal. Jeremy Corbyn, by contrast, commanded almost religious, cultish devotion among his followers. He was, in his own way, the leader of a populist insurgency, broadly speaking the Momentum movement, and some of that magical appeal touched the wider country at the 2017 general election, which boasted the biggest swing to Labour since 1945. The election of 2019 was a disaster, but few would argue that that justifies suspension.  The treatment of Corbyn seems almost designed to rile the left, and so it has proved. Sensible commentators warn that such macho displays of strong leadership as Keir Starmer is currently engaged in merely lead to civil war and the impression of a divided party – electoral poison, as the Tories came to discover over Europe.   More

As international trade secretary, Liz Truss has one of the toughest jobs in politics – trying to make some kind of sense, let alone success, of the grand-sounding but nebulous concept of “Global Britain”: making Brexit a success, in other words.To her credit, she is trying. Pre-empting the end of the Trump era, she has used a keynote speech at Chatham House to indicate that Global Britain will promote a rules-based international trading system, rather than, presumably helping to isolate and break the World Trade Organisation, as the US administration has tried. From the Department for International Trade there will be no mini-me echo of Donald Trump, no “Britain First” approach to new trading arrangements. Truss recalls the era of Cobden and Bright, the enlightenment values of Macaulay and the timeless principles of free trade in contrast to the protectionist populists of the US and, implicitly, within the ranks of her own party. Give or take a few wedges of Stilton, the recent trade deals with Japan and Cote d’Ivoire apparently stand testament to this new spirit of economic liberalism. She didn’t mention Michel Barnier by name, but she did refer to the EU’s “innovation-phobic” mindset and high tariff wall (and one that British farmers and others have sheltered behind for half a century).   More