The other bit of electoral calculus is anyone taking over now has to deal with all the problems. If you let Johnson bumble on a bit longer then you can drop in shortly before the next election, claim all the problems were his fault and you're a shiny new Conservative leader.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
When Will It All Go Wrong For The Tories/ Johnson?
- Thread starter tbtc
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
If Boris goes, there's nobody waiting to replace him. Not only did he get rid of all the well known party moderates when they disagreed over Brexit, he then filled the cabinet with a bunch of yes-men & women who are there entirely because they're loyal rather than on merit or ability. Not only that, but there's so much bad news on the near horizon, that nobody wants to stick their head above the parapet and take on those messes, when Boris is already on the downslide and can take the blame for them too.
If the Tories had even a single possible candidate who would be popular with voters and without Boris's baggage, he would have been gone months ago. Arguably, this lack of good leadership options is an even bigger issue for the country than the lying & cheating buffoon we currently have in the top office, as it means we're stuck with him while we continue to face major issues which need serious attention.
At Oddschecker, there are odds for which year Boris Johnson will quit as Prime Minister. A couple of weeks ago, you could get odds of 3/1 for 2022. The odds are shortening, and its now 9/4 (ie if you bet £1 and he leaves this year, you get your £1 back and £2.25 winnings, if he doesn't, you lose the £1). The favourite is still 2024, with current odds of 8/7 (ie bet £1 and get £1.14 winnings). 88% of the new bets are for him to leave in 2022.
Gloster
Established Member
Liz Truss is lying in wait to take over. She seems to spend most of her time getting pictures taken of herself being tough with foreigners and threatening various actions that would be popular with those who will elect the new leader. Whether some of the actions are good for the country seems to be irrelevant.
I agree with what you're saying; in my lifetime Prime Ministers ensured that some of their Cabinet members didn't automatically agree with them. I got the feeling that Margaret Thatcher enjoyed the disagreement, at the end of which she was either convinced or could say that she was the boss. Boris made the huge mistake of appointing people who would agree with him, perhaps based a little on Theresa May's problems when she didn't, but she was right and he is wrong.
I really can't think of anyone in the current Cabinet who's any good - maybe Gove but he's devious but at least he has a brain and doesn't automatically suck up to Boris. I'm not sure this country would be well served by having him in charge, but at least he'd be better than the current incumbent.
As Foreign Secretary, has she actually achieved anything significant? I don't think so. She messed up the Iran negotiations for Nazanine Zaghari-Ratcliffe, a pitch which had been queered by her boss when he had her job, and she's stuffed the negotiations with the EU to an extent that we'll end up in a trade war if we're not careful.
I think you're right, she's after the main chance, but I don't think her CV supports her very well.
Some insider stories regarding "Partygate" have now been released,
Partygate: Insiders tell of packed No 10 lockdown parties
Staff describe bins overflowing with bottles, people sitting on each other's laps and colleagues sleeping in the office.
www.bbc.co.uk
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Were these people referred-to all civil servants or Conservative Party politicians? There are apparently some website members unable to differentiate between the two.Some insider stories regarding "Partygate" have now been released,
Partygate: Insiders tell of packed No 10 lockdown parties
Staff describe bins overflowing with bottles, people sitting on each other's laps and colleagues sleeping in the office.www.bbc.co.uk
It does seem they want to keep him there until the worst of the problems are over. Problem is they're only going to keep getting worse.
They should have got rid of him sooner.
As for the Boris supporters - we've already seen it exposed how many bots were set up and post using the #backboris tag. They're mostly not real, and almost zero people watch GB News or Talk TV (not that I'm sure even they're that loyal anymore as they've seen the writing on the wall).
It would actually be a somewhat smart move for the Conservatives. She'd be their third female leader and the third female Prime Minister.
As opposed to the 'progressive' Labour who have had 0 of either.
And yes, I know May wasn't great (although looking back I think some people wish she'd stayed), but it would still hurt Labour's image, and that's how politics works nowadays, hurt them more than they hurt you, so you look like the less bad option. Sad but true, and a 'vote winner'.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
If the politicians had wanted to stop it then they would only have had to say the word.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
The line manager of those civil servants is the one whom in which the responsibility lies.
I hope we get someone completely fresh, not one of the Britannia Unchained Brexiter clique like Truss. Once Johnson does go, we need to move on from the Johnson era.
Get Truss in and it'll be the same old rubbish, but this time ideologically-driven. Thankfully she presumably won't have the "Boris Factor" which (rightly or wrongly) might have played a part in the last election, and the comments of the "Britannia Unchained" lot about British workers can be seized on by the opposition - so I think they're going to lose seats either way.
Best chance for the Tories now (and I say this as someone who doesn't want them to win) is to choose one of the remaining moderates. Jeremy Hunt has been mentioned a few times on this thread already. I wouldn't say I'm a fan of his, but he's less bad than the current clique.
Not sure that would be enough to be a vote-winner. Would they have ditched May if so? As I said above Truss isn't someone I'd expect to appeal to the general public, especially. Particularly if Labour focus on the "Britannia Unchained" pamphlet and its comments on British workers, as I said above.
On the other hand, bringing May back might work. Some potential Tory voters might view this as a refreshing change after the shannanigans of Johnson.
Last edited:
Of course it can backfire, but as I said, it's all about making Labour look bad, not making them look good. Just modern politics sadly. And it works sometimes, as long as Labour don't have something in their arsenal to fire back with, and with the Starmer investigation and focus on the parties rather than say, the cost of living, they might not have an effective counter.
Does it actually matter whether they were politicians or civil servants? The point is that if there were parties, rules were broken and they should all have the book thrown at them.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
The politicians direct the civil servants. If the PM had said "this has got to stop" then it would have stopped. He was clearly aware these were going on and didn't put a stop to them.
The Guardian reports the BBC as saying:
Boris only cares about himself and will sacrifice anyone else to protect himself.
which reminds me of the brilliant quotation from Jeremy Thorpe:
Thorpe was referring to the 1962 cabinet reshuffle "Night of the Long Knives" by Macmillan, his Guardian obituary (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/04/jeremy-thorpe) says that this caused permanent damage to Macmillan's reputation which is probably true, from memory only salvaged in part by his role as "elder statesman" for a time to Margaret Thatcher.
Boris only cares about himself and will sacrifice anyone else to protect himself.
What is a special adviser?
Special advisers (spads) are political appointees hired to support ministers. They give party political advice and support that would be inappropriate for the civil service to provide. Spads are a specific kind of political adviser first introduced in 1964. They are appointed as a temporary civil servant.How powerful are special advisers?
In Number 10, special advisers are the prime minister’s most senior advisers, often including his chief of staff, director of communications or head of the Policy Unit. Others can be very powerful even if they do not have a specific role. Before he left in November 2020, Dominic Cummings was referred to as the prime minister’s ‘chief adviser’ and seems to have had a wide but unspecified brief.How are special advisers held accountable?
Special advisers are governed by a code of conduct. They are accountable to their ministers for their conduct.From https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/special-advisers
More and more people are being reported, correctly in my view, for saying "this wouldn't have happened under Theresa May". But I credit her with enough sense to run a mile from a second chance at the poisoned chalice of leadership, she did what she did and she couldn't control her party and she knows it'll happen again.
I once worked as a scientific civil servant.
Out of interest I looked at a job advert for a senior post, something I felt I might be capable of doing.
Part of the requirement was to sign up to a "code of conduct" which just made me laugh and convinced me not to apply for the job - it was well meant but I thought of all the senior staff whom I knew and they simply didn't live the job according to this, they were mean, petty, back-stabbing liars in the most part, which is to say that they were human beings.
I don't place much store in these sorts of things, as you can probably guess.
brad465
Established Member
Windfall tax critics look set to be thrown under a bus like so many others in order to save Johnson further:
www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk
Tomorrow's Papers Today - UK Front Pages - Latest Newspaper Headlines
All of UK's Tomorrow's Front Pages ✅ Updated Daily between 7PM - 11pm ✅ The Mail, Express, Times, Guardian and many more Proudly supporting #buyapaper
www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Are you really expecting me to believe that "special advisers" formed the majority of the civil servant attendees at these gatherings? The last sentence in the first sub-heading section above states the temporary nature of their retainership in that capacity.
Most people would recognise the difference between a politician elected by the electorate and a paid unelected employee.
Of course not. Even if a photo of the entire cabinet doing the conga while drinking champagne came out, you'd be calling for their timesheets to prove it was actually a team building exercise done on work time before criticising any of them, and even then you'd be letting Boris off the hook because he only went along with someone else's idea.
It's well documented that these parties were not only attended by civil servants, but spads and elected members also. People are willing to go on record that Boris knew what was going on, and rather than tell people off, he'd start pouring the drinks instead. The whole culture in that building from top to bottom was rotten and illegal, and those who are trying to cover it up and protect their messiahs are just as bad as those who broke the rules.
Ultimately I think it's irrelevant. I don't expect most voters to understand the nuance between SpAds and permanent civil servants. Personally, I think it will all blow over. In my view, the next general election will be fought on the battleground of the economy and what people think works best for them.
Last edited:
My impression is that the drip-drip leaking, while obviously bad, has been Johnson’s salvation. Incremental stuff doesn’t provide the sorts of big swings required to oust him, and it’s easier to dismiss each revelation as a petty distraction from more pressing issues. Also, each individual revealed incident or deception is somewhat comparable to Starmer’s boozy curry, and so can be compared on a one-to-one basis (even if the totality of all the known occurrences is far worse).
I think his position would be untenable if it had all leaked a few months ago, and whatever forces want him out have therefore slipped up.
I think his position would be untenable if it had all leaked a few months ago, and whatever forces want him out have therefore slipped up.
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Johnson’s Downing Street parties are just not comparable to Starmer having a beer with his dinner while working late. The issue for Johnson is more that he lied about it rather all than own up to the facts. For people to not be able see that difference is flabbergasting.
Isn't a windfall tax a good thing though? Or so we've been told. It's a nice silver lining to know he's still got brown trousers on. Maybe we can't kick him out, but there's ways to force his hand to do what we want him to.Windfall tax critics look set to be thrown under a bus like so many others in order to save Johnson further:
Tomorrow's Papers Today - UK Front Pages - Latest Newspaper Headlines
All of UK's Tomorrow's Front Pages ✅ Updated Daily between 7PM - 11pm ✅ The Mail, Express, Times, Guardian and many more Proudly supporting #buyapaper
View attachment 115205
Now, if only Cummings would leak more stuff....
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Sir Kier Starmer has been pressing for a windfall tax for quite a while now.
That's called foresight and consistency.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
But unfortunately, not the power to do anything about it
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
I would say, not, it sounds appealing when so many people are struggling, but it's an absolutely terrible idea.
Imagine you do really well at work and your employer therefore gives you a salary rise. So for several months you're going in to work happy that you're earning more. Then suddenly the Government comes along and says, "Hey, we don't like you! We don't want you to earn that much. So - that extra money you've been earning - we're going to take it away from you now. And we'll do that by increasing your tax rate. Not the general tax rate for everyone. We're going to pass a special rule so that you have to pay more tax than everyone else. And by the way, it's retrospective, so we're also taking away the money that you've already been earning."
That's the windfall tax.
To my mind, the fact that Labour are so enthusiastically pushing it (without telling you what it actually means) just shows that Labour hasn't moved on from the Corbyn era. They've changed the man at the top, but they haven't changed their economy-wrecking anti-the-modern-economy ideology. Ditto the LibDems. On the other hand the fact that the Government haven't managed to counter such an appalling idea, and are just completely letting Labour run with it shows total incompetence when it comes to publicity on their part.
Last edited:
edwin_m
Veteran Member
But if that salary rise is purely down to luck and totally unearned, and others have had to take a pay cut to make it possible? That's more analogous to the position of energy companies making bumper profits because of external circumstances.
- Status