Have the last few weeks seen a turning point in Boris Johnson’s premiership?
Dozens of Tories have refused to follow the prime minister’s orders in the voting lobbies on issues as diverse as sleaze and social care.
Meanwhile a handful of Tory MPs have gone public with demands for change, with many more complaining in Westminster’s cafes and bars. At times, it has felt like Mr Johnson was losing his political agility.
“There are too many issues at the moment in which the government is shooting itself in the foot with issues and problems which as I say colleagues are warning and warning and warning about and that are visible from Venus, Mars even maybe visible from Pluto,” northern Tory and ex minister Andrew Percy told Sky News.
“And that has got to stop because we owe the people of this country better than that.”
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:30
Is PM losing Tory support?
Mr Percy hasn’t always been a rebel, though he accepts that description now.
Not that long ago he occupied the high profile portfolio of Northern Powerhouse minister until 2017 and was an early backer of Mr Johnson’s leadership in the summer of 2019.
More on Boris Johnson
Related Topics:
Nor can he just be dismissed as one of a small number of irreconcilables.
Almost one in seven Tory MPs – 52 of them – have rebelled more often than Mr Percy, according to the Public Whip website which provides a crude tally of how many times he and his colleagues have voted against their party.
Yet he is one of the few prepared to go on the record in a television interview quite so expansively with their concerns, and as he sits in his office next to a full size Yorkshire flag, he worries, the government’s political antennae is wonky.
“Those are questions that people around the prime minister and then the senior levels of government have to ask themselves.
“They have to look and see if the setup of this government is broad enough, if it is drawn wide enough from the party if it is reflective of our new voter base, if it’s reflective even of our new base on the back benches.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:17
PM asked ‘is everything okay?’ after speech
Last week, he voted like many others against the government’s social care plans because they will mean the less well off having to pay more than affluent voters before the state steps in and picks up care home bills.
Tory rebels cut the government majority from 80 to 26, setting off alarm bells across the party.
Mr Percy blasts Rishi Sunak’s department, saying their focus on keeping control of public spending is getting in the way of the party meeting its promises.
He said: “The Treasury has to be cognizant of what we promised people, what we told people, and I understand absolutely, you know, public spending is at record levels, you know, the amount of debt we are facing following COVID and all the rest of it is really, really very challenging.
“And these same conversations are happening in governments all across the world. I totally appreciate the challenge, but commitments were made, be that on rail, they were made on social care, they were put into our manifesto, people voted for us on the basis of those and therefore, you know, we need to ensure that we are making good on those promises.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:02
PM loses place in speech, uses Peppa Pig joke
Beneath the surface this argument, between Tories who want to spend whatever it takes to deliver for voters, and those who think strong public finances are the bedrock of the Tory claim to competence.
Not all promises cost money, however, and Tories across the party are worried one of their biggest weaknesses stems from making offers that never materialise.
Ex-minister Tim Loughton, now a Tory on the home affairs select committee, points the finger firmly at France for the migrant crisis.
However he worries that the government has talked up its ability to find a quick fix too often when it is unable to find an easy solution.
“There is a genuine concern that the government has talked tough,” he told me. “The government genuinely wants this trade to end, as we all do, but we haven’t been able to achieve that on our own because most of the cards are in the hands of French.
“And perhaps it wasn’t wise to overpromise when we couldn’t rely on the partnership we need to solve this.”
Soon there will be two opportunities for voters to pass their verdict, with two traditionally safe Tory seats heading to the polls for a byelection.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:13
PM’s letter stirs controversy
This Thursday will see the vote in Bexley and Old Sidcup where the south London voters will choose a successor to popular minister James Brokenshire, who died of cancer in October.
Two weeks later, voters in North Shropshire will elect a successor to disgraced ex-minister Owen Paterson. Few expect an upset in Bexley, although some Liberal Democrats say they are putting in a concerted effort in Shropshire.
On the streets of Bexley, however, there was little sign of danger for Mr Johnson, where at times voters appeared more forgiving than his own MPs.
Tory voters there talk of Mr Johnson going “off the boil” and “fumbling” and doing things that mean they “lack confidence”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:50
PM ‘deeply saddened’ by migrant deaths in Channel
Asked if that means they will take their vote elsewhere, most said not, often arguing he had been dealt an unprecedented bad hand.
This could be dismissed as an outlier result in a safe Tory seat, but the national opinion polls suggest that even after the most recent few weeks, Mr Johnson’s party enjoys an advantage.
The most recent YouGov survey from last week puts the Tories on 36% and Labour on 35%.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:31
‘It’s corrupt – there’s no other word for it’
Older voters in the 65 and above category are twice as likely to vote Tory than Labour, an advantage Labour has not yet begun to directly tackle.
Meanwhile there is little sign Keir Starmer’s Labour is winning over Tory votes directly. Amongst those who voted Tory in 2019, 6% would now choose to vote for Labour but twice as many, 11%, would go for the little known Brexit Party successor, Reform UK.
The last three weeks have seen doubts about Mr Johnson in Westminster unthinkable even during Tory conference in early October, as well as calls for him to shake up his team and signs of fissures in government.
It is not yet clear those doubts in Westminster have filtered through and changed the voting habits in the country.
The Conservatives have been fined over £10,000 by the elections watchdog for failing to accurately declare donations.
The party under-reported non-cash donations in the form of a member of staff seconded to the party by donor Richard Harpin between April 2020 and December 2023, the Electoral Commission said.
Mr Harpin, founder of home repairs company HomeServe and review website Checkatrade, has been a long-time donor to the Conservatives, providing the party with almost £3 million in cash and non-cash donations since 2008.
The non-cash donations were under-reported by more than £200,000 when the employee went from part-time to full-time work at the party.
The Tories also reported late a single non-cash donation relating to the same seconded employee, in December 2023.
The party paid two fines totalling £10,750 on 6 March, saying it was the result of an “administrative error” and “not deliberate”.
More from Politics
The fine is the largest paid by the Conservatives since December 2021, when the party was fined £17,800 for failing to deliver an accurate quarterly donation report and failing to keep accurate accounting records. Louise Edwards, Director of Regulation and Digital Transformation, said: “Our investigation into the Conservative and Unionist Party found a number of donations inaccurately reported or reported late.
“The political finance laws we enforce are there to ensure transparency in how parties are funded and to increase public confidence in our system, so it’s important donations are fully and clearly reported.
Advertisement
“Where we find offences, we carefully consider the circumstances before deciding whether to impose a sanction. We take into account a range of factors before making our final decision, including proportionality.”
The row concerns remarks made by businessman and Tory donor Frank Hester, who reportedly said in 2019 that Diane Abbott, Britain’s longest-serving black MP, made him “want to hate all black women” and that she “should be shot”.
Electoral records show Mr Hester donated £10m to the Conservatives last year.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:31
‘I think Hester’s money should be kept’
Rishi Sunak, who called the comments “racist and wrong”, was already under pressure to hand that cash back when it was reported that he has given the party a further £5m that has yet to be declared, as the Electoral Commission only publishes lists of donations every three months.
The government has repeatedly refused to confirm whether the money has been received.
Campaigners and MPs are calling for a parliamentary inquiry into the Loan Charge scandal – accusing HMRC of “airbrushing” its approach to a harsh tax crackdown linked to several suicides.
The Loan Charge Action Group (LCAG) has hit out at the Treasury Committee after it wrote to the tax office requesting information on its approach to contractor loan schemes.
These were widely – but wrongly – promoted by employers as HMRC compliant in the early 2000s, and tens of thousands of workers who signed up for them are now facing life-ruining bills for tax on their salaries which their employer should have paid.
Campaigners said the Treasury Committee letter was “little more than a tick box exercise triggered by all of the recent coverage of the Loan Charge” and an inquiry which hears from victims and tax experts is needed.
Steve Packham, spokesperson for the LCAG, told Sky News: “It is frustrating that instead of holding a full select committee inquiry to hear evidence from those facing the Loan Charge and tax sector professionals, the Treasury select committee has merely written to HMRC.
“It seems that this is little more than a tick box exercise triggered by all of the recent coverage of the Loan Charge, allowing HMRC to pedal the usual misleading and partial responses.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:31
Loan scheme causing tax turmoil
He accused the committee of a “failure of parliamentary scrutiny in the same way the Post Office were not properly challenged for too long” – in reference to the Horizon IT scandal.
“What is needed is a full select committee inquiry and we urge committee members to announce one and call a variety of witnesses, including those whose lives have been ruined by HMRC’s approach.”
Sky News has previously reported on how tens of thousands of people across the country are facing crippling tax demands from HMRC in a campaign that has been linked to 10 suicides.
Advertisement
What is the Loan Charge?
It all comes back to a 2016 piece of legislation that made individuals responsible for tax which their employers should have paid – the “Loan Charge”.
HMRC has been criticised by MPs and tax experts for not policing the contractor sector at the time of the schemes.
Employers were paid their salaries in loans – and it was widely marketed as HMRC compliant.
Some people facing the Loan Charge, including nurses, cleaners and teachers, have said they had no choice but to be paid this way when they accepted their jobs, while others insist they were trying to do the right thing and streamline their tax affairs following the introduction of complex self-employment rules.
No scheme promoters prosecuted
In his letter to the treasury committee, Jim Harra, the director of HMRC, confirmed that there have been no prosecutions of individuals “for the promotion and/or operation” of what it now calls Disguised Remuneration (DR) schemes – noting that “promotion or operation of mass-marketed tax avoidance schemes is not by itself a criminal offence”.
Mr Harra’s letter also revealed that the median settlement for individuals is £19,000, though noted about 40,000 people have still not settled. Approximately 50,000 people are estimated to be affected in total.
He denied accusations the department operates without scrutiny, saying it is “simply not the case that HMRC is unaccountable” and “we act under the general direction of ministers”.
Taking a firm line on recent criticism of “sinister” new tactics, he said: “We do not accept claims that we have been deliberately heavy-handed. We certainly do not intentionally write to taxpayers on specific days, such as their birthday, to increase the impact of our interventions.
“We do not play with people’s emotions. We recognise that there is a human story behind each one of these cases and we take our Charter responsibilities very seriously.”
Chair of the Treasury Committee, Conservative MP Harriett Baldwin, said: “Many of my colleagues have raised concerns about the implementation and management of the Loan Charge by HMRC. As a Committee, we believed it was important that we got answers both for our fellow MPs and their constituents.
“I hope the information contained in Mr Harra’s response makes a useful contribution to the public debate.”
However, fellow Conservative MP Greg Smith, co-chair of the Loan Charge APPG, said while it is “welcome” the committee is raising the Loan Charge “as well as writing to HMRC, it needs to also hear from victims and tax professionals who can show that so much of what HMRC says is simply not an accurate picture of the Loan Charge Scandal”.
He said: “As usual, HMRC are airbrushing the whole mess and giving the false impression that they acted at the time and warned users, when the reality is that they failed to police the contracting sector and failed to warn contractors and then invented the Loan Charge so they go back retrospectively, but targeting only the workers, not those who operated the schemes.
“With 10 confirmed suicides and 13 attempted suicides, as well as countless lives already ruined, the Treasury Select Committee should also seek evidence from other parties, to get a more realistic picture of the whole Loan Charge Scandal.”
He warned: “Without a change of approach from HMRC, we are very fearful of the consequences and we hope the Select Committee will join us in properly holding HMRC to account, before more lives are ruined”.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK.
The government has announced its plan for an Independent Football Regulator (IFR) for the professional men’s game.
The IFR came about following a review by Tory MP Tracey Crouch, which itself was launched after the attempt by clubs to form the European Super League.
But the Premier League has responded by saying they “remain concerned” about the legislation, which they claim could unintentionally “weaken the competitiveness and appeal of English football“.
Among the measures contained in the IFR – which will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny – are:
• New “stronger tests” for new owners and directors to “stop clubs falling into the wrong hands”. They face being blocked and even struck off from future attempts;
• “Backstop powers” to sort out the financial distribution between the Premier League and English Football League, if they cannot come to an agreement themselves;
• All clubs from National League One to the Premier League will be need to be licensed to compete in competitions, following “a number of issues in recent years including financial mismanagement, breakaway plans for the European Super League, and changes to club names, badges and colours against the wishes of fans”;
More on European Super League
Related Topics:
• New requirements to protect from “breakaway competitions” and “stadium relocations”;
• An obligation to consult fans on “key off-field decisions” will also be a requirement of the licence. This could include decisions on cub heritage and strategic direction.
As well as statutory regulation of football clubs, the government has also announced that the IFR will produce a periodical report, called “State of the Game”, which will analyse the financial state of football.
The government says the IFR will not be “overly-interventionist”, and will instead take an “advocacy first” approach – although these will be backed by a “broad suite of powers to investigate suspected non-compliance, compel information, and enforce if necessary”.
It is also pledged that the bill will have “no input in on-field decisions and will act in a way that minimises any impact on sporting competitions”.
A “shadow regulator” will be set up to run while the IFR is created, with a location, chair and board make-up all still up in the air.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said: “Football has long been one of our greatest sources of national pride. Up and down the country, it brings people together in celebration or commiseration.
“But for too long some clubs have been abused by unscrupulous owners who get away with financial mismanagement, which at worst can lead to complete collapse – as we saw in the upsetting cases of Bury and Macclesfield Town.
“This bill is a historic moment for football fans – it will make sure their voices are front and centre, prevent a breakaway league, protect the financial sustainability of clubs, and protect the heritage of our clubs big and small.”
Ms Crouch said that “football fans can begin to breathe a sigh of relief in the knowledge that the next steps towards protecting the long term sustainability of the pyramid have now been taken”.
In response to the announcement, a spokesperson for the Premier League said it would study the bill once it is published.
“We agree it is vital that football clubs are sustainable, remain at the heart of their communities and that fans are fundamental to the game,” it added.
“The government has consistently stated that it wishes to support the Premier League’s continued global success which generates funding to help sustain the entire football pyramid.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
“With our clubs, we have advocated for a proportionate regime that enables us to build on our position as the most widely watched league in the world.
“Mindful that the future growth of the Premier League is not guaranteed, we remain concerned about any unintended consequences of legislation that could weaken the competitiveness and appeal of English football.”