A politician who thrives on drama and attention, Boris Johnson’s bombshell resignation on Friday night was true to form: once again the former prime minister left Westminster reeling, while also throwing in grenades against enemies that will ensure he remains in the spotlight for some time yet.
It was undoubtedly a shock. Even one of his closest allies told me a few minutes after his excoriating resignation letter landed that they had no idea this was coming. It was also vintage Johnson, as the former prime minister unleashed a full frontal attack on the protagonists he believed caused his demise – Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and the “kangaroo court” privileges committee who Mr Johnson insisted was always going to find him guilty regardless of the evidence.
As with his resignation from Number 10, there was not a scrap of contrition or regard for the democratic process that had got him to this place (remember there was a Commons vote to kick off the inquiry and there is also a Tory majority on that committee).
Instead there was fury, defiance and the threat of revenge laced through his remarks. He ended his statement saying he was “very sad to be leaving parliament – at least for now”.
Cue frenzied speculation about whether he might find another seat to come back in before the next general election. Whatever he does now, what is clear is that he’ll be hurling rocks from the sidelines at a prime minister he’s determined to destroy.
But surveying the scene of Mr Johnson’s bombshell the morning after, the timing of the detonation makes perfect sense.
We knew two things about the former prime minister: he was very focused on getting his resignation honours lists through, and he’d said himself at the privilege committee hearings that he wouldn’t accept the findings if members didn’t find in his favour.
Having received a copy of their report a few days ago, he’d clearly decided to quit rather than suffer the humiliation of being sanctioned and potentially suspended as an MP through a Commons vote. So when his honours list was secured and published, it was time for Mr Johnson to go.
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:04
Tory MP pays tribute to Johnson
We don’t yet know the findings of the committee – due to meet on Monday to decide whether to now expedite the publication of its report – but we do know from Mr Johnson’s furious response that it’s likely MPs determined he had wilfully or recklessly misled the House, and were preparing to recommend a suspension of more than 10 sitting days from the Commons.
We currently only have Mr Johnson’s versions of events, as the former prime minister looked to set the narrative on a report that is almost certainly going to be very damning indeed. We know the privileges committee has received more evidence regarding Mr Johnson, since the initial partygate hearings earlier this year.
Last month, Boris Johnson was referred to police over further potential lockdown breaches by the Cabinet Office, which had been reviewing documents as part of the COVID inquiry. His ministerial diary revealed visits by family and friends to the prime ministerial country retreat Chequers during the pandemic. The information handed to the police was also handed to the privileges committee as part of its investigation. While Mr Johnson’s spokesperson immediately dismissed claims of breaches as a “politically motivated stitch-up”, another figure told me that the evidence is damning and has Mr Johnson “bang to rights”.
“There was an expectation that MPs would try to avoid the highest sanction, that they have gone there means it must be pretty bad,” says one Whitehall figure, who believes that the privileges committee has been unanimous in its verdict against him (we won’t know that for sure until the report is out).
The big question on my mind now is whether Mr Johnson will – or can – stage a comeback, and to what extent he’ll be able to disrupt his political nemesis Mr Sunak from outside the tent.
When it comes to the former question, the former prime minister has clearly decided not to box himself in and there is a big chunk of the activist base, as well as the parliamentary base, that are Mr Johnson backers.
But it’s equally true that this close to an election, Conservative MPs don’t want to stoke division – with a nod to the old adage that divided parties don’t win elections.
His most loyal backers on Friday night rode out on Twitter and TV screens to denounce the privileges committee, rather than amplify further Mr Johnson’s pointed criticisms about Mr Sunak and his government.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:57
Rayner: ‘Good riddance’ to Johnson
For its part, the Number 10 team were relieved when Mr Johnson failed to lead a huge rebellion and don’t believe he had anything near the potency he once had. “We’re in a period where Rishi is doing well restoring trust after a period of distress,” is how one figure close to the PM put it to me. “I don’t think the mood in the party is pitch forks.”
That’s not to say Number 10 isn’t worried by an unleashed and furious Mr Johnson determined to settle scores, but, as another person put it: “He is one man, the party is more than that and we sometimes lose sight of that in the Johnson circus.”
Image: Prime minister Sunak with President Biden
But the criticisms Mr Johnson has levelled at Mr Sunak – justified or not – are potent. There’s the criticism of Mr Sunak’s handling of Brexit and failure to get a UK-US free trade deal, to his call for lower taxes and bemoaning the lack of political momentum going into an election.
Those in government might remark in exasperation that the relationship between Mr Johnson and President Biden meant a free trade deal is something he’d never had been able to do, but that doesn’t matter much – what matters is that these dog whistles rally a base in the party frustrated by the new regime. He already has in the new grassroots Conservative Democratic Organisation, a movement which he could lead.
What he’ll do next, we don’t know. But the signs are that he intends, with his allies, to be a political menace. A third by-election was triggered on Saturday after another key Johnson backer Nigel Adams announced he too was quitting Westminster with immediate effect. That on top of the two by-elections caused by Mr Johnson and that of his closest political ally Nadine Dorries are the last thing his successor needs. Lose them, and it all feeds into the narrative that Mr Sunak is a busted flush.
There are obvious questions as to whether Mr Johnson will try to stand in Ms Dorries’ mid-Beds seat, where the Conservatives are defending a 24,000 majority, or return to another safe seat before the next election (there were plenty of rumours before all of this that Mr Johnson was on the look out for a safer seat than Uxbridge and South Ruislip).
He could equally return to writing a newspaper column or editorship. What’s clear from his resignation statement is that he still intends to hold the spotlight whether Mr Sunak likes it or not.
Image: Johnson swearing in ahead of hearing at Privileges Committee March, 2023.
Those around him tell me Mr Johnson shouldn’t be written off and feels deeply aggrieved by what he sees as a campaign within Number 10 and the cabinet office to defenestrate him, with briefings against him in the run-up to the publication of the privileges committee report and then vote in Commons. His camp believe fervently that Mr Sunak is trying to drive them from parliament and the party: they are defiant and this, if you like, is the beginning of a fight back. I’m told more resignations are likely.
For the current regime, Mr Johnson’s attack gives voice to those supporters angry that – in the words of one – Mr Sunak is unpicking the 2019 manifesto despite having neither a mandate from he public or party members. For many Conservatives, it is Mr Johnson who has the box office appeal and ability to connect with voters in a way that Mr Sunak does not. Those loyal to him are ready to rally – should he mount an attempt to return to parliament.
There are detractors who say Mr Johnson is done, that the partygate scandal has damaged his standing with the public and the party beyond repair.
A snap poll out today by YouGov found that nearly three in four Britons believe Mr Johnson committed further breaches of COVID rules than those he’s already been investigated and fined for.
In some ways, the easier thing for Mr Johnson to do was make this resignation the concluding chapter of his political life. But instead he’s chosen to leave the door open to a sequel.
A politician who above all hates to lose, the question is, after all that’s passed, whether he still has the appetite – and ability – to try once more to win. Never rule him out.
This is going to be a big budget – not to mention a complex budget.
It could, depending on how it lands, determine the fate of this government. And it’s hard to think of many other budgets that have been preceded by quite so much speculation, briefing, and rumour.
All of which is to say, you could be forgiven for feeling rather overwhelmed.
But in practice, what’s happening this week can really be boiled down to three things.
1. Not enough growth
The first is that the economy is not growing as fast as many people had hoped. Or, to put it another way, Britain’s productivity growth is much weaker than it once used to be.
The upshot of that is that there’s less money flowing into the exchequer in the form of tax revenues.
2. Not enough cuts
The second factor is that last year and this, the chancellor promised to make certain cuts to welfare – cuts that would have saved the government billions of pounds of spending a year.
But it has failed to implement those cuts. Put those extra billions together with the shortfall from that weaker productivity, and it’s pretty clear there is a looming hole in the public finances.
3. Not enough levers
The third thing to bear in mind is that Rachel Reeves has pledged to tie her hands in the way she responds to this fiscal hole.
She has fiscal rules that mean she can’t ignore it. She has a manifesto pledge which means she is somewhat limited in the levers she can pull to fill it.
Put it all together, and it adds up to a momentous headache for the chancellor. She needs to raise quite a lot of money and all the “easy” ways of doing it (like raising income tax rates or VAT) seem to be off the table.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:24
The Budget Explained – in 60 seconds
So… what will she do?
Quite how she responds remains to be seen – as does the precise size of the fiscal hole. But if the rumours in Westminster are to be believed, she will fall back upon two tricks most of her predecessors have tried at various points.
First, she will deploy “fiscal drag” to squeeze extra income tax and national insurance payments out of families for the coming five years.
What this means in practice is that even though the headline rate of income tax might not go up, the amount of income we end up being taxed on will grow ever higher in the coming years.
Second, the chancellor is expected to squeeze government spending in the distant years for which she doesn’t yet need to provide detailed plans.
Together, these measures may raise somewhere in the region of £10bn. But Reeves’s big problem is that in practice she needs to raise two or three times this amount. So, how will she do that?
Most likely is that she implements a grab-bag of other tax measures: more expensive council tax for high value properties; new CGT rules; new gambling taxes and more.
No return to austerity, but an Osborne-like predicament…
If this summons up a particular memory from history, it’s precisely the same problem George Osborne faced back in 2012. He wanted to raise quite a lot of money but due to agreements with his coalition partners, he was limited in how many big taxes he could raise.
The resulting budget was, at the time at least, the single most complex budget in history. Consider: in the years between 1970 and 2010 the average UK budget contained 14 tax measures. Osborne’s 2012 budget contained a whopping 61 of them.
And not long after he delivered it, the budget started to unravel. You probably recall the pasty tax, and maybe the granny tax and the charity tax. Essentially, he was forced into a series of embarrassing U-turns. If there was a lesson, it was that trying to wodge so many money-raising measures into a single fiscal event was an accident waiting to happen.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:34
Can the budget fix economic woes?
Except that… here’s the interesting thing. In the following years, the complexity of budgets didn’t fall – it rose. Osborne broke his own complexity record the next year with the 2013 budget (73 tax measures), and then again in 2016 (86 measures). By 2020 the budget contained a staggering 103 measures. And Reeves’s own first budget, last autumn, very nearly broke this record with 94 measures.
In short, budgets have become more and more complex, chock-full of even more (often microscopic) tax measures.
In part, this is a consequence of the fact that, long ago, chancellors seem to have agreed that it would be political suicide to raise the basic rate of income tax or VAT. The consequence is that they have been forced to resort to ever smaller and fiddlier measures to make their numbers add up.
The question is whether this pattern continues this week. Do we end up with yet another astoundingly complex budget? Will that slew of measures backfire as they did for Osborne in 2012? And, more to the point, will they actually benefit the UK economy?
Reports of a “board-level orchestrated coup” at the BBC are “complete nonsense”, non-executive director Sir Robbie Gibb has told MPs.
Sir Robbie, whose position on the BBC board has been challenged by critics in recent weeks, was among senior leaders, including the broadcaster’s chair, Samir Shah, to face questions from the Culture, Media and Sport committee about the current crisis.
The hearing took place in the wake of the fallout over the edit of a speech by US President Donald Trump, which prompted the resignation of the corporation’s director-general and the chief executive of BBC News, and the threat of a lawsuit from the US president.
Image: Former BBC editorial adviser Michael Prescott wrote the memo that was leaked. Pic: PA
Former editorial adviser Michael Prescott, whose leaked memo sparked the recent chain of events, also answered questions from MPs – telling the hearing he felt he kept seeing “incipient problems” that were not being tackled.
He also said Mr Trump’s reputation had “probably not” been tarnished by the Panorama edit.
During his own questioning, Sir Robbie addressed concerns of potential political bias – he left BBC News in 2017 to become then prime minister Theresa May’s director of communications, a post he held until 2019, and was appointed to the BBC board in 2021 by Boris Johnson.
Image: BBC board member Sir Robbie Gibb appearing before the Culture, Media and Sport committee. Pic: PA
“I know it’s hard to marry the fact that I spent two years as director of communications for the government… and my genuine passion for impartiality,” he said.
“I want to hear the full range of views… I don’t want the BBC to be partisan or favour any particular way.”
Asked about reports and speculation that there has been a “board-level orchestrated coup”, Sir Robbie responded: “It’s up there as one of the most ridiculous charges… People had to find some angle.
“It’s complete nonsense. It’s also deeply offensive to fellow board members… people of great standing in different fields.”
He said his political work has been “weaponised” – and that it was hard as a non-executive member of the BBC to respond to criticism.
‘We should have made the decision earlier’
Image: BBC chair Samir Shah also answered questions. Pic: PA
Mr Shah admitted the BBC was too slow in responding to the issue of the Panorama edit of Mr Trump, which had been flagged long before the leaked memo.
“Looking back, I think we should have made the decision earlier,” he said. “I think in May, as it happens.
“I think there is an issue about how quickly we respond, the speed of our response. Why do we not do it quickly enough? Why do we take so much time? And this was another illustration of that.”
Following reports of the leaked memo, it took nearly a week for the BBC to issue an apology.
Mr Shah told the committee he did not think Mr Davie needed to resign over the issue and that he “spent a great deal of time” trying to stop him from doing so.
Is director-general role too big for one person?
Image: Tim Davie is stepping down as BBC director-general
Asked about his own position, Mr Shah said his job now is to “steady the ship”, and that he is not someone “who walks away from a problem”.
A job advert for the BBC director-general role has since gone live on the corporation’s careers website.
Mr Shah told the hearing his view is that the role is “too big” for one person and that he is “inclined” to restructure roles at the top.
He says he believes there should also be a deputy director-general who is “laser-focused on journalism”, which is “the most important thing and our greatest vulnerability”.
Earlier in the hearing, Mr Prescott gave evidence alongside another former BBC editorial adviser, Caroline Daniel.
He told the CMS committee that there are “issues of denial” at the BBC and said “the management did not accept there was a problem” with the Panorama episode.
Mr Prescott’s memo highlighted concerns about the way clips of Mr Trump’s speech on January 6 2021 were spliced together so it appeared he had told supporters he was going to walk to the US Capitol with them to “fight like hell”.
‘I can’t think of anything I agree with Trump on’
Mr Trump has said he is going to pursue a lawsuit of between $1bn and $5bn against the broadcaster, despite receiving an official public apology.
Asked if the documentary had harmed Mr Trump’s image, Mr Prescott responded: “I should probably restrain myself a little bit, given that there is a potential legal action.
“All I could say is, I can’t think of anything I agree with Donald Trump on.”
He was later pushed on the subject, and asked again if he agreed that the programme tarnished the president’s reputation, to which he then replied: “Probably not.”
Mr Prescott, a former journalist, also told the committee he did not know how his memo was leaked to the Daily Telegraph.
“At the most fundamental level, I wrote that memo, let me be clear, because I am a strong supporter of the BBC.
“The BBC employs talented professionals across all of its factual and non-factual programmes, and most people in this country, certainly myself included, might go as far as to say that they love the BBC.
He said he “never envisaged” the fallout that would occur. “I was hoping the concerns I had could, and would, be addressed privately in the first instance.”
Asked if he thinks the BBC is institutionally biased, he said: “No, I don’t.”
He said that “tonnes” of the BBC’s work is “world class” – but added that there is “real work that needs to be done” to deal with problems.
Mr Davie, he said, did a “first-rate job” as director-general but had a “blind spot” toward editorial failings.
A teenage boy is in a life-threatening condition after being shot in Sheffield.
Police said the 16-year-old was taken to hospital after suffering a gunshot wound on Monday evening.
The incident happened shortly before 5.20pm in London Road.
Officers will remain in the area overnight as they carry out “extensive enquiries to identify those responsible”, with increased patrols in the coming days, said a statement from South Yorkshire Police.
London Road is partly closed, and traffic disruption is expected to continue today.
Meanwhile, the boy’s family are with him in hospital.
Image: London Road is closed from the junction at Sitwell Place to the junction at Crowther Place
‘Terrible incident’
Detective Chief Inspector Emma Knight, the senior investigating officer, said it was a “terrible incident”.
“I want to assure residents that a dedicated team of officers and staff are working tirelessly to understand the circumstances that led to this attack and to trace those responsible,” she added.