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.
A 12-year-old girl who died after an incident of self-harm was failed on multiple levels, an inquest jury has found.
Warning: This story contains references to self-harm and suicide
Mia Lucas, who died in January 2024, was found unresponsive at an NHS children’s psychiatric unit after developing a rare neurological disorder that had been left undiagnosed.
The jury at Sheffield Coroner’s Court heard the girl was found at the Becton Centre, part of Sheffield Children’s NHS Foundation Trust.
She had been placed there after being sectioned while suffering an “acute psychotic episode” during an assessment at the Queen’s Medical Centre (QMC) in Nottingham.
On Thursday, the jury found that the failure to undertake a lumbar puncture at QMC before her transfer to the Becton Centre “possibly contributed to Mia’s death”.
A lumbar puncture involves a needle being inserted into your lower back to find out if symptoms are caused by a brain or spine condition.
Image: Mia Lucas.
Pic: Family handout/PA
The jury also said there was a failure at the Becton Centre to respond adequately to Mia’s risk of self-harm.
Professor Marta Cohen told the jury Mia’s cause of death was “compression of the neck” but she had now added that this was caused by “acute psychosis”, which was caused by “autoimmune encephalitis”, an inflammation of the brain that can cause extreme psychiatric symptoms and is treatable.
The autoimmune encephalitis diagnosis emerged during the nine-day inquest after a pathologist revealed she had received new post-mortem results.
The revelation prompted shock in the courtroom and tears from Mia’s family members in the public gallery.
The condition was described as “complex and rare”, according to consultant paediatric neurologist Mike Taylor.
He added that there was a low level of suspicion Mia had it, while being assessed at QMC, and told the court that experts had to consider the very severe treatment side effects, which included death.
Mia’s mother, Chloe Hayes, told Sky News she was unhappy at how the Becton Centre had supervised her daughter.
Image: Mia Lucas (right), with her mother Chloe. Pic: Family handout/PA
“All they had to do was watch her. I actually never got told the truth about the attempts that Mia made [to self-harm] until after she died,” she said.
“If I’d have known the truth I wouldn’t have left Mia there. And I think she had so much to live for. I don’t think she knew what she was doing.”
In a statement, Mrs Hayes added that she wanted people to know her daughter’s extreme behaviour was only evident in the final few weeks of her life.
“For the other 12 years, she was a beautiful soul who loved life and loved her family, and that’s how we want her to be remembered,” she said, describing Mia as a “happy, fun, friendly girl who had so much to live for.”
NHS Trusts apologise for Mia’s death
In a statement, Dr Manjeet Shehmar, medical director at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, offered “heartfelt condolences to Mia’s family for the loss of their daughter”.
She continued: “We accept the coroner’s outcome in court today and apologise to Mia’s family for not identifying autoimmune encephalitis while she was in our care. While this is an incredibly rare condition and initial tests were negative, we recognise that further testing may have had an impact on her future, for which we are truly sorry.”
Dr Shehmar said that in future cases of suspected possible autoimmune encephalitis, a lumbar puncture will be performed.
The trust will also “strengthen training and guidance for staff internally and review current published evidence of acute psychotic episodes in children and young people”.
Dr Jeff Perring, executive medical director at Sheffield Children’s NHS Foundation Trust, said: “Our thoughts are with Mia’s family and everyone who is grieving her loss in such tragic circumstances.
“We are deeply sorry for Mia’s death and recognise the profound impact this has had on those who loved her.”
The trust has carried out a thorough review of Mia’s care and made “significant changes” at the Becton Centre, he added.
“We will continue to work with children, young people, their families and carers to listen to, learn and take action from their experiences.
“The inquest has been important to understand fully the circumstances surrounding Mia’s death. We will now carefully reflect on the evidence heard and the coroner’s conclusions to ensure we continue to provide safe and compassionate care.”
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. Alternatively, you can call Mind’s support line on 0300 102 1234, or NHS on 111.
Day two after a budget is always an important moment.
This is when the nerds and boffins of Britain’s fiscal thinktanks assemble to deliver their snap verdict on the chancellor’s decisions.
The moment is more important than ever when, as was certainly the case this time, the budget is a big one.
So what did the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and the Resolution Foundation make of this year’s budget?
Well, as you’d probably expect, they both fell short of distilling it into a single soundbite, but in broad terms, they both sounded somewhat positive.
Yes, there were plenty of big provisos. The head of the IFS, Helen Miller, said Labour have broken their manifesto pledge not to raise National Insurance.
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
The Resolution Foundation argued that if only the chancellor had raised the basic rate of income tax instead of freezing personal allowances, it would have made the tax rise considerably fairer and more progressive.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
10:22
Treasury minister vs Ed Conway
And that’s before one gets into the criticism of some of the other bits and pieces from the red book – the structure of the EV tax, for instance (why doesn’t it try to penalise congestion?), or of the mansion tax (why not just overhaul council tax altogether?).
But for the most part, these closely-followed institutions seemed pretty supportive of this year’s budget – more so, certainly, than they were last year.
Primarily, that’s because while the last budget left only a very thin bit of headroom against Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules, this one was far more cautious, doubling that fiscal insurance policy to just over £21bn.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:15
Beth Rigby challenges Sir Keir Starmer over the budget
Yet that headroom is dependent on a couple of important factors. First, that the government will hold to its promises to keep spending growth constrained towards the end of the decade. Second, that it will be able to raise all the tax revenues it’s promising in that year.
That, in turn, gets to a deeper issue with the budget. Most of the tough stuff has been put off to the final year of the forecast – namely 2029.
That year, the government will face a squeeze at the very same moment that Britons are all asked to pay more in taxes.
And, critically, that’s the very year Labour is due to face a general election. Does it really plan to fight an election off the back of a contracting economy?
Consider, too, that for all the government’s promises to get living standards growing this parliament, they are currently only forecast to rise at the slowest rate since the 1950s – save for the pandemic and energy price shock period. The economic backdrop, in other words, is hardly rosy.
Still, for the time being, the chancellor has managed to put together a budget that has bolstered her position both in her party and in her job.
Markets remain relatively sanguine – much more so than after Rachel Reeves’s first budget last year – with bond yields lower today than before the event (albeit a little higher than yesterday).
However, this was a complex budget. And, as with all bits of complex engineering, there remains a distinct possibility of large chunks of the budget failing to work.
But since so much of it isn’t due to kick in for a few years, it may take quite a while before we find out which bits work and which, if any, don’t.
A man has been arrested at an airport as part of the investigation into the terrorist attack at a Manchester synagogue.
The 31-year-old was detained at Manchester Airport on suspicion of the commission, preparation and instigation of acts of terrorism after arriving on an inbound flight, police said.
It brings the total number of people arrested in connection with the incident at Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation Synagogue to seven.
Jihad al Shamie launched the attack at the synagogue in Crumpsall on 2 October, driving his car at worshippers gathering on the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur, before attacking others with a knife and trying to storm inside.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:43
Manchester synagogue terrorist: what we know now
Armed police shot al Shamie after he ran towards officers “aggressively” while carrying a knife and what police feared was an explosive device – later identified as a fake.
Image: Adrian Daulby, left, and Melvin Cravitz. Pics: Family handout/Greater Manchester Police
He died from a single gunshot wound to the chest fired by an armed police officer, while father-of-three Mr Cravitz died from multiple knife wounds inflicted by al Shamie, an inquest at Manchester Coroner’s Court heard in October.
The inquests into the deaths of both men have been adjourned until February next year.
Three other men were treated in hospital for serious injuries. Two have since been released, police said on Thursday.
Image: The deadly attack rocked the local community. Pic: PA
An inquest into the death of al Shamie, a Syrian-born UK citizen, heard he was identified by his fingerprints and evidence, including his car, phone and inquiries with his immediate family in the aftermath of the attack.
At the hearing in October, Judge Alexia Durran, the chief coroner of England and Wales, said her provisional findings were that al Shamie died of gunshot wounds.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct found no misconduct in the police response.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
In a statement on Thursday, Assistant Chief Constable Rob Potts, from Counter Terrorism Policing North West, said: “The loved ones of Mr Daulby and Mr Cravitz have been updated on this development, as have those who were seriously injured in the attack.
“Our investigation is continuing, and I would once again appeal for anyone with information that they think could assist our enquiries to please come forward.”
Police also said a 30-year-old man arrested on 9 October on suspicion of failing to disclose information contrary to S38B of the Terrorism Act 2000 remains on bail.