The Bible reading chosen for Boris Johnson to read at the Platinum Jubilee celebrations in St Paul’s Cathedral was from Philippians 4. 4-9 . This included the following sentiments:
“…whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.”
From a correspondent:
The combined roles of Chief Executive Officer, Head of paid services (Human Resources in corporate speak)with that of electoral “Returning Officer”, places a lot of power in one pair of hands.
Let us review some recent history of leadership in EDDC.
The EDDC Chief Executive has been hauled in front of a Commons Committee in 2014; corporate management severely admonished by an Information Tribunal Judge in 2015; and auditors, in 2016, found weaknesses in accounting for S106 payments. All this raises questions about the oversight and accountability of senior management at EDDC.
In 2014 Mark Williams was called to the Commons Committee to explain how 6,000 (typo corrected Owl) voters came to be missing from the electoral roll.
Judge Kennedy, in his Decision Notice of May 2015 on the Information Tribunal concerning EDDC’s refusal to release five documents related to the Knowle move, concluded that EDDC had: “displayed discourtesy and unhelpfulness” throughout.
Specific criticism included: “Correspondence on behalf of the Council, rather than ensuring the Tribunal was assisted in its function, was at times discourteous and unhelpful including the statement that we had the most legible copies possible. A statement, which was clearly inaccurate…”
(During the Tribunal hearing the then deputy Chief Executive, Richard Cohen, also made the extraordinary admission that he had not given an original version of a document to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee but an “amended” one.)
A freedom of information (FOI) request in 2016 concerning S106 arrangements and payments between 2014 and 2016 (as Cranbrook development was underway), revealed EDDC held no information on whether there had been any breach of obligation on the part of developers or how much money was owed, possibly going back much earlier.
In a subsequent formal complaint to the newly appointed external auditors, KPMG found, after sampling cases over just one year, rather than any forensic analysis over many, that there had been a quarter of a million pounds understatement in the past year’s accounts. KPMG concluded: “Given the weaknesses identified in the Council’s controls, it is possible that understatements of a similar scale or even larger could be apparent at any point in time.”
Then there are examples of how thin-skinned and dismissive Mark Williams can be in dealing with members of the public. However irritating members of the public may be, it is surely inexcusable for a senior public servant to behave in such a way. Using this tone, the Chief Executive does not come across as impartial. Many of us have had similar experiences when trying to make a complaint.
Where are the checks and balances on this power?
A job description was revealed through a 2014 FOI request. Compared to other local authorities it is a bit thin. The key point is that nowhere does it specify who the CEO is personally accountable to. A recent online search for a more up to date job description proved fruitless.
These historic events are disturbing, demonstrating an executive making significant mistakes and seemingly impervious to criticism. It is in this context that the Tories lost control in 2019 and “New Guard” took over in 2020.
Where does the buck stop? How do you hold the CEO to account?
Boris Johnson faces the task of persuading Conservative MPs he can still lead his party into the next general election, despite being booed by the crowd outside the Queen’s platinum jubilee service.
Adam Forrest www.independent.co.uk
In a new humiliation for the prime minister, desperately trying to stave off a no-confidence vote, he was met with a loud chorus of boos, jeers and whistles as he walked up the steps of St Paul’s Cathedral with his wife Carrie on Friday.
BBC presenter Jane Hill noted that there was a “substantial amount” of booing as Mr Johnson entered the cathedral. The PM was also heckled as he left the service – with one person heard shouting “f*** off Boris”.
A Labour source told The Independent: “The boos for the prime minister will have been a rude awakening to those Tory MPs who have been in denial about the public’s anger at the industrial-scale law-breaking they’ve seen in No 10.”
It comes as Downing Street is said to be preparing for a “charm offensive” of wavering rebel MPs in the hope they can be won over and a leadership vote avoided.
Around 30 backbenchers have publicly called for the prime minister to resign, and committed rebels believe they are close to reaching the threshold of 54 no-confidence letters needed for a leadership ballot.
No 10 officials have drawn up a list of 64 Tory MPs they believe can still be won over, including senior figures such as Theresa May, Tom Tugendhat and Julian Smith, according to The Telegraph.
Meanwhile, rebel Tories MPs shared fears about the timing of a push to remove Mr Johnson, with some expressing doubts that next week is the right moment for a vote of no-confidence to be triggered.
One Tory MP keen to see Mr Johnson replaced has urged colleagues to withdraw their no-confidence letters to prevent a vote happening “by accident” at the start of next week, according to The Guardian.
Rebels have previously told The Independent that they fear a confidence vote could be triggered too soon “accidentally” – allowing Mr Johnson a good chance of staying in power for another 12 months.
Tory rules mean that a majority of the party’s MPs – 180 – would have to vote against Mr Johnson in order to spark a contest to find his replacement. If the PM survives, he is protected from another vote for a year.
Anxious anti-Johnson backbenchers are said to fear that potential leadership candidates have not had enough time to mobilise and encourage wavering MPs to look beyond Mr Johnson.
Some believe the period after two by-elections on 23 June would present the best chance of defeating the PM in a confidence vote.
Andrew Bridgen – the Tory MP who recently resubmitted his letter after withdrawing it at the outbreak of the Ukraine war – reportedly predicted in a Tory WhatsApp group that No 10 would be told on Monday that 54 letters had already gone in to 1992 Committee chair Sir Graham Brady.
Tory MP Mark Francois, who has not called for Mr Johnson to go, suggested the PM still had work to do to convince many of his wavering backbenchers that things will change after Partygate.
“We will come back on Monday and colleagues will ask, ‘Who is going to take responsibility for this?’” he told Times Radio on Friday. “Having spoken to colleagues in the past few days, the mood is, they want to know, ‘Who is going to carry the can?’”
It comes as the head of the Grassroots Conservatives activist group called on Mr Johnson to resign over the Partygate scandal, saying the PM would “put off voters” at the next general election.
Ed Costelloe told The Telegraph that Mr Johnson had not been “wholly honest” about the law-breaking gatherings in Downing Street. “If he had any sense he would resign before he was pushed.”
From a correspondent;
Surely the job of a Chief Executive requires him or her to be neutral and supportive of whatever shade of council exists, and particularly to assist a new majority group with few experienced councillors to find its feet – in the best interest of the district.
It appears that Mr Williams was unable to make this adjustment or to consider any change in his former allegiances. One must therefore ask why this was and why he stood back and allowed the situation with his officer to first of all be hidden from the new council and then to do nothing helpful as the situation was allowed to deteriorate under his watch. Remember, this is a CEO who has a legal qualification (albeit many years ago). He must have had to use his legal knowledge on many similar issues in the past – though we never seem to have heard of them.
As for his time “wasted” do remember that, some years ago, he was able to run two councils (East Devon and South Somerset) on a 50/50 basis with no obvious time management problems. Though South Somerset did cancel the arrangement early without saying why.
In any other kind of organisation this person would almost certainly have been relieved of his post. Alas, as we have seen with other political situations very recently, the Chief Executive reports to – the Chief Executive and the Chief Executive decides whether or not he should be punished. Not very transparent …..
[Likely leaker, in advance of the scrutiny committee meeting, is either a councillor, possibly on the committee, or a senior officer – take your pick! – Owl]
More than half the people who have gone wild swimming or tried water sports in British seas and rivers have fallen ill, a survey has found.
Ben Webster www.thetimes.co.uk
The report commissioned by the charity Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) found that a fear of being exposed to contaminated water deterred 52 per cent of people from entering the water. Awareness of the threat has grown rapidly in the past year.
Of the 22 per cent that have tried wild swimming, surfing or other water sports, 55 per cent have fallen ill.
In the past two years, SAS has received more than 640 reports of illness, including ear and eye infections and diarrhoea, from people who have been in the sea or rivers.
The reports were submitted by the charity’s Safer Seas & Rivers Service, an app that delivers water quality alerts based on information from water companies about sewage discharges and Environment Agency forecasts of agricultural pollution.
Storm overflows operated by water companies resulted in 372,533 sewage spills last year in England and Wales, down from 403,171 in 2020. Water companies are allowed to release sewage in exceptional circumstances, such as after heavy rain, but last year 675 overflows spilt sewage 100 times or more.
More than half (55 per cent) of the 2,000 people surveyed said funding for improvements to sewage infrastructure to reduce pollution should come from water companies’ profits.
Susan Moate, 38, who swims in the River Ouse near her home in Lewes, East Sussex, said she became ill in 2020 with severe ear infections that her doctor attributed to swimming in the river.
“Since then I have avoided putting my head underwater when I swim, but I don’t want to give up altogether,” she said. “It’s such a shame so little is being done to combat sewage pollution.”
Matthew Harle, 29, an aeronautical engineer from Bristol, said he went surfing at Sandymouth Bay, Cornwall, in January and was violently sick that night. He believed the source of the infection was agricultural pollution.
The Environment Agency rates the bay as having “excellent” water quality. However, SAS said there was a loophole in the water regulations.
Hugo Tagholm, the chief executive of SAS, said: “The public are fearful about swimming due to the amount of raw sewage being discharged and believe the water industry must cut this crap.”
Boris Johnson’s post-Brexit plan to bring back imperial measurements is “complete and utter nonsense”, according to Asda chair Stuart Rose.
Adam Forrest www.independent.co.uk
In a scathing attack, the Conservative peer said the push to boost the use of pounds, ounces and other outmoded weights and measures would only “add cost” and confusion to businesses.
“I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life,” Lord Rose told Times Radio on Thursday, branding it a “backwards” step aimed at pleasing nostalgic voters.
“I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying let’s go backwards. Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?” the Asda chief asked.
Lord Rose said the government was pushing ahead with the plan “just to actually please a small minority of people who hark for the past. It’s complete and utter nonsense and it will add cost to those people who have to put it into place.”
The former boss of Marks & Spencer added: “I am shocked. It’s one thing having a crown on your pint glass, which is a bit of fun and a bit of nostalgia. It’s quite another having a whole dual system of weights and measures.”
The government is set to consult industry on how to reintroduce imperial units in Britain after quitting the EU, with ministers expected to officially announce the move today to coincide with the Queen’s platinum jubilee.
The idea has already faced criticism from the Tory backbenches, with Rutland and Melton MP Alicia Kearns branding it “a nonsense”. Labour has accused Mr Johnson of trying to “weaponise nostalgia”.
Last week, Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis claimed voters and businesses would be “pleased” that the government was set to open the door to greater use of imperial units.
But the British Retail Consortium (BRC), the umbrella body representing the big supermarkets, has warned that the move could be “distracting” and costly at a time when food chiefs were trying to tackle inflationary pressures during the cost of living crisis.
Ministers have argued that it would give the likes of greengrocers and pub landlords greater choice over running their businesses, as well as bringing “national culture” back into shops.
Mr Lewis said that, while the policy was “light-hearted”, there were many people who “want to go back” to using pounds and ounces, and measures such as yards and miles.
The EU weights and measures directive came into force in 2000, with traders legally required to use metric units for sale by weight or the measure of fresh produce.
It remains legal to price goods in pounds and ounces, but they have to be displayed alongside the price in grams and kilograms.
The consultation, which is being coordinated by the department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), could change those stipulations, allowing traders to choose how they price fresh items.
The Independent understands that there will not be a move away from metric units, but the consultation will look at where it makes sense to incorporate or switch to imperial measurements such as feet and yards, and pints and gallons.
A Tory minister struggled to convert imperial measurements during an interview on Sky News earlier this week, despite Downing Street claiming the system is “universally understood”.
Arts minister Stephen Parkinson gave incorrect answers when Kay Burley asked him to convert ounces and grams into pounds.
The Conservative candidate for this month’s Tiverton and Honiton by-election has refused to say whether she would like the support of disgraced former MP Neil Parish.
Joe Ives, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk (Extract)
In an interview last week Mr Parish, who resigned in April after he admitted to watching pornography in the House of Commons, said he would be “very happy” to campaign for the Conservative candidate Helen Hurford if she wanted his help.
But Ms Hurford won’t say whether she would like his support.
Mr Parish has said he is willing to take as visible a role in the campaign as Ms Hurford and the Conservative party wish.
Right now, that appears to be nothing.
Voters on the streets of Honiton – part of the Tiverton and Honiton by-election – have told the Mirror how they are preparing to ditch the Tories.
The Tiverton and Honiton by-election is one of two crunch polls on June 23 that could decide Boris Johnson’s future – and if these voters are anything to go by, he should be very worried indeed.
Follow this link for details.
Update: Politico London Newsletter’s take on the Mirror interviews:
HONITON HORROR SHOW: The Mirror’s Ben Glaze has a strong piece from Honiton, the Lib Dem-facing by-election the Tories are staring down later this month. Glaze found that voters are deserting the Conservatives. Betting shop manager Julie Garland said: “I voted Tory before but I’m not voting Tory on June 23. I will read up on the others to see what they have got to offer.” And nursery assistant Naomi Bowman added: “Me and my mum have always voted Conservative but the way he has been lately we have changed our opinions — mainly because of the parties. And I was completely disgusted about Neil Parish watching pornography — it was outrageous. I think I will vote Lib Dem.”
Will the Conservatives lose the Tiverton and Honiton by-election?
Who will win the Tiverton and Honiton by-election? The seat, in Devon, is held by the Conservatives and its towns have voted Tory in every general election since the 1880s. It is now, however, being talked up as a probable gain for the Liberal Democrats — evidence that against a backdrop of partygate revelations and the cost-of-living crisis, no seat is safe for the Conservatives. Whether or not those predictions will be proved correct on 23 June is yet to be seen, but let’s talk about likelihoods for a moment.
Ben Walker sotn.newstatesman.com
North Shropshire — held by Owen Paterson, the former Tory cabinet minister, until he resigned after a lobbying scandal — went Lib Dem on a significant swing in December 2021. I didn’t predict that: the seat voted Leave, has above average levels of deprivation and didn’t have much in the shape of a Lib Dem presence before the by-election. The timing proved excellent for an insurgent campaign, however, especially as the contest came just as partygate was beginning to grab the headlines. It was, in a way, the perfect storm. It showed that the Lib Dems, once confined to graduate-heavy Remainia in 2019, could win in leafy, Leave-voting, semi-deprived constituencies perceived to be left behind by the incumbent Conservatives — seats a world away from, say, Richmond Park in west London. My analysis was blown to bits.
As I say, North Shropshire didn’t have much in the shape of a Lib Dem ground campaign before the by-election, and that makes me somewhat sceptical that the party will be able to hold it come the next general. But Tiverton and Honiton does. In fact, while North Shropshire has had few close-run races over the decades, Tiverton and Honiton has had plenty. In 2021 local elections nearly 80 per cent of the wards in North Shropshire voted Conservative. In Tiverton and Honiton, in 2019, more than half the seats up voted Liberal Democrat or independent.
A proclivity to vote for alternative candidates, be they local independents or opposition parties, appears more evident in Tiverton and Honiton than it does in North Shropshire. This should favour the Lib Dems in this by-election, doubly so given the national mood music is more intense and despairing of No 10’s present occupant than it was in December 2021.
Tiverton and Honiton’s voters have form for opting for alternatives, and may just be as willing to vote Lib Dem in a by-election as, say, Richmond Park or South Cambridgeshire. The trouble for the Tories at present is not confined to Blue Wall or Red Wall: it’s everywhere, wall or not.
The interesting question in this case is why Mark Williams took so long to make contact with the new administration when the changing of the guard took place in 2020. One might have expected him to be eager to discover what the new priorities might be.
Council Chief Executives and council staff are paid by the public but operate in a rather different way to civil servants. Both are responsible for advising and implementing the policies of elected leaders. The difference is that the civil service is overseen centrally by the civil service commission including recruitment and promotions.
Local government has no such equivalent overarching organisation. Councils are independent. In most cases a council’s Chief Executive is also Head of Paid Services, which means the Chief Executive directly employs the staff working for that authority. – Owl
Joe Ives, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk
A report about the spat between council leader Paul Arnott, above and East Devon’s CEO Mark Williams has been hushed up.
And it’s cost tens of thousands of pounds.
A bust-up between the leader of East Devon District Council (EDDC) and its chief executive has cost local taxpayers tens of thousands of pounds, caused a senior officer to take time off with a stress-related illness, and damaged the council and its reputation.
Tensions between Cllr Paul Arnott, the independent leader of EDDC and chief executive Mark Williams were so bad that, according to a leaked report, “council taxpayers and stakeholders, had they been aware of the council’s difficulties, may well have had concerns about its leadership and operation.”
The unpublished report, commissioned by EDDC and carried out by the East of England Local Government Association, is thought to have cost the council up to £22,000.
Though the precise cost of the episode has not been revealed, it is believed to have been “substantial”, dragging in top lawyers and draining hours of council staff time across a year.
But East Devon’s leadership have since tried to shield the report from public view, even keeping discussions about it behind doors closed to the press and public.
The inciting incident, unknown at the time, began in January 2020 when, following a review, chief executive Mark Williams proposed to axe a senior officer position at EDDC. The officer consented but no formal agreement was made.
Two months later, when a group of councillors going by the name of the Democratic Alliance Group, which is made up of independent, Lib Dem and Green councillors, came to power, that decision wasn’t raised by Mr Williams.
Even that initial meeting between new leader Cllr Arnott and Mr Williams – usually the critical relationship for the functioning of an effective council – didn’t take place for several days after the Democratic Alliance took control in March 2020.
Issues arose almost immediately. The new administration, led by Cllr Arnott, declined the support of the Local Government Association (LGA) which is usually taken up when an authority has a change of political control.
For its part, the Democratic Alliance said it received little in the way of formal help with the handover.
The report says: “All in all, this meant that a new and relatively inexperienced administration took over the council with very little understanding of officer roles, the functioning of the council and with no internal or external support or advice being available.”
It says the situation was a “perfect storm” where there was “no shared understanding of their respective roles, no respect for each other, no common purpose or common ground from which to build productive relationships”, causing an employment dispute about a senior officers role to be dragged out for several months and costing the council tens of thousands of pounds.
Mr Williams didn’t make councillors formally aware of his proposal to make the senior officer role redundant for five months.
When he did, Cllr Arnott then sought advice from South West Councils, an association of council leaders in the region.
But Mr Arnott found the advice he was given to be unconvincing and asked for another opinion from external lawyers.
Law firm Clarke Willmott found that the redundancy would be legal and suggested EDDC reach a settlement with the officer in question.
Cllr Arnott rejected that advice too.
He wanted the council to implement a more thorough senior management review before committing to the redundancy.
This, according to the leaked report, “essentially left the chief executive in the unprecedented position” where a senior officer had agreed to be made redundant but the politicians in control of the council refused to allow it.
“The question became not whether he “could” make the role redundant but whether he “should.”
In any event the chief executive felt unable to act,” says the report.
It documents how suspicions over each side’s motives incapacitated decision-making.
A meeting in November 2020 between Cllr Arnott and Mr Williams to review their “working relationship” fixed very little.
Having rejected the guidance he had received from two external sources, Cllr Arnott said he wanted additional outside advice, this time from an occupational health professional. He wanted to ensure the council had fulfilled its obligations to the officer after they went off sick.
The officer, who had been aware of the situation for much of the year, was ill with work-related stress. The officer argued this was “a direct result of the failure to implement redundancy” and thought the help of occupational health would be pointless as it would simply confirm this.
The officer alleged that Cllr Arnott was preventing Mr Williams from implementing the redundancy in revenge for comments they had made about another councillor earlier in the year.
It is not clear what these comments were.
The officer also alleged that Cllr Arnott’s argument, that he wanted a full ‘senior management review’ was “a sham” to stop the council making a redundancy payment.
Mr Williams, for his part, saw Mr Arnott’s idea of a management review as a tactic to frustrate him.
At one point Cllr Arnott attempted to solve the issue with the help of an LGA advisor and a trade union representative for the officer.
But the agreement they reached was effectively useless because neither the council leader nor the LGA advisor have the power to make such decisions.
The report describes Cllr Arnott’s own attempts to solve the redundancy issue as “inappropriate.”
In the end, further legal advice was sought from a barrister – who usually cost several hundred pounds an hour.
It was decided the only way to settle the dispute was through a full council meeting. This took place on 9 February 2021, something the report says should be avoided in future.
The report says the disagreement between the chief executive and EDDC’s leaders became “increasingly entrenched” in the build-up to this meeting, at which the full council agreed to make the senior officer’s position redundant.
The council commissioned the independent report In April 2021, but it remains unpublished. Leaked documents show that to pay for it EDDC set aside a budget of £18,150 pounds, excluding VAT.
No precise figures are known for the cost of the barrister, the officer’s redundancy payment, or the amount of paid time of council employees given over to this matter.
But as a rough calculation for just one of the people involved show how costly the episode has been.
In 2020/21, Mr Williams was paid £121,414, with a further £20,762 towards his pension. If he had spent a month on this matter since it emerged in January 2020, that’s nearly £12,000 in his time alone, plus other costs such as national insurance.
Commenting on the resources wasted as a result of the feud, the report says: “At a time where the council is required to either generate additional income or make significant savings this expense is unhelpful at best and if matters had been resolved by internal means could have been avoided.”
It explains how the saga had its origins in mistrust between the current administration [of independents, Lib Dems and Greens] and senior council officers, with some councillors believing “some officers were withholding information at best or “in cahoots with” the pre-2019 administrations which had been run by Conservatives in one form or another since the dawn of local government.
The report continues: “At no point were these assumptions about officers put to them to allow them to respond or even to explain their roles regarding the political agenda of the previous administration; essentially that they had to carry out the instructions of their political masters.
“It cannot be stated strongly enough the damage that has been done to the council, its reputation, its officers and members and its ability to reach its potential by the events which led up to the full council meeting on 9 February 2021.”
It says that the mistrust of the Conservatives and a combative environment between different political factions in East Devon “all come together to create a perfect climate of mistrust and acrimony.”
“It is regrettable that the powerful force for good which can be created by members and officers working productively together has been lost to the community.”
Amongst other recommendations, the report says the chief executive Mark Williams and council leader Cllr Paul Arnott “need to work together and model the behaviours expected of senior leaders”
“The two individuals and their colleagues should make every effort to make the relationships work for the benefit of the council.”
A spokesperson for the council wouldn’t comment on the issue because the report will be discussed by the scrutiny committee next week and they think doing so would be “inappropriate.”
They continued: “The decision to commission a report into this was taken at full council with the full support of all political groups. It was not a decision taken by the current administration.”
“Rebel Conservatives trying to orchestrate enough names to oust the prime minister say many MPs, particularly newer ones, are concerned about the privacy of the process.”
Owl wonders whether one of these might be Simon Jupp, though on his voting record he doesn’t appear to be independent minded. For example he voted, last October, to reject the Lords amendment that would have placed legal duties on the companies to reduce discharges until the government U-turned. He also voted, a few weeks ago, against a windfall tax on power generation companies until the government U-turned.
On the other hand Owl can’t find effusive support for Boris on his website or twitter account.
The time is fast approaching when silence becomes acquiescence to: sleaze; lies; cronyism and incompetence. Electoral Calculus predicts Simon only has a 33% chance of winning the new “Devon East” constituency (front runner is on 42%) – Owl
Tory MPs hold back from move against Boris Johnson over fear of reprisals
Rowena Mason www.theguardian.com
Tory MPs including a junior minister are holding back from submitting letters of no confidence in Boris Johnson over fears their names will leak and they will face reprisals from the whips.
Rebel Conservatives trying to orchestrate enough names to oust the prime minister say many MPs, particularly newer ones, are concerned about the privacy of the process.
They worry that the Tory whips will be spying outside the office of Sir Graham Brady, the 1922 Committee chair who gathers the letters, and do not trust emails not to be accidentally shared or viewed by staff who have access to the accounts.
Some senior Tories who are publicly opposed to Johnson have taken on the role of conduits carrying letters to Brady. One said they had offered to take letters to Brady’s parliamentary office on behalf of colleagues concerned about leaks, as there was a pervasive feeling of mistrust in the process among new MPs who had not been through the vote of no confidence in Theresa May.
They said MPs had not been prepared to email their letters because of concerns about others having access to their inboxes or computers, and they said they had repeatedly reassured colleagues that no letters had leaked from the challenge against May.
Another Conservative backbencher said the newer MPs in particular were worried about being targeted by the whips if they went public with having submitted letters, and if the coup attempt was ultimately unsuccessful.
A third MP said some of those who have gone public with their opposition to Johnson already felt as though their lives in parliament were being made difficult by the whips.
At least one minister has been wavering over putting in a letter over fears his name could come out and he would have to resign if the challenge is unsuccessful.
Almost 20 Tory MPs have now publicly stated that they have submitted letters, and 45 in total have publicly questioned Johnson’s leadership.
If the threshold of 54 MPs submitting a letter is reached, then Brady will inform No 10 and a confidence vote will be held by secret ballot on Johnson’s future as leader.
The number of 2019 MPs who have called for the prime minister’s resignation has been growing. Simon Fell, the MP for Barrow, became the latest to publicly question Johnson’s position, saying an apology over Partygate was “insufficient”.
Fell, who was part of the “pork pie plot” of MPs who met to discuss their loss of faith in Johnson earlier in the year, stopped short of saying he had written a letter of no confidence in the PM.
“I’m left feeling angry and disappointed. It beggars belief that when the government was doing so much to help people during the pandemic, a rotten core with an unacceptable culture carried on regardless of the restrictions placed on the rest of us,” he wrote in a letter to constituents.
“To many of us, these findings are a slap in the face. The culture that Ms Gray’s report details is unforgivable and I certainly will not be defending it. There were no exceptions in the rules for the activities that took place, and there is no excuse whatsoever for them.
“As Ms Gray details, a corrosive culture and a failure in leadership allowed this to happen and apologising after the fact is insufficient … Trust matters. And standards in public life go to the heart of maintaining it – once trust is lost, the whole house of cards is at risk of collapse.”
Others from the 2019 cohort who have called for Johnson to go include Aaron Bell, Alicia Kearns, Elliot Colburn and Anthony Mangnall.
Martin Shaw, Chair of the East Devon Alliance: “When it comes to the by-election, it’s horses for courses. We need to make sure this corrupt government does not win here again.”
It’s now pretty clear that however disgraceful Boris Johnson’s behaviour, Conservative MPs will not remove him. The most telling new revelations are about the Downing Street cleaner who was not allowed to visit her mother in hospital because of lockdown rules, but had to clean up the mess left by Johnson’s rule-breaking parties; and about the security guard being mocked by the PM’s staff for doing his job and pointing out that rules should be observed.
There was a time when any minister, let alone a prime minister, would have resigned for presiding over such outrageous behaviour. There was a time when Conservatives claimed to represent standards in public life, and when MPs would have forced a disgraced prime minister out.
Our chance to make a difference
These times are gone, alas, and in most parts of the country people are pulling their hair out because there seems to be nothing they can do about this travesty of a government, so preoccupied with its own survival that for months it ignored the terrible cost of living crisis which is plunging families and pensioners into poverty.
But here in many parts of East Devon – Seaton, Axminster, Honiton and the villages around – we can do something. In three weeks time, we can vote in a by-election to send a message to Boris Johnson and the country that enough is enough.
This is an election which people who don’t always bother voting should make sure they turn out for. It’s an election to make sure you’re on the electoral register (if not, register to vote now), and to apply for a postal vote for if you’ll be away on 23 June.
Tactical voting
It’s an election, too, where we need to vote tactically for the candidate best placed to defeat the Conservative, since on the morning after a Tory victory here, Johnson will conclude that the electorate will put up with anything – literally anything – that he throws at us.
When I first mooted tactical voting two weeks ago, I didn’t say who to vote for, but Sean Day Lewis from Colyton (writing in this paper) assumed I meant the Liberal Democrats rather than Labour. I think that’s telling – the sense that the Lib Dems are the people who can win is already out there even among people who’d like it to be Labour. Exeter’s Labour MP, Ben Bradshaw, has also given a heavy hint: it’s the Lib Dems who can win this by-election, not his own party.
Indeed the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, has drawn the same conclusion. Labour’s national party are not putting resources into this by-election because they know they can’t win. Starmer has an informal pact with the Lib Dems because they know that working together, they can help put the British people out of the misery that the Tories have created.
Horses for courses
We should welcome this outbreak of common sense among the parties. It’s the same approach we already have in local politics, where my own East Devon Alliance of Independents has teamed up with the Lib Dems and Greens to give EDDC its first non-Conservative administration in 50 years.
I empathise with Labour’s Liz Pole and the Greens’ Gill Westcott, both good candidates who in other circumstances might well gain my vote as their parties have in the past. As an Independent, I’ve worked with Lib Dem, Labour and Green members on the County Council, and I know that there is much more that unites us all, and separates us all from Johnson’s Conservatives, than divides us.
When it comes to the by-election, it’s horses for courses. We need to make sure this corrupt government does not win here again. Personally, I would feel sick if Richard Foord, the Liberal Democrat candidate, lost by a few votes on June 23 while I’d given my vote to a Labour or Green candidate who had no hope of winning.
Liberal Democrat candidate Richard Foord
The insight lies in the questions rather than Bluster’s answers – Owl
(PS Boris if you are trying to win over “Waitrose Woman”, you are in for a disappointment there are no Waitrose stores in the Tiverton and Honiton consituency)
AS reported in the Guardian: Johnson came under fire from a slew of angry commentators in a Mumsnet interview, whose first question was: “Why should we believe anything you say when it’s been proven you’re a habitual liar?”
During the exchange, Johnson said he was “very, very surprised and taken aback” to be fined by the Metropolitan police for his surprise birthday party, which he called a “miserable event”.
Asked about the pressure he was under from MPs, Johnson said: “I’m not going to deny the whole thing hasn’t been a totally miserable experience for people in government.”
He said he was not considering resigning. “I just cannot see how actually it would be responsible right now, given everything that is going on, simply to abandon … the project on which I embarked to level up.
“I am still here because we have got huge pressures economically and we’ve got the biggest war in Europe for 80 years, and we have got a massive agenda to deliver.”
The company is the Jekyll and Hyde of the ten regional monopolies privatised in 1989. While it is regularly praised by the industry regulator Ofwat for its financial discipline, its environmental record has been branded the worst in the country by the Environment Agency, which has said South West Water “drags down the whole sector’s reputation”. The agency has called its performance “consistently unacceptable”.
Robert Lea www.thetimes.co.uk
The inflation crisis will blow a £60 million hole in the operating costs of the South West Water group this year, putting further pressure on already falling profits.
Revenues at Pennon increased last year as second-homers and others flocked to the southwest to escape the pandemic in cities. But its underlying profits tumbled more than 8 per cent, hit by rising energy costs and the impact of rising inflation on index-linked borrowing.
The company’s finance director, Paul Boote, said there would be more trouble to come, with the likely increases in gas and electricity prices sending its energy costs up by £30-£40 million. The cost of servicing its inflation-linked debt will rise by another £30 million. Boote said those rising costs would be partly offset by a full year of income from its newly acquired neighbour, Bristol Water.
Pennon is the FTSE 250 parent company of the water supplier for Devon and Cornwall and parts of Somerset and Dorset. South West Water has the most expensive average water bills in the country at £522 this year, which it blames on having to look after a third of the UK’s bathing waters but with just 3 per cent of the country’s population, meaning it spends a disproportionate amount of money on its sewage treatment works, mains supply and sewerage pipes.
The company is the Jekyll and Hyde of the ten regional monopolies privatised in 1989. While it is regularly praised by the industry regulator Ofwat for its financial discipline, its environmental record has been branded the worst in the country by the Environment Agency, which has said South West Water “drags down the whole sector’s reputation”. The agency has called its performance “consistently unacceptable”.
In Pennon’s financial results for the year to the end of March, underlying revenues increased by 6.7 per cent, and including Bristol Water rose from £644 million to £792 million. “The Covid-19 pandemic led to a substantial population increase in the southwest with continued higher levels of household demand,” it said.
Excluding the impact of the acquisition of Bristol Water, Pennon admitted its underlying profit before tax fell to £143.5 million compared with £157 million in the previous year. It blamed “cost pressures from macro-economic conditions and higher costs” including energy, labour and chemicals and “increased interest charges on index-linked debt driven by the high inflationary environment”.
Pennon’s net interest costs of £77.9 million last year were £20.2 million higher due to the impact of inflation on index-linked debt. Susan Davy, the group’s chief executive, described it as “another year of resilient performance”.
Despite falling profits, the company is increasing its dividend by 8.2 per cent to 38.53p. Shares in the group have been dribbling down since last summer, off about 25 per cent during that time, and slipped further yesterday, down 2.7 per cent, or 28p, at £10.01.
Or perhaps not if he is confident that he can take you for granted.
The Independent reports that Boris Johnson rang potential rebels on the Conservative backbenches in a desperate bid to shore up his position ahead of a vote of no confidence in his leadership that many Tory MPs now expect to be called when parliament returns next week.
Standby on Mumsnet
Meanwhile the electoral battleground turns to “Waitrose Woman”.
According to the Independent “Waitrose Woman” is reported to be the voter demographic Downing Street reckons is crucial if the prime minister is to reverse plummeting ratings and defy rebellious Tory MPs in the wake of both Partygate and the cost of living crisis.
Like “Mondeo man” and “Worcester woman” before, she is, of course, a fictionalised construct based on stereotypes – the product of market researchers and focus groups.
But does “Waitrose woman” actually back Johnson at all?
According to Politico London Newsletter:
Johnson is holding a Q&A session with Mumsnet — his answers will be put online around noon.
Also The Times reports that Boris Johnson’s ethics adviser has threatened to quit over the Downing Street parties scandal after concluding that there were “legitimate” questions about whether the prime minister breached the ministerial code. A source said that Geidt was “60/40” in favour of quitting despite the prime minister’s clarification. The Cabinet Office denied that he was leaving.
Most likely result of any vote of confidence?
“He would hang on even if it was a one-vote majority,” said one former cabinet colleague. “He loves the trappings.”
As the Tories limp towards the next election, is Boris the best recruiting sergeant a progressive alliance has? – Owl
Now or never? Tory MPs face last chance to ditch Johnson before election
Heather Stewart www.theguardian.com
For weeks now, Westminster has been fixated on the number 54 – the tally of Conservative MPs needed to trigger a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson. If, as now appears increasingly likely, that threshold is breached in the coming days, another number will become all-important: the 180 MPs required to kick him out of Downing Street.
The Tories have a reputation for ruthlessness when it comes to throwing out their leaders, and the rules of a no-confidence vote are stark: if Johnson loses, he is out.
He would be expected to stay on as prime minister while a successor was chosen, but he would be disqualified from standing in the leadership race.
The House of Commons is in recess until the afternoon of Monday 6 June; but if the 54 threshold is reached this week the 1922 Committee chair, Graham Brady, could announce that a vote will be held when MPs return.
As when Theresa May faced a similar vote in December 2018, Conservative MPs would file into a House of Commons committee room to cast their votes in a secret ballot.
And with 359 sitting Conservative MPs, it would take 180 votes to defeat the prime minister.
In theory, Johnson should have a powerful built-in advantage: according to calculations by the Institute for Government, 80 Tory MPs are ministers in Johnson’s government, with another 47 serving as principal private secretaries, ministers’ aides in the Commons.
These MPs are referred to at Westminster as the “payroll vote” (though PPSs are not, in fact, paid) and can be expected to turn out reliably for the government in the division lobbies of the Commons. Another 20 are trade envoys to various parts of the world, owing these posts to the prime minister.
Yet while Johnson has used his powers of patronage ruthlessly, to shore up support and reward backbench waverers, the luxury of a secret ballot may free up some critics to vote against him, even if they have plum roles in government.
Is this the moment when the dam bursts – and his support drains away?
“It will be a secret ballot and I wouldn’t assume that the payroll will all vote for him. It’s a secret ballot for a reason,” said one Johnson critic on the back benches. Another suggested two-thirds of the payroll vote might stick with him, leaving perhaps 40 or more to peel off.
At least one minister in a marginal seat is understood to have concluded that they have no chance of remaining an MP if Johnson leads the party into the next election. They have not resigned from the government, fearing that would do little damage, and are wary of submitting a letter lest their name leaks, but would “100%” vote against him if the 54-letter threshold was attained.
Some MPs suggest Johnson might prefer to face a quick vote next week, rather than in late June, after the Tories are expected to struggle in a pair of key byelections, in Wakefield and Tiverton.
These two contests are seen by backbenchers as critical tests of Johnson’s popularity, in very different types of constituency.
If they lose both – or even see hefty swings against them – it would strongly reinforce the sense that he has become an electoral liability.
The mood at Westminster on Tuesday was increasingly that the threshold might be met within days, rather than weeks, however – a sense that was underlined by reports that Johnson had begun the task of ringing round potential swing voters in his party, in an attempt to shore up his position.
When he was last imperilled, earlier this year, the former education secretary Gavin Williamson ended up with a knighthood, and pressure groups of backbenchers were able to force their pet policies on the government – fracking being just one example.
As one senior Tory put it: “One of the things his critics underestimate about Boris is, Boris knows how to stack a deck in his favour.”
Several sources said Johnson’s allies had also recently used the threat of a snap general election against his critics – saying that if they tried to move against him, he would trigger an early poll and let the public decide if he should keep his job.
If the crunch point does come next week, the prime minister’s detractors will urge their colleagues to seize what could be their last opportunity to ditch him before the next general election – because if the prime minister wins, he is safe for a year.
That would take his party perilously close to the next contest, which must be held before January 2025 – though the executive of the 1922 Committee could, in theory, change the rules and allow another vote, if they felt it was in the party’s interest.
As one MP working to remove him put it: “There will be people who wouldn’t themselves put a letter in, but when they’re given a ballot paper, you’ve basically got a straight, binary choice, and the question on the ballot paper is effectively, do you want to go into the next general election with Boris Johnson leading the Conservative party? It’s pretty much now or never.”
Many at Westminster believe the most likely outcome is that Johnson wins by a narrow majority – one veteran Tory described it as “nip and tuck”. He would then face the decision of whether to throw in the towel, rather than press on, with his authority badly undermined.
Colleagues who know him well suggest there is little or no chance of him voluntarily stepping aside, and instead would press on in the hope he can rekindle the public’s love for him.
“He would hang on even if it was a one-vote majority,” said one former cabinet colleague. “He loves the trappings.”
Unusual of her to miss an opportunity – Owl
Police in Devon and Cornwall at “creaking” point over lack of Officers
Olivier Vergnaul www.cornwalllive.com
There are not enough police officers to do the job, which is why the system is creaking and crime prioritisation might have to take place, a high-ranking police union official has warned. Andy Berry, the chairman of the Devon and Cornwall Police Federation, believes there is so much demand on the force in our two counties that it is outstripping capacity.
As a result of the increased pressure on the under-resourced police force, members of the public are losing faith in the police while officers are at breaking point, he said. He said he has never seen the service in such a dire situation in his time as an officer. Speaking to BBC Radio Devon he said: “Everything is creaking. Not only is that service failure for the public but it is breaking officers because they are working themselves inside out, desperate to do a good job, and feel, in themselves, that they are failing.
“I have been in this role for four years, a police officer for 29 years and I’ve never seen so many inspectors, chief inspectors and superintendents coming to me and say this stuff. These are the people that are running the force and are close enough at the front end to see what is happening, or what is not happening.”
It comes as a rising number of police officers are leaving the force or feeling under strain for both their mental and physical health as a lack of resources makes them feel angry and frustrated for not being able to do their job properly. Mr Berry added: “We will have more officers in Devon and Cornwall by the end of the uplift – which will be sometime next year – but we will have fewer officers per 100,000 members of the public than a decade ago. We are not even keeping up with population rise, let alone the changes in crime.
“As a police force we try to prioritise everything, get to every call and try to provide the best service that we possibly can. But there aren’t enough people to go to the crimes and investigate the crimes. The chief constable needs to take some radical decisions and maybe, for a temporary period of time, say we won’t go to certain things, maybe not focus as much on certain crime types.
“A lot of energy goes into the low level possession of drugs. Maybe we should reduce that. Maybe the chief constable should think about stopping our neighbourhood team – the very visible part of policing, that do an immense amount of good work – maybe they should stop for a period of time to enable us to do the basics. It’s got to the stage where there needs to be that debate.”
He said that perhaps it is time the public are consulted on what they want their local police force to concentrate on. Mr Berry added: “Should the police concentrate on serious crime; rapes and domestic abuse and bringing those perpetrators to justice, or respond to urgent 999 calls quickly so they are getting there faster than they are now? Or do they want us to keep on spreading the jam really thinly?”
A Devon and Cornwall Police spokesperson agreed that officers’ workloads can be stressful and this can result in workplace pressures. He added: “Leaders in the force acknowledge these issues and the stressful work that our officers and staff do – it is a job like no other.
“Within Devon and Cornwall Police we are proactively recruiting. As of March, Devon and Cornwall police has recruited 281 additional uplift officers. The force has been allocated a further 188 officers for the final year of the programme. Funding for Devon and Cornwall Police increased by £20 million from around £356m in last year to £375m this year.
“We are doing everything possible to support officers and all of our staff in managing the impact of work on their physical and mental wellbeing. We remain committed to supporting officers and staff in helping them provide a sustainable, resilient and high-quality service to the public with the resources that we have.”
Alison Hernandez, Police and Crime Commissioner for Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, added: “I recognise many of the pressures that police officers, staff and volunteers are under. It is one of the reasons that, with the assistance of our communities, we started the uplift in officer numbers before central Government announced it would fund a national uplift.
“It takes time to recruit and train officers but Devon and Cornwall Police is now starting to feel the effects of this historic investment in policing. This year it will have 686 more officers than it did when I came to office and more police officers than at any other time in its history.
“We must not rest though. So many calls for help from the police should have been heard before people reached crisis point. Other agencies must do their bit to ensure that more of our residents are assisted before police have to become involved.”
Boris Johnson’s lurch to the right after Partygate is fuelling even more anger among rebel Tory MPs, with momentum now building for a leadership challenge next week.
Decision time for Simon Jupp may be approaching. Predictions from Electoral Calculus suggest that he might not be secure in the newly redrawn Devon East constituency (and that is before we know how badly the Tories do in the by-election). – Owl
Rowena Mason www.theguardian.com
Conservative whips spent the first day of recess anxiously phoning round the parliamentary party to shore up support for the prime minister, as four more MPs called on him to resign, including Jeremy Wright, the former attorney general.
Several Tory MPs told the Guardian they believed the threshold of 54 letters withdrawing support for Johnson was close to being crossed – or may have been already. This would trigger a secret ballot on whether they still have confidence in the prime minister.
It is understood that Sir Graham Brady, the chair of the 1922 Committee, will have to use his own judgment about whether to announce the milestone being passed straight away if it occurs while parliament is off this week, or wait until Monday, when the House of Commons returns after the Queen’s jubilee celebrations.
One backbench critic of the PM said MPs from the 2019 intake were “gathering their courage” to put in letters before next Monday, but were worrying about repercussions if No 10 were to identify them after an unsuccessful coup. They said the opposition to Johnson was increasingly coordinated and determined to trigger a vote, with almost 30 MPs having publicly declared their opposition so far.
In his statement withdrawing support for the prime minister, Wright said Johnson had done “real and lasting damage” to the institution of government, and while he could not be sure that the prime minister had misled parliament, Johnson had been at best “negligent” in how he had approached the issue.
Elliot Colburn, a Tory MP with a small majority against the Lib Dems, said he had put in a letter “some time ago”, while Nickie Aiken, the Cities of London and Westminster MP whose council turned Labour this month, called on Johnson to bring an end to the situation by submitting a no-confidence letter in himself. Tory MP Andrew Bridgen also told constituents he had resubmitted his letter.
The dismay over Johnson’s premiership is worsening among Tories in so-called “Blue Wall” seats at risk of losing them to the Lib Dems, and “Red Wall” marginals where they have narrow majorities over Labour.
With Johnson’s future in the balance, No 10 has begun launching a number of rightwing, nationalistic policies in recent weeks. These include the return of imperial measures, plans to override the Northern Ireland protocol, a hint about expanding grammar schools, a review of fracking, and repeated promises to tear up more EU regulation.
A cabinet minister told the Guardian that Johnson appeared to be trying to stop the right of the party turning against him in the event of a leadership challenge, citing policies such as the review of fracking – which is electorally unpopular but appeals to a minority in parliament.
But Tory pollsters and some centrist MPs warned that this “core vote” direction was the wrong route to go down with public trust in Johnson so low among swing voters. Tobias Ellwood, a Tory former minister and chair of the defence committee, warned: “We will lose the next election on the current trajectory as reflected in recent elections.
“There is not only just a concern on the conduct of behaviour in No 10, because that has breached the trust with the British people, it is now concerns about No 10 thinking what our policies are.”
On the weights and measures policy, he told Sky News: “There will be some people in our party which will like this nostalgic policy in the hope that it’s enough to win the next election. But this is not the case. This is not one-nation Conservative thinking that is required to appeal beyond our base.”
One Tory cabinet source said the imperial measures policy was “absolutely bananas”, while another cabinet source said they had “no idea which muppet had come up with that idea”, as “this is not what the government’s overall strategy is about”.
Another Conservative MP said he represented a seat in the “heart of middle England” and about half of the core Conservative voters there had lost faith in the prime minister.
Some local government leaders also expressed a lack of confidence in Johnson. Rishi Sunak’s local council leader, Carl Les, the Conservative leader of North Yorkshire county council, said he thought it was time for a leadership election, blaming Johnson for heavy losses in the local elections.
“I am very disappointed that the strong majority we had in North Yorkshire has diminished down to a working majority, but only just, and a lot of the comment we were getting on the doorstep was about the impact of Partygate,” said Les.
The warnings from MPs and councillors were echoed by pollsters and political strategists, including former No 10 advisers James Johnson and Will Tanner. Both said Johnson was on course to lose the election by swinging to the right instead of focusing on delivering goals on schools, hospitals, housing and the cost of living.
Tanner, a former No 10 aide and the director of Conservative thinktank Onward, said: “My view is that while it’s understandable that the prime minister and Downing Street would want to demonstrate their commitment to rightwing policy issues, to satisfy some of his backbenchers at a moment where clearly the prime minister is worried about his future, those issues are not going to win the Conservative party the next election.”
He said he had “never sat in a focus group or conducted a poll where issues like imperial weights and measures or Channel 4 privatisation has come up repeatedly” from the voters Johnson is seeking to court.
He added: “It is NHS, immigration, crime, wages, good jobs in my town. Those are the fundamentals that the Conservative party needs to be focusing on, not these quite small and niche issues, which only matter to a few people.”
James Johnson, a pollster at JL Partners, who worked for Theresa May, said: “Some of these things that might have raised a smile in the past will actually invite ridicule, the pounds and ounces thing being a good example of that. We’re approaching the situation with Johnson similar to one we faced with Corbyn, where the individual policies might be popular, but the brand attached to them is toxic.”
