Boris Johnson was not universally admired in the Foreign Office, when he headed it. In late 2017, his allies there suggested he would benefit from having a chief of staff. “This suggestion seemed to fall on deaf ears”, writes Michael Ashcroft in his latest political biography. Then, in early 2018, Johnson became keener on the plan, saying he had just the right candidate in mind. But his allies were “aghast”; Johnson’s choice was quite unsuitable, lacking the heft for the role. “Everyone advised him not to do it. They told him she had been over-promoted and that making her his chief of staff was ridiculous”, says a source close to the episode.
The candidate was Carrie Symonds. Unknown to his advisers, Johnson had become close to her, and around this time, one friendly MP walked in on the pair in “a compromising situation” in his House of Commons office. Undaunted and unembarrassed, Johnson persisted with the idea of making Carrie head of staff, calling in Zac Goldsmith to offer support. Only after a (named) aide threatened to resign did Johnson drop it.
If ever a book invited lazy thinking from journalists, then First Lady: Intrigue at the Court of Carrie and Boris Johnson is it. We know what 76-year-old Ashcroft thinks about a lot of things, so it is easy to assume that the billionaire won’t be a fan of Carrie, who is very much a modern, liberal, green Tory (though they share an interest in animal welfare). The book on David Cameron that appeared under his and Isabel Oakeshott’s name, though very readable, was a piece of score-settling by a man who felt his beneficence to the Party had gone under-appreciated.
He remains something of an outsider so, one might think, this new title is presumably another piece of axe-grinding. Plus, given that many of the juicy bits have already appeared in the newspaper serialisation, why bother with the book itself? And evidently some will object to the imbalance of an idiosyncratic rich man examining the life of a woman half his age. One reviewer became “absolutely furious” at Ashcroft referring to Carrie, then 31, as a “young lady” in the introduction; for her, the narrative never recovered.
There are parts that made me squeamish, and certainly some of the anecdotes from her early years feel slightly invasive, inevitably in a biography of this type. But to disqualify Ashcroft because of an imputed attitude to women is short-sighted. And to say his book is a misogynistic hit job just isn’t good enough.
The days when he would use his wealth to elevate him above libel laws and ventilate nonsense about David Cameron putting his penis in a dead pig’s mouth, or his wife having an affair with one of her security people, seem to be behind him. (Francis Elliott and I checked the latter rumour when co-writing the first biography of Cameron and established it was untrue, but it was still doing the rounds seven years later and Ashcroft and Oakeshott reported it as gossip.)
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI don’t much care about her. Or about him for that matter. But I do do care passionately about the quality of my prime minister. Ukraine has rather obscured how incompetent he is.
Before Putin saved him, he looked like a teenager who’d thrown a party whilst his parents had gone away, but lacked the basic domestic skills to clean up before they returned. This piece reminds us that he’s still profoundly incompetent and we’re still stuck with him. For pity sake where did all the grownups go?
I wonder if we will ever find out whether he lied to parliament or broke his own laws over the parties in Downing Street.
Rob.. There’s not much of a grey area left, surely? If you say that something you did/something that happened/ was in your opinion not against the law and a ruling is subsequently made against that opinion, that is not “a lie”. It’s just a way we conduct civilised life. I’m constantly amazed at the way we so often allow partisan spin to suspend our sense of proportion.
I’m sure they’d love for that report to slip quietly out on a wet Friday afternoon, when Putin has done something even more awful in Ukraine. I suspect it will eventually appear in some feeble form after the Met have found a new Commissioner. Will it hold anyone to account? I seriously doubt it with this mob.
“She even has her very own expenses scandal, in which she used the names of junior colleagues when claiming taxis.”
This might be the most wretched part of this for me. What a vicious person.
She met Zac Goldsmith’s cousin at a party and then began working for him? What? How did that happen?
Drama and PR, eh? Just the sort of person we want influencing policy at the highest level with absolutely no mandate whatsoever. Boris is a fool and the whole Tory Party is rife with this nepotistic crap. The results are plainly visible in his wreckage of a government.
Just remember, no-one knows the name of the other married Tory MP with whom she had an affair.
Sounds like you have to know diddly squat to be an ‘advisor’, never mind a communications director.
Just give very good BJs.
She has brought the communication profession into disrepute. As a comms director, you sometimes have to hold your boss to account (I know I’ve had to in some roles); you can’t do that objectively if you’re having an affair with them. They are both squalid, awful people.
“She met Zac Goldsmith’s cousin at a party and then began working for him? What? How did that happen?”
Clearly, she slept her way to the top!
It’s less specifically about Carrie herself and more what she represents. At every level of Government, both National and Local, you find these complete no-hopers who are elevated into positions they should never have been in. I’ve known many Carrie’s and, though unfashionable to say, they almost always use their looks/girlish charm/sexual advances to get their way.
The fact that Cummings was the one forced out of No.10 over Carrie rather than a near-revolt at her elevation by Johnson just shows how entrenched the “Carries” are at every level of society currently. She’s yet another glaring symptom of an elite which is bursting at the seams with incompetency.
Her ilk bring to mind Is 3:4. We have stumbled upon the government we deserve: weak, incompetent popinjays, ignorant of the priorities of governance and ignorant of their own ignorance.
She is responsible for Boris’ abject failure to promote conservative values and, in particular, to stand up against the pernicious wokery of critical gender and race theory that is destabilising our society. Small wonder Putin reckons we are a basket case.
But what are Tory values today? We have Tory MP Crispin Blunt reprimanding another female Tory Councillor for standing up for Women’s rights against the pervasive Trans community Blunt promotes. Where was the Tory Party when these pair of Clowns in No 10 set about deconstructing it? Cumming’s was the best chance to depoliticise the whole Westminster blob that thwart the Tories and Boris cowered to his wife to get rid of him. Both are now a liability and Boris should step down for someone to make the hard decisions
Cummings tried to answer this question (for good or ill) and was forced out by Queen Carrie for his troubles. The malaise the Modern British State finds itself in is quite severe.
Another standard Heome ceounties faux sloane Guildfordoid/ similar, with the guile of a vixen and an ability to mesmerise certain types of vain insecure men…
‘She studied drama at Warwick University, spent time in PR and then, after meeting Zac Goldsmith’s cousin at a party, began working for Zac and subsequently for the Conservative Party.’ So, completely qualified to lead Britain on a Net Zero crusade. I can only hope that when the history of Britain in the 21st century comes to be written, those writing it will not die from over-much hilarity. The idea that a country of 75 million people would be dictated to by a posh bint with a drama degree to the point of driving it off a ‘green’ cliff is too silly for a Monty Python skit.
Having an unfortunate and/or unhappy childhood does not give the right to grabbing all you want when you are an adult. It seems that, like her husband, she does not understand the difference between power and authority.
They both seem to exist in a moral vacuum as one of the MPs who sent a letter of no confidence wrote.
She’s not even that pretty.
Not very gentlemanly Mike.
Utterly irrelevant!
I disagree. Boris has married her and probably not for her brain or her political values. And she now appears to be setting policy. So her looks are not “utterly irrelevant”.
Yet she traded on her ‘prettiness’, so it is particularly relevant. She didn’t get there through honest endeavour it seems. Then to add insult to injury, she isn’t pretty. Beyond the very lovely hair she is not ‘pretty’ imo.
An interesting piece by Hanning.
But I note “Her commitment to green issues, admirable to my mind, is a constant thread.”
Unfortunately, in reality, her GangGreen enthusiasms are the very worst aspect of the woman.
Leaving on one side the extremely contested notion that CO2 drives the climate to any appreciable extent, she obviously has absolutely no notion of energy policy and has reinforced the ignorant and ridiculous opinions of Goldsmith and Stanley Johnson in Boris’s brain (to be found, apparently, residing at leisure in his bellend).
I keep pointing out that the implications of the Zero Carbon scam will make the Zero Covid scam look like a vicarage tea party.
The present energy problems are only a minor portent of what will follow.
The Brits seem to have become very much like the French.
In all the wrong ways!
Well she’s probably making him miserable so there is that…on the other hand he may be like prince handbag Harry and remain unaware of it…
There was a great critique of Michael Ashcroft’s (? Tory party chairman) recent book on TCW which went into this. Very Interesting.
The suggestion that any politician, any MP, should act totally independently of their partner is ludicrous. Partners have to live with each other after all and each vet the other’s moral compass. I would expect a politician to run ideas by their partner, to solicit their input, and modify to some extent the position on issues. I also expect that a politician would rarely, if ever, adopt a position to which their partner is vigorously opposed. When we elect a politician to office we have to expect that the politician and their partner come as a pair, not totally independent, isolated individuals.
With regard to Boris and Carrie, unless Carrie has Boris under coercive control his position on issues must be in agreement, or at the very least sympathetic to those of Carrie.
You cannot have the tarts in charge of the pastry shop.
That’s not very nice.
Indeed so. Not what I expect at Unherd.