July 6, 2022 - 4:25pm
Amid the terrible spectacle of the drawn-out collapse of this Government, a lot of attention is focused on the Prime Minister.
As and when the end arrives, that focus will suit a lot of people. But while the larger-than-life character of ‘Boris’ tends naturally to overshadow its surroundings — and usually revels in doing so — in this case it conceals too much.
It is obvious that the Prime Minister needs to go. And yet, he — at the time of writing — remains in power. Contrast this with the ruthlessness a previous generation of Conservatives showed when they deposed Margaret Thatcher. Love her or loathe her, she was a three-time election winner who had delivered a transformative agenda during almost a decade in power.
That a hard core of Thatcherites were prepared to follow her to the very end, even if it meant losing an election, is in some ways perhaps less surprising than the fact that a majority were prepared to unsentimentally replace her.
Johnson’s colleagues, on the other hand, have shown much greater hesitancy, and it isn’t immediately obvious why. There is no transformative agenda to speak of.
But perhaps this lack of a programme is part of the Prime Minister’s durability. Thatcher was a divisive figure, but she could make room in her Cabinet for powerful and independent figures because there was a common project to work on.
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.
SubscribeBut look how long it took to remove Theresa May. Look how long it took to remove Jeremy Corbyn. Or, for that matter, that Kier Starmer is still in place.
Different political parties follow different rules of course, but if you want to get rid of a leader for whatever reasons you have to arrange in advance for a strong replacement. At the moment the groundwork does not appear to have been prepared.
Lucky dip is no way to run a country.
The alternative, a quicker turnaround, may not be any better: we in Australia are enjoying our 7th Prime Minister in 15 years. It seems that we can have competent with no ideas, or big ideas but no competency. I suspect part of the problem is that membership of parties has shrunk to practically zero, which means branches are controlled by small cliques obsessed with furthering their own interests. This doesn’t attract good candidates.
I also reckon that the sheer viciousness of journalists seeking every “gotcha” moment would put off any sane sensible person from becoming an MP let alone a PM.
Its a pity journalists don’t face the same public prosecution for in my opinion they have actually more power to influence events than any MP. Remember the SUN’s claim that they got Thatcher elected.