142. Is this the end for Boris Johnson?

0:00Thanks for listening to the Restus Politics, sign up to the Restus Politics Plus to enjoy ad -free listening and receive a weekly newsletter. Join our members' chat room again early access to live show tickets. Just go to therestuspolitics .com. That's therestuspolitics .com. It's the Smuckers Uncrustables Podcast with your host Uncrustables. Okay, today's guest is Ruffer on the Edges. Please welcome Crust. Thanks for having me. Today's topic, he's round with Soft Pillar We Bread. Hey, filled with delicious PB &J, are you talking about yourself? And you can take him anywhere. Why do you invite?

0:35And we are out of time. Are you really cutting me off? Uncrustables are the best part of the sandwich. Sorry, Crust. Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. With the price of just about everything going up, we thought we'd bring our prices down. So to help us, we brought in a reverse auctioneer, which is apparently a thing. Mint Mobile Unlimited Premium Wireless. 30 -30 -30 -30 -30 -30 -30 -30 -30 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -20 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 - Bucks Month. So give it a try at MintMobile .com -slash -switch. Up front payment of $45 for three months, plan equivalent to $15 per month required.

1:08New customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow after 35 gigabytes of networks busy. Taxes and fees extra. See MintMobile .com.

1:21So welcome to the RESTAS Politics Emergency Podcast with me, Rory Stewart. And me, Alistair Campbell, you're smiling, Rory, why are you smiling? Because it's, I wanted to tell this since it's been a pretty, pretty close run thing. Alistair wanted to hit the Emergency Podcast button. Of course, on the football match, on Saturday, over his downfall, which, of course, I'm a great expert on, but, you narrowly mess. And actually, we're hitting it on the Parliamentary report on Boris Johnson, which, Alistair, you spent the last hour reading. What's your sense of it? It's, I would say utterly damning.

1:52I think anything that we expected it to be, it is that and more. It's, it's like a, I really do recommend to people that they read the whole thing. I think it's like the Trump indictment. It's only if you read the full indictment, you get a sense of what he's doing. And of course, the way that our media operates, they'll give you the headlines, but it's the detail. It's the relentless detail. It's, it's very, very, very, very well done, I think. It's, it's quite hard to read without. I mean, I try to read these things, especially, it's no secret. I don't like Boris Johnson very much. And I, I hate what he's done to the country.

2:23But it's very hard to read this and think that anything other than the fact that he's absolutely, totally, completely finished. I mean, the misled Parliament is, of course, as we know, the sort of Parliamentees for lied in the House of Commons. And that phrase comes up again and again, several occasions repeatedly, contempt of Parliament, contempt of the committee. He, his entire character in a sense is taken apart. Not by the way, saying this is about his character, but you just have a sense of it through the whole thing. Just just to, again, for people who've not fully minute by minute. What's happened is that this was an inquiry done by the committee on privileges, which is a committee of the House of Commons.

3:08And it's got seven members of whom Alberto Costa, Charles Walker, Andy Carter and Bernard Jenkins are conservative. So four conservatives got a conservative majority, two Labour members whom the chair is Harret Harmon and a Scott Matt Alan Dorrance. And they started their inquiry in July last year, looking at the question of Boris Johnson's statements to Parliament about his behaviour during COVID. And the thing that provoked this was increasing evidence that seemed to be emerging that Boris Johnson had broken his own COVID regulations by attending parties in Tendowning Street. And the reason it came to the committee is that he had been asked about this in the House of Commons.

3:56And on many occasions, he had denied that he had attended any parties or that any rules had been broken. And as this became more and more implausible, a committee decided to meet on of this. And this was separate from another investigation led by Sue Gray, a civil servant who was looking at what had happened in Downing Street. This is really focused on did Boris Johnson mislead Parliament? And we did a podcast, people interested on his testimony to the committee a few months ago now. And their conclusion is that not only did he mislead Parliament, he also lied to the committee during that testimony back over to you.

4:35If you go through the report at the top, so this is the list of occasions and allegations on which in their view he quotes misled the House, aka lied. When he said the guidance was followed completely in number 10, that the rules and guidance were followed all times, the events in number 10 were within the rules and guidance, etc. Number two, when he failed to tell the House about his own knowledge of the gatherings where rules or guidance had been broken. Number three, when he said that he relied on repeated assurances that the rules had not been broken, the assurances he received were not accurately represented by him to the House nor were they appropriate to be cited to the House as an authoritative indication of number 10's compliance.

5:13Four, when he gave the impression that there needed to be an investigation by Sue Gray before we could answer questions. If you remember that, the way for Sue Gray thing was essentially saying that he used that to hide from the fact that he didn't know that this stuff had gone on, he was pretending he didn't. Five, when he purported to correct the record, but instead continued to mislead the House and by his continuing denials this committee. He keeps saying that he corrected the record at the earliest opportunity when clearly he didn't. Then goes on, he was deliberately disingenuous when he tried to reinterpret the statements to the House to avoid their plain meaning and reframe the clear impression they intended to give, namely when he advanced unsustainable interpretations of the rules and guidance and when he advanced legally impermissible reasons to justify the gatherings.

6:01In other words, he was aware of the rules, he was aware of the guidance, he was aware that they were that they were broken and he then tried to lie about not just the fact of them, but what they actually meant. It goes on page after page after page. So just to kind of sum it up, what they seem to be saying is that he knew perfectly well what the rules were, not least because he frequently was to be found standing at a podium in Downing Street telling the public what the rules were. He had been warned by people in number 10 that what he was doing in number 10 wasn't in accordance with the rules.

6:33And the what he was saying was not necessary accurate. And he proceeded to attend those parties nonetheless. And furthermore, one of the other things that's come out, which really, I mean, certainly more than so, substantially I would think reinforces the sense of the lying, is the number of bits of evidence coming from members of his staff that they were very, very guilty about it. So very unfairly, his press secretary, Allegra Stratton, ended up carrying the can because she was caught doing a mock speech from a podium where somebody teased her in a question about how could she possibly justify parties taking place at Downing Street during the lockdown.

7:11And she basically said, I don't really know what to do with that. And people, and she resigned over that. Then Sam Cotes from Sky has pointed out extraordinary testimony, which is come in written evidence submission 7th, February 2023. I was the and then there are a huge black lines when he looks through this evidence. But anyway, he was in this office which had the press office in a vestigal, connecting all three. This was the place meeting where wine time Fridays took place. They were calendared, weekly events and our outlook diary starting at 4pm, where preface offices would gather on Fridays to have drinks.

7:47During the pandemic, number 10, despite setting the rules of the country, was slow to enforce any rules in the building. The press office, wine time Fridays, continued throughout. Social distancing was not enforced, mask wearing was not enforced. I once inquired to Dada Dada in March 2020 whether we should be wearing masks and was told that the science advice, what there was no point. And that very little had very little effect on the spread of COVID. This was all part of a wider culture of not adhering to any rules. Number 10 was like an island oasis of normality. Operational notes were sent out from the security teams to be mindful of the cameras outside the door, not to go out in groups and to social distance.

8:30It was all a pantomime. The thing in the report that when you just see it and the thing about these reports, this one actually is quite well written, I think. It's often these reports are quite hard to penetrate. In light of Mr Johnson's conduct in committing a further contempt on 9 June 2023, this is his reaction the other day when he resigned from Parliament, attacked the inquiry as a kangaroo court, and also the fact that they had as a courtesy shown him a copy of this report in advance. In confidence and it says in confidence and it also said in the communications with him that as you know any breach of that confidence is itself a contempt of Parliament.

9:12So they go on in light of Mr Johnson's conduct in committing this further contempt. The committee considers that it was the Johnson worst to remember he should be suspended from the House for 90 days. They say he has a deliberately misled the House, be deliberately misled the committee, see breach confidence, de -impune the committee and thereby undermine the democratic process of the House, he been complicit in the campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the committee. And then hilariously, he sort of think and therefore he should go to jail for about 15 years and then says we recommend that he should not be entitled to a form of members pass.

9:49So when the House of Commons votes on Monday, I said now I'm joking there because the punishment for this is I think the end of his political career and also hopefully the appropriate that he's long deserved will now be directed towards him. But the I suspect that that we recommend he should not be entitled to form a member's pass. I think John Burkow had the same punishment. Yeah, that's not a crushing pass. I haven't actually myself even bothered to pick up my former members passed and I left the House of Commons in 2019. So that may not be the greatest punishment. Well, can I come in for a second and just give a little, I think, you know, we can set a little context on this from both sides and one of them is I was the chair of a House of Commons committee and I served on another House of Commons committee for four years before that.

10:36So I was a big back bench committee person and you I think were actually the subject of committee reports. So we're able to talk about this from different. Yeah, so let me start from my end first. First thing I think to understand is that this is these things are very, very lengthy done and and this particular one was done unbelievably carefully and seriously. They've been out it since July last year. They took advice from a former law lord. I was very struck when they were cross questioning Boris Johnson that actually they were much more skillful in their forensic questioning than is often the case with parliamentary committees.

11:15Albert Hucoster, who's one of the conservative members, was a lawyer. I think Harriet Harmon was a lawyer too. So maybe that was part of what helped them there. They have set up very, very clear guidance on what an appropriate way to behave was more than actually committees are obligated to in this case. They really did go out of their way to try to make sure that he saw evidence that he was given notice that he was given opportunities to give written evidence and he came in quite liar it up in a way that you don't normally go into a committee. Normally when we're asking people to testify, we expect them to turn up particularly a fellow member of parliament in a straightforward fashion.

11:51I testified in any number of committees as a member of parliament and a minister and I certainly never would have thought that I was going to bring a lawyer, but he brought in very expensive lawyers. A man called Lord Panic, which I always thought was a slightly terrifying name for the man who's meant to be supporting you in a crisis. They will have also had clerks working on this. So what will have happened is very careful drafting, very careful gathering of evidence, lots for appendixes brought together by the House of Commons clerks and then it will have been reviewed a number of times by the committee until the whole committee was comfortable with the way in which it's come out.

12:25Now on the other hand, I think you sometimes have felt as the person receiving end of this and this is sort of pushing my luck a bit. But were the times when you were subject to these committees that you sometimes did think that you can see Boris Johnson's point that you didn't think they were always fair and that you sometimes thought these committees maybe didn't behave with all the judicial objectivity that you might expect? Well, I, this sort of various times that I've given evidence to committees, but I think the two that I guess came close as to me feeling that they were essentially aimed at me.

13:01One was a public administration committee. I don't know if there exists still whether it's called something different, but the Select Committee on Public Administration did an inquiry into the changes that I was trying to make to government communication and because of this sort of obsession that the media had with our so -called spin culture, etc. There was sort of, it was huge in the media at the time and they, they had lots of people on there that they tried to get to say sort of how terrible I was and blah, blah, I found that when I went to the inquiry to give evidence over several hours myself, I didn't find it that difficult to be honest to because of the way, as you know, the way the committee works, the chair's sort of sitting there and bringing in people and giving them limited time and so forth.

13:50And I felt they were just bounced around. I didn't think they had a kind of coherent strategy to what they were trying to do. Whereas I agree with you, I think that with this investigation into Johnson, I got the feeling, we both said at the time that the questioning was better than it is often the case. But I did feel, Roderick Morgan was the chair, the former Welsh First Minister, it went on to be the Welsh First Minister, he was the chair of the committee into me and it was, I felt at least half a dozen of them were basically slightly grandstanding, coming up with their sort of pre -prepared line of attack.

14:23But ultimately when the report came out, it was fine. I felt actually that they'd sort of, you know, pretty much got to the point that a few points that I agreed with, a few that I didn't, but it didn't feel terribly unfair. And likewise, the other occasions on which I've been particularly in relation to the build -up to the war in Iraq, I felt it was a combination of serious people who were trying to get to the serious points and a few who were just frankly grandstanding. But I think what you've seen with this, I completely agree with you. And I think Harry, I suspect Harry at harm has been a very good chair, a very good chair.

14:58Although, God's so you're worried, just literally, just as you were speaking there, I got a little rash of text messages. I'll just read you one. It says, Reese Moog just named checked you on the world at one. He was asked about why they were questioning Harry at harm and there's the chair. And he said, Harry at harm and retweeted Alice to Campbell. And he says very aggressive things. There we are. Well, that's enough, isn't it? That's enough, that's enough to take it on. So I think that brings us quite neatly to the other theme here, which is the fight back from the Boris Johnson supporters. So there's been an extraordinary flurry of would be Baroness Nadine Doris, Sir James Dudridge, Sir Jacob Riesmoll.

15:44Sir Michael Fabricant. Lord Stuart Jackson, all coming out in defense of Boris Johnson. Was there anything they had in common those people you just listed? Very strange. I don't know why I keep saying Sir and Lord in such a sort of strong way when I've mentioned that. But no, indeed, these are all people. And some of them, not very senior MPs who rather surprisingly Boris Johnson gave pierwages to or nighthoods to who are now passionately out there defending him and saying that the whole thing is a kangaroo court. And one of the things that of course is most discussed, and there are many things disgusting about this, but one thing I think which is a theme that we'll hear again and again and we've got to challenge again and again is the idea that somehow Boris Johnson is unbelievably popular with the people.

16:32He has this incredible mandate from the implication is the majority of the British people and that therefore it's undemocratic for elected members of Parliament to in any way impede or criticize him. And this is a mad idea, firstly mad constitutionally because Britain doesn't live in a presidential system. Boris Johnson was not elected as an individual. He was only elected in his constituency of Oxbridge. So he's equal with all these other MPs who are conducting their own constituencies. He's party won an election in 2019, but not him as an individual. But the second thing is that actually if you look at the public opinion polling, he's astonishingly unpopular with the public.

17:10So there's a very very good Ipsos Mori thing that's just come out looking at net satisfaction with Prime Minister of 79 to 23. Boris Johnson is astonishingly less popular most of the time than Theresa May. And if you compare him to Tony Blair, I mean there's just no comparison. If you compare it even to John Major or Mrs. Thatcher towards the end of that time, no comparison. I mean in historical terms, he was an extraordinarily unpopular MP barely got there with most of the population and most of the polling evidence is pretty clear. But the 2019 election was one because of promises on Brexit get Brexit done.

17:49And because the unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn, but the idea that this man somehow has some magnificent personal mandate that allows him to ignore the House of Commons, the courts, all kinds of constitutional checks. It's just popular, it's a one -on -one. I'd love for him just to take a walk down a high street and see what happened. I mean the only time he seems to go in the public is when there's a camera there to take a picture of him running for about 20 yards and then he goes back inside. I tell you the thing, we've so yesterday we should tell our listeners that we spent a very enjoyable morning talking to the aforementioned former prime minister John Major and we'll be putting he was incredibly generous with his time and we're actually going to do two episodes of leading over the next week or two.

18:36And I don't know if you remember this, but you were trying to get him to sort of say some very disabliging things about about Boris Johnson. Because I know that he really despises Boris Johnson. Yes, I know, I know, but I thought he's put that was absolutely marvellous because he basically just said, I really think we should stop talking about him. But the sort of contempt was clear. But I think what's, it was very interesting to me, I was sort of mentioned to a couple of people who saw him for the day that we've been speaking to him and what have you. And whatever you say about something like major, I would say the same about thatcher and of course I would say the same about the Labour Prime Minister's that I work for.

19:18And you I know would say the same about Theresa May and I think you'd be right, is that there was a commitment to the job being about a genuine sense of public service. And when you would, when we were talking to John Major, you really got the sense of talking to somebody who even now is offended by the idea that politicians should make politics anything other than actual a noble calling. And what you're seeing with Johnson now is utter narcissism. He now doesn't care. In fact, I'll go further. I think he now actively wants Rishi Sunak to lose the next election because that then will play into this narrative.

19:59And the other point that John Major said, we talked about he talked about the false narratives that develop in politics. And you of course have just mentioned one, Boris Johnson's very, very popular in the given day for the referendum and for the election, but given that he's broken every promise he made, he's not popular as you say anymore. And yet I did a very quick look around the headlines of all the kind of main newspapers of how they're covering this report. The mayor, the express and the son are all nosing it, leading their coverage on Boris Johnson's reaction and the threat to Rishi Sunak, including the express case that they're going to the threat that their local Tory parties will deselect MPs who vote to support the privileges committee report on Monday.

20:51It's utterly delusional, totally mad, isn't it? And one of the most striking things produced by Jen Johnson and his polling is that Boris was less popular than Theresa May. Boris Johnson even during the 2019 campaign. So even at the moment of that election, he was less popular than Theresa May, consistently less popular. And Theresa May wasn't exactly the most popular prime minister ever. And the reason of course that they're doing this is that it's a basic attempt again to turn the conservative party into Trump's Republican party. All these people are doing in all their arguments is pretending totally US president leading in the polls in the Republican party who's being attacked by the courts.

21:33It's quite funny as all the in his, you did a very good analysis of his 800 -word telegraph column that you wrote the other day in response to the when he received the report. He's done a slightly longer version today. And he actually can't, whether this was deliberate or not, I don't know. Again, it looks like it's just been sort of tossed off over a rather drunken lunch, which is how he used to do most of his columns in the past. But he does actually say, he does talk about Trump top charges. So it's almost as if he's perhaps psychologically realizes that he's gone full Trump. I tell you the thing Roy, there's some the other thing you will know from these reports, both having written them and read them, is that sometimes you get the most interesting stuff in footnotes.

22:12And can I reach it by favorite footnote? Because again, it exposes Johnson's utter hypocrisy and vianality, including in relation to another issue. It says, we note that Mr. Johnson has recently undertaken to supply the COVID -public inquiry with a large number of his personal WhatsApp messages. This contrast with his highly restrictive release of such messages to us. If it transpires from examination of the WhatsApp messages supplied to the COVID inquiry, that there was relevant material which should have been disclosed to us, either by Mr. Johnson or the cabin office, this would be a serious matter which the house might need to revisit.

22:52That is my footnote of the day. Yeah. And I think, I mean, if I can just finish on a couple of kind of slightly pompous points, one is that this matters because his shambolic, mendacious behavior was one of the reasons that Britain has been poorly governed. He was not a good prime minister. And although he got the vaccine rollout quickly, he did not respond well to COVID. He had a very, very bizarre oscillation between being too late to lock down because obviously he had some, he doesn't like people telling him what to do. Then being too late to open up again, then locking down sporadically, opening up sporadically, it was a shambolic approach particularly in March of 2020 to COVID, which, and I hope the COVID inquiry is going to get beyond the personality of Boris Johnson to look at all the things within government that went wrong.

23:43And the second thing I think is just reinforcing the fundamental sense that we live in a parliamentary democracy. And we need to take our constitution seriously. And that means that members of parliament are equally democratically elected. There are 650 of them. And they have more of a democratic mandate than any individual. And they certainly have more of a democratic mandate than the conservative party, where your only eligibility criteria is your willingness to pay 25 quid to join the party. So actually, this goes to the heart of how Boris Johnson was selected, which was a daily express, daily mayor whipped up, moved through a conservative party, a lecturer, members of lecturer, which corresponded to about 0 .3 % of the general population.

24:27Instead of allowing the MPs who knew him best, had worked with him best, and who are all individually democratically elected to make the decision. And that's why we should be respecting parliament and respecting the parliamentary committee. But for that to happen and for the respect to be rebuilt for parliament, again, to go back to our conversation with John Baker, he said that he was ultimately optimistic that this sort of poison in our politics could be reversed and that we could get to a better place. But I do think what you see now needs to do more than he's done so far. I think he's made a terrible mistake in allowing these honest to go forward.

25:02You now have a situation where a man who is no longer allowed to go into parliament, into the buildings of parliament without going through security because he's having his past withdrawn, he is sending to the House of Lords to be in our legislature for the rest of their lives, people in their 20s who've done absolutely nothing but be back carriers and sick of ants to Boris Johnson. Likewise, every living prime minister, and I think he's absurd that Lestros is going to get the same, every living prime minister gets an allowance for the rest of their lives that is about dealing with the consequences of having been prime minister.

25:39I think if you leave and disgrace, you should not be allowed that either. The next thing, are we seriously going to have to see Boris Johnson at every single remembrance day ceremony, reminding us of who and what he is in the damage that he has done? So I think Rishi Sunak, actually, if he really wants to signal that he's different and it's about professionalism, integrity, accountability, he should block these honors, he should not allow those allowances to be played, he should not let Lestros send any of the House of Lords or frankly do anything with an honors list and what's more, it should be made clear that there is genuine appropriium towards this guy because otherwise, we'll be back with this.