Yesterday, an upset in the world of parliamentary committees took place large enough for people who aren’t total politics nerds to notice. The reason was that the government, who wanted Chris Grayling to be the new chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, was undone by Julian Lewis, a then Tory backbencher, who conspired with Labour MPs to get the chairmanship instead. The government retaliated against Lewis by removing the Tory whip from him, the strongest thing they could have done within the boundaries of common law.
People are interested in the story for two reasons. One, Chris Grayling has been humiliated, which is good fun for most people across the political spectrum. Two, for people on the left side of British politics, a chance to claim that Boris Johnson is a dictator in the making. Dealing with the second thing here: governments whip their MPs to vote for the leader’s choice of chairs of committees all the time. It is extremely common practice. The only reason you noticed is because it didn’t work this time. Which is way more interesting to think about.
Why did Lewis defy the government like that? Particularly given BJ has shown no shyness in removing the whip from MPs when it has suited him in the past, so Lewis would have been well aware of the potential consequences. Particularly given Lewis is no latter day Remainy liberal type – he’s an ERG supporter and solidly on the right of the party. He should be the type absolutely cheerleading for Boris at this stage. So why did he defy the prime minister so openly instead?
I have no idea why Lewis did it but I can hazard a guess. A lot of Tory MPs are getting frustrated with the Number 10 machine and Boris Johnson’s leadership style. The Lewis-Grayling situation could be the first of many such upsets. Perhaps HMG being so harsh with Lewis, removing the whip, will deter others. Then again, perhaps it won’t. The fact that it could happen once suggests the government needs to be mindful of rebellion becoming an issue. Julian Lewis isn’t the chap you would have picked out of the parliamentary party to have done something like this, which suggests there are a lot of other Tory MPs who might be open to defiance.
As always with Boris, the usual rules don’t seem to apply, so let’s see. He’s one of those guys in Westminster where you think gravity is finally going to kick in and yet there he is, floating in mid-air still, somehow. Yet I always come back to David Cameron. Everything worked out for him – until one day, it didn’t. With a whole other phase of the CoVid crisis to get through and no deal Brexit looming on the horizon, Boris has a whole lot of gravity to defy in the next six months.
************************************************************************
I have a book out now called “Politics is Murder”. It follows the tale of a woman named Charlotte working at a failing think tank who has got ahead in her career in a novel way – she is a serial killer. One day, the police turn up at her door and tell her she is a suspect in a murder – only thing is, it is one she had nothing to do with. There is also a plot against the Foreign Secretary and some gangsters thrown into the mix while Charlotte tries to find out who is trying to frame her for a murder she didn’t commit.
Also: there is a subplot around the government trying to built a stupid bridge, which now seems a charming echo of a more innocent time!
It’s here:
I guess it is largely about the Russia report. You have to ask yourself why Johnson/Cummings wanted Grayling as chair. Perhaps there are precious few who would be sure to carry out the bidding of number 10 on this.
It is also noteworthy that the opposition would vote for a Monday club type Tory. In terms of the Tory whip, it must be quite likely that Lewis would not be recontesting the seat anyway.
I predict there will be an attempt at strategic news management to try to bunt the impact of the Russia report by leaking bits and pieces first, by raising specious expectations and by getting the right wing media to find some kind of distractor.
I guess it is largely about the Russia report. You have to ask yourself why Johnson/Cummings wanted Grayling as chair. Perhaps there are precious few who would be sure to carry out the bidding of number 10 on this.
No, that can’t be it. Even assuming for the sake of argument you are right that there is something in the report that the government doesn’t want published, and that’s why Grayling was picked as chair, it doesn’t explain removing the whip from Lewis as by that stage the damage was done. Removing the whip won’t stop him being chair of the committee.
The only thing removing the whip post hoc can possibly achieve is to serve as a deterrent for future rebels. It can’t in itself be about the Russia report because once Lewis was elected, removing the whip doesn’t change anything regarding that report.
As always with Boris, the usual rules don’t seem to apply, so let’s see. He’s one of those guys in Westminster where you think gravity is finally going to kick in and yet there he is, floating in mid-air still, somehow. Yet I always come back to David Cameron. Everything worked out for him – until one day, it didn’t. With a whole other phase of the CoVid crisis to get through and no deal Brexit looming on the horizon, Boris has a whole lot of gravity to defy in the next six months
The thing about those type, though, is that trying to predict exactly when the gravity will kick in is a mug’s game. Usually it’s not over something that anyone expected. Like Cameron: if anybody claims that they foresaw that the EU referendum would be his downfall, they are lying. Nobody thought he’d lose that referendum. Even the people on the Leave side didn’t think they’d actually win. People predicted the Scotland referendum might be the moment the Cameron luck would run out, and they were wrong. But nobody predicted before 11pm on the 23rd of June 2016 that the EU referendum would be what finally did him in.
I mean yes you can keep saying ‘Boris will fall’ and eventually you’ll be right, but it’s hardly impressive to keep predicting something that’s inevitable and then expect people to act impressed when it does happen. That’s the Vince Cable trick of claiming to have predicted the global crash because he once said, ‘you know, this bubble can’t go on forever, eventually it’s going to burst’. That’s not impressive. If he’d said, ‘these CDOs made up of sub-prime loans are getting out of hand, if too many of them default at the same time then a major bank could go under and that’d cause a massive liquidity shock’ in 2005, now that would have been impressive.
I mean, even those crazies who keep predicting the end of the world are going to be right eventually. If I wake up every day and say, ‘Today is the day I will die’ then one day I’ll turn out to have been right.
Same thing with ‘Boris’s luck will run out.’ Of course it will. That’s not an impressive prediction. Predicting when and how it will run out, though, get that right and people will be impressed.