Weaponising Jimmy Savile
If Johnson didn't want the slur out there he could have drawn a line under it and apologised. Instead, we got a mealy-mouthed half apology in which he accepted Starmer was not the presiding lawyer over the case back in 2009, but was nevertheless responsible because he had been in position as CPS head for a year at that point. A factually accurate statement, yes, but one repeated to keep the smear alive. Was it worth it, now it proved too much even for Johnson's most loyal lackey to stomach? Johnson's still in position as of the time of writing, so for buying him a few extra days, yes.
The problem Johnson has is tonight's mobbing of Starmer is going to make more Tory MPs quesy as they hover on the brink of submitting a confidence letter. It's one thing for Johnson to say burqa-wearing Muslim women look like letter boxes and turn a blind eye as the resultant wave of Islamophobia rises up to harass and traduce the victims of the Prime Minister's pen, but quite another for an upstanding pillar of the British establishment to suffer the same fate. To underline the seriousness of the situation, cringingly loyal Lindsay Hoyle rebuked Johnson for his comments. And so, taken together it's quite likely Johnson's indulgence of a fashy talking point has probably made his position even weaker. Political bridges have been burnt while he's supposed to be mending them.
Is Johnson going to row back from this? I very much doubt it. His condemnation of the "protest" betrays not a scintilla of responsibility. This isn't just because of Johnson's entirely contrived chaos agent affectation, but it's embedded deeply in Tory statecraft. The concentration and exercise of authority in the person of the Prime Minister has characterised all governments for over 40 years, including Johnson's. Their semi-presidential style backed by untrammelled power, for as long as their parliamentary majority allows it, has led to a very rigid strategy. The legitimacy of institutions of state has become smothered by that conferred on (or claimed by) the PM, which encourages no turning back/I know best/never surrender behaviour. Tory PMs are usually fortunate in that their press won't highlight the multiple compromises any administration has to make, but on the big issues they like to dig their heels in. Compromise and climbdown hurts their authority, and as this is the most precious resource a Prime Minister possesses they jealously guard it to the point of absurdity.
We're at that point with Johnson now. Having set his face against so many issues these last two years - free school dinners, rescinding the National Insurance rise, and shielding the Met from criticism and accountability - the stock response is a shake of the head and a Churchillian evocation of beaches and landing grounds. When there is a climbdown, it's passed over quickly and with very little comment from his press allies. But since PartyGate broke, following his cack-handed defence of Owen Paterson on respect-my-authority grounds, Johnson has offered half- and non- apologies while telling Tory MPs, civil servants, donors, and favourite journalists that he thinks he's done nothing wrong. And in so doing, by sticking rigidly to the authoritarian play book inherited from his predecessors, he's making his position look increasingly untenable. There's a political rationality there, but as Max Weber might have observed, pursuing it instrumentally without other considerations can lead to irrational outcomes.
Johnson has survived up until now thanks to the question of timing. There are wiser heads in the Tory party than he. But there's only so much damage his party are willing to take for their leader, only so many MPs willing to risk their re-election for one man's overweening vanity and sense of entitlement. It could be that a ragtag mob shouting rude things and jostling Keir Starmer is the tipping point to finally bring this drama to a close.
Image Credit