After this weekend’s celebration of 70 years of constancy and continuity under Queen Elizabeth, Britain will next week enter a period of political uncertainty that will continue at least until its next general election. It will determine Boris Johnson’s fate and the future of the Conservatives in government and could eventually open up opportunities in Britain’s relationship with Ireland and the rest of the European Union. But before that, Britain’s neighbours should get ready for trouble.
Fifty four Conservative MPs must write letters to Graham Brady, the chairman of the backbench 1922 Committee, to trigger a vote of no confidence in Johnson’s leadership. Forty five have publicly questioned his position already, so the expectation at Westminster is that if Brady has not received enough letters to call a vote, he will have done so by next week.
If the target is not reached next week, it is fairly sure to be after byelections in the Conservative-held seats of Wakefield and Tiverton and Honiton on June 23rd. Wakefield, which the Conservatives won from Labour for the first time in 2019, is vacant because its former MP, Imran Ahmad Khan, was jailed last month for sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy.
Neil Parish, who had a majority of more than 24,000 in Tiverton and Honiton, resigned as an MP after he was seen watching porn on his phone in the House of Commons chamber. The Conservatives are expected to lose both byelections, one to Labour and the other to the Liberal Democrats.
Whenever the vote of no confidence comes, 180 Conservative MPs will have to vote against Johnson to topple him and the conventional wisdom at Westminster is that the sooner the vote comes, the more likely he is to survive it. The “payroll vote” of ministers and more junior government figures accounts for more than 170 MPs, and although many will fancy their chances under a new leader, a large number will probably back Johnson out of loyalty or self-interest.
If the vote of no confidence fails to dislodge the prime minister, party rules say there cannot be another for 12 months, but as Theresa May discovered, the rules are one thing and politics another. She survived a no-confidence vote in December 2018, winning 200 out of 317 votes, but her authority was shot and she was gone a few months later.
If Johnson wins but the number of rebels is greater than those who voted against May, he will be badly wounded and his already unruly parliamentary party could soon become ungovernable. If he loses, he will be excluded from the subsequent leadership contest, which sees MPs choose two candidates to go before the entire party membership for the final choice.
Since the scandal of lockdown-breaking parties at Downing Street first became a political threat to Johnson last year, he has governed almost exclusively with an eye to winning the approval of Conservative MPs. After a few months of trying to please everyone, he has narrowed his focus in recent months to the MPs on the right of the party who formed the core of his supporters when he won the leadership three years ago.
Immunity from prosecution
This is why the British government last month introduced proposals to deal with Troubles-related crimes that are opposed by all Northern Ireland’s political parties and victims’ groups as well as by the Irish Government. It will end inquests and civil actions related to such crimes and offer immunity from prosecution to those who cooperate with an information retrieval commission.
The only group that approves of the legislation is Conservative MPs who want to protect former British soldiers from prosecution over their actions in Northern Ireland. But in Johnson’s current political predicament, they are the only people who matter.
The prime minister’s political weakness also informs his approach to the Northern Ireland protocol, which he negotiated in 2019 but has been rubbishing ever since. Later this month, he will introduce legislation to unilaterally rip up the protocol, risking a confrontation with Brussels that could lead to trade sanctions and even the termination of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) that guarantees tariff-free trade between Britain and the European Union.
Johnson claims that the protocol is undermining the Belfast Agreement because the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) will not allow the Stormont institutions to function until it is “fixed”. The EU has offered to address the central problem the protocol presents for the DUP and other unionists – excessive checks on goods crossing from Great Britain to Northern Ireland – but that will not be enough for Johnson.
The EU is willing to implement the agreement in a less intrusive way and even to change its own rules but it will not change the text of the protocol, which is part of an international treaty. But Johnson insists that it must be thoroughly renegotiated to address issues such as VAT rules, state aid and the role of European courts as well as checks on goods.
In a thoughtful paper this week, the Tony Blair Institute argued for a new set of negotiations that left open the legal form a new agreement might take. But as the report’s author acknowledged, there is no appetite among EU leaders to renegotiate the protocol and Johnson is too weak to make compromises.
In fact, Johnson’s position is such that he will be unable to accept any deal Brussels offers because it could never be good enough to satisfy the hardline Eurosceptics on his backbenches. Any further concessions from the EU will be counterproductive, rewarding Johnson’s recklessness with no prospect at all that they will lead to an agreement.
If no progress is possible under Johnson, could things improve under his successor? After a series of ballots to narrow the field, MPs are likely to choose one candidate representing the liberal, One Nation wing of the party and another that appeals to the nationalist, populist tendency.
Safest option
But when they start campaigning for the votes of party members, both candidates will have to converge on the right because that is where most Conservative activists are. The safest option on the protocol will be to back the current government position, promising to fight for British sovereignty and to protect the Union.
Tobias Ellwood, the Conservative chairman of the Commons defence committee, raised a flutter of excitement this week when he suggested that Britain should rejoin the European single market. Writing in the House magazine, a weekly publication for MPs and peers, he said it was time to face up to the fact that Brexit was going badly.
“Our exports to Europe have shrunk by £20bn. From the fishers who can no longer sell their Scottish salmon, to the farmers undercut by unchecked imports, to Cheshire cheesemakers running into £180 health certificates, even to the City which can no longer sell financial services to Europe, sector after sector is being strangled by the red tape we were supposed to escape from,” he wrote.
“If joining the single market (with conditions) results in strengthening our economy, easing the cost of living crisis, settling the Irish problem at a stroke and promoting our European credentials as we take an ever greater lead in Ukraine, would it not be churlish to not face this reality?”
The intervention drew a predictable response, with Downing Street telling friendly journalists that it showed that the plot against Johnson was all about reversing Brexit. Ellwood’s friend Tom Tugendhat, who may have leadership ambitions, distanced himself from the proposal, tweeting: “Tobias is wrong. The single market puts the EU in charge.”
But Ellwood’s proposal reflects what many MPs are hearing from businesses about the cost of the ideologically-driven deal negotiated by David Frost and the unnecessary barriers to trade it created.
Labour is keen to avoid talking about Brexit, focusing on the government’s incompetent implementation of it rather than on the terms of the deal. But the party favours a veterinary agreement with the EU that would eliminate the most intrusive checks required by the protocol.
Labour is opposing the Bill offering an amnesty for Troubles-related crimes and it will vote against unilateral action on the protocol. A new Conservative leader with a strong mandate might moderate the British approach to Northern Ireland and to relations with the EU. But for now, the best course for Dublin and Brussels is to sit tight, hold firm and hit back hard if Britain proceeds with its reckless plan for the protocol.
