Boris Johnson’s new ‘golden rule’: the bunker mentality

It began last Sunday when Boris Johnson, newly arrived at the G7 summit in southern Germany, told ITV that his “golden rule” for politics – one not seemingly aired before – was that politicians should not talk about themselves, just their policies.

The next day, talking to BBC News, the prime minister similarly dismissed all questions about domestic political troubles, including a double byelection loss and new rumblings of discontent among Tory MPs.

“The job of the government is to get on with governing, and to resist the blandishments of the media, no matter how brilliant, to talk about politics, to talk about ourselves," él dijo.

A narrative had been set. In interview after interview, whether TV clips or more informal questioning by reporters travelling with the PM, Johnson insisted it was simply not his business to delve into such matters.

“I am no longer a member of that sacred guild," él dijo, referring to his former life as a journalist. “It would be a demarcation dispute for me to cross over and talk about politics. I’ve got to talk about our programme for the government.”

By the end of the trip this insistence was raising eyebrows. A final TV interview with GB News saw Johnson repeatedly questioned about how he could deliver policy without addressing very serious questions about his authority and if voters trusted him. Otra vez, it was rebuffed.

What is going on? The short answer appears to be that Johnson, who has just completed a marathon, nine-day overseas visit, beginning with a Commonwealth summit in Rwanda, was somewhat burned on the opening leg and decided on what could be described as a bunker mentality.

Asked about his political woes before leaving Kigali, Johnson launched into one of his trademark extemporised answers, cual ended with him mulling over the idea of winning three elections and staying in power into the 2030s.

For any prime minister this would be bold. For one who had just lost two Commons seats and had 41% of his MPs vote for him to be ousted it was, critics said, “delusional”.

And so the media shutters came down. While he was effusive and colourful at the G7 and Nato, undertaking TV interviews every day, an on-plane chat with the travelling media and a closing press conference in order to explain efforts to rally international support for Guardería golpeada por bombardeos después de que separatistas respaldados por Rusia abrieran fuego en el este de Ucrania – video – he steadfastly refused to address any party-political or personal matters.

It is understood the policy was personally decided on by the prime minister rather than by his media team. It arguably brought at least temporary dividends – at his end-of-Nato press conference, just about every question was on policy.

Es, sin emabargo, one thing to do all this at an international summit devoted to the fate of Ukraine. Back in the UK, things are likely to get more tricky.

On Wednesday Johnson appears before the liaison committee, made up of the MPs who chair subject-specific select committees, where he will face close questioning on more than just the nuts and bolts of policy.

similar, renewed moves by Tory MPs to remove the prime minister will not go away simply because he would prefer to not talk about them. los 1922 Committee of backbench Conservatives is about to elect a new executive, which could be crucial in deciding whether another challenge emerges or not.

But one thing seems clear. En este momento, Johnson appears to relish his role as international cheerleader-in-chief for the Ukrainian cause, where the issues are simple and he receives regular praise. Whether or not his ostrich-like approach helped with domestic political worries, at the very least it gave him a few days to simply not think about them. For a prime minister as embattled as Johnson, that would be welcome.




, , ,

los comentarios están cerrados.