Maybe it's because I'm a
northerner that I fail to see the attraction of Boris Johnson, either as an
individual, or indeed as a worthwhile political figure, even though much of the
mainstream media would seemingly have us all believe that politically, Boris is
the best thing since sliced bread.
Telegraph columnists like
Professor Tim Stanley, Isabel Hardman and others have tried hard to convince
their readers that Mr Johnson has not only been a roaring economic and
political success during his time as London mayor, but somehow also represents
a repositioning of Conservative party values that are more in tune with the
wider electorates beliefs, when it comes to issues such as the UK's troublesome
membership of the European Union and the often thornier subject of mass
migration.
At the same time, Mr Johnson's
recent announcement that he intends to contest, an as yet unidentified
parliamentary seat in 2015, is said to mark a direct challenge to the
leadership of David Cameron, the current Conservative Party leader and Prime
Minister, in the event that Mr Cameron fails to lead his party to victory in
next year's General Election. Putting a brave face on Mr Johnson's public
announcement, Mr Cameron is said to have welcomed Boris' decision to stand and
described the London mayor as one of the Conservative Party's "best
players"
Although one suspects that Mr
Cameron probably isn't that happy about Boris' decision to stand as an MP, he
cannot be seen to publicly oppose him for fear of offending even more of the
dwindling numbers of traditional Tory voters, who really do seem to believe
that Mr Johnson might just turn out to be the saviour of their party's
political fortunes in 2015. Others are not so sure; and unhappily seem to take
the view that Boris' erratic nature will no doubt be exposed in the glaring
light of a national publicity campaign, where voters in the North, in the
Midlands, in Wales, in Scotland and Northern Ireland will see Mr Johnson for
what he really is, a rampant right-wing Eton educated rich boy who purposefully
hides behind the facade of a generally old-fashioned, but completely harmless
British eccentric, when in fact he is nothing of the sort.
One assumes that either Mr
Cameron already accepts that the chances of a Conservative electoral victory in
2015 are slim to non-existent, or he really does believe that the presence of
Mr Johnson on the campaign trail will actually boost the Prime Minister's
chances of being re-elected, ostensibly by Boris helping to undermine the
appeal of Nigel Farage and UKIP. It has hardly escaped people's notice that Mr
Johnson has regularly positioned himself in similar territory to UKIP, when it
comes to the UK's continued membership of the EU and the associated subject of mass
migration. The current Conservative thinking seems to be that with Boris
talking tough on European Union directives and mass migration, even though he
holds no elected parliamentary position or ministerial power, sufficient voters
will be attracted to the party's electoral cause in 2015 to give Mr Cameron his
second term as Prime Minister.
Even ignoring the fact that Boris
first has to identify a potential parliamentary seat, contest it and then win
it, such a strategy pre-supposes that Mr Johnson would be able to influence or
guide future Conservative policies as regards the EU, which is by no means a
certainty. Mr Cameron has already laid out his own plans for some form of
renegotiation over the UK's membership of the EU assuming a Tory General Election
victory in 2015, to be followed by a national plebiscite on the matter of 2017.
However, given his previous history of reneging on his promises, it is hardly a
surprise hat a majority of voters are generally unconvinced by Mr Cameron's
personal promises on anything, never mind the UK's membership of the European
Union, of which the Prime Minister is reported to be a huge supporter.
Likewise, his fellow Conservative and possible future opponent for the party
leadership, Boris Johnson, is also reported to be an avid reporter of the EU,
as well as the concepts of free movement and open borders from which the City
of London has been a principal beneficiary.
Despite what Mr Johnson and his
supporters may choose to tell the British people, in support of his own
campaigns, both for a parliamentary seat and for the Conservative leadership,
the reality is that Boris Johnson is simply another self-serving privately
educated millionaire, who will do and say whatever it takes in order to achieve
their own selfish personal objectives, the acquisition of power and wealth.
Unfortunately for Boris, his own previous pronouncements, statements and
writings tend to make plain the lie of his so-called personal
Euro-scepticism; pointing instead to a
Conservative politician who is fundamentally wedded to the concept of Britain's
ongoing membership of an all embracing federalist EU, as well as the
outrageously unfounded view that Britain's indigenous workforce are more often
than not the architects of their own misfortune, by virtue of being lazier and
significantly less well educated than their incoming foreign counterparts.
According to one of Boris's oft quoted statistics, around one in four Britons
(or 25%) will leave primary school being unable to read, write, or do basic maths.
Quite whether that particular figure is true or not is unclear, as one doesn't
imagine that every British child is individually tested when leaving primary
school, although the fact that the London mayor chose to use such a generalised
statistic to somehow excuse the use of foreign workers, instead of British born
employees, should perhaps be the more noteworthy point.
But therein lies the main problem
with Boris. For this writer at least, he is first and foremost a fair weather
politician, allowing himself to drift from one populist cause to another,
depending on the direction that the winds of public opinion are blowing, from
the EU, to immigration, to foreign affairs and then onto the economy.
After all it wasn't that long ago
that he was busily berating the likes of David Cameron and Theresa May over the
subject of putting limits on the numbers of migrants coming into the country,
at the same time suggesting that the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens
already within our borders should be given British citizenship, in order to
bring them into mainstream society, an amnesty if you will. Of course one could
only conclude that these hundreds of thousands of newly created legal citizens
would then have been entitled to bring their wives, dependents and extended
families into the country as well, adding a few more hundreds of thousands to
the already overstretched population; and yet Mr Johnson seemed perfectly happy
for this to happen? Fast forward a couple of years and the same Boris Johnson
is now demanding that Mr Cameron and Mrs May should be imposing more stringent
controls on the numbers of migrants coming into our country, presumably because
the national debate has moved on and the public's opinion has changed, so
Boris' position has needed to adapt as well.
Although there's little doubt
that Boris Johnson is an extremely shrewd political operator, much of the
evidence from his time as London mayor suggests that he has not only tried, but
has in part successfully managed to politicise a great deal of that city's
administration, even though tradition demands that certain offices and services
be exempt from party influence. It is also clear that as with a number of other
London based local government authorities, Mr Johnson has successfully managed
to construct a highly loyal team around him, one that is dedicated to
protecting him and his reputation, even if that involves one of them having to
take a political bullet for him occasionally.
However, even though Boris'
cheery, mildly eccentric, "hail fellow well met" persona might play
well with the Conservative party faithful and elements of the wider British
electorate, it remains to be seen whether or not Mr Johnson proves to be a vote
winner or not. Britain has never been short of colourful characters, or mild
eccentrics like Boris Johnson, Magnus Pike, Grayson Perry, Screaming Lord
Sutch, Quentin Crisp, Vivienne Westwood, to name but a few; and we might
occasionally cast a vote for them in local and national elections just for a
laugh or as a protest, but would we really want to give them any real power?
Clearly the voters of London decided to trust Mr Johnson with their economic,
social and political futures, but despite what the Westminster led mainstream
media would have us all believe I'm not so sure that the rest of the country
are quite as gullible as their southern cousins are, when it comes to a choice
of national leadership. Boris Johnson for Conservative Prime Minister? Not
seeing the appeal I'm afraid!
No comments:
Post a Comment