Morning call: pick of the comment

The ten must-read pieces from this morning's newspapers

1. If politicians want to be trusted again, they must learn to listen (Daily Telegraph)

Jeremy Hunt MP, the Tory shadow culture secretary, argues that the internet decentralises power, giving people more control over their lives and allowing them to hold their leaders to account.

2. Justice in pay packets starts at the top. Across the board (Guardian)

Finally, moves are afoot to restrain out-of-control salaries -- in the public sector. But the problem orginates with private firms. Polly Toynbee argues for restrictions across the board, and greater respect for public-sector workers.

3. Voters will always go for Santa, not Scrooge (Times)

Optimism and pessimism will be the dividing line for the next election, argues Rachel Sylvester, looking at Cameron's and Brown's approaches so far.

4. The familiar road to failure in Afghanistan (Financial Times)

Sir Rodric Braithwaite, the former ambassador to Moscow, says Britain must learn the lessons of history in Afghanistan: no one has explained convincingly why we should succeed where the Russians and, previously, the British themselves failed, or why the war will prevent terrorism at home.

5. David Cameron needs to reclaim the centre ground (Independent)

The latest ComRes poll in today's Independent shows that voters still view the Tories as out of touch. The leading article argues that this is because the Conservative message has become increasingly contradictory.

6. Copenhagen: well that made us think, didn't it? (Times)

Agreement was always going to be almost impossible, says David Aaronovitch. But it wasn't a waste of time: it gave us a crash course in eco-education, presenting us with a "map of where we really are" and what needs to be done.

7. If you want to know who's to blame for Copenhagen, look to the US Senate (Guardian)

George Monbiot is less positive, arguing that Barack Obama's attempt to put China in the frame for failure had its origins in the absence of US campaign finance reform. China made problems, but equally the US "demanded concessions while offering nothing".

8. Time to take off the blinkers in business class (Financial Times)

There cannot be one rule for the banks and another for the rest of society, says Michael Skapinker. The banks -- which have behaved petulantly -- must show why they are necessary.

9. Where have all the big beasts gone? (Independent)

Even when Labour was slaughtered in 1983, it had a galaxy of stars and potential leaders. Steve Richards discusses the dearth of stars, which he blames on a lack of party conviction.

10. Factory schools don't give real education (Times)

A ten-hour day could close the attainment gap between state and private, but only if used well, says Anthony Seldon, discussing a scheme by the Sutton Trust to improve the education of those from deprived backgrounds.

 

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter

Picture: ANDRÉ CARRILHO
Show Hide image

Leader: Boris Johnson, a liar and a charlatan

The Foreign Secretary demeans a great office of state with his carelessness and posturing. 

Boris Johnson is a liar, a charlatan and a narcissist. In 1988, when he was a reporter at the Times, he fabricated a quotation from his godfather, an eminent historian, which duly appeared in a news story on the front page. He was sacked. (We might pause here to acknowledge the advantage to a young journalist of having a godfather whose opinions were deemed worthy of appearing in a national newspaper.) Three decades later, his character has not improved.

On 17 September, Mr Johnson wrote a lengthy, hyperbolic article for the Daily Telegraph laying out his “vision” for Brexit – in terms calculated to provoke and undermine the Prime Minister (who was scheduled to give a speech on Brexit in Florence, Italy, as we went to press). Extracts of his “article”, which reads more like a speech, appeared while a terror suspect was on the loose and the country’s threat level was at “critical”, leading the Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, to remark: “On the day of a terror attack where Britons were maimed, just hours after the threat level is raised, our only thoughts should be on service.”

Three other facets of this story are noteworthy. First, the article was published alongside other pieces echoing and praising its conclusions, indicating that the Telegraph is now operating as a subsidiary of the Johnson for PM campaign. Second, Theresa May did not respond by immediately sacking her disloyal Foreign Secretary – a measure of how much the botched election campaign has weakened her authority. Finally, it is remarkable that Mr Johnson’s article repeated the most egregious – and most effective – lie of the EU referendum campaign. “Once we have settled our accounts, we will take back control of roughly £350m per week,” the Foreign Secretary claimed. “It would be a fine thing, as many of us have pointed out, if a lot of that money went on the NHS.”

This was the promise of Brexit laid out by the official Vote Leave team: we send £350m to Brussels, and after leaving the EU, that money can be spent on public services. Yet the £350m figure includes the rebate secured by Margaret Thatcher – so just under a third of the sum never leaves the country. Also, any plausible deal will involve paying significant amounts to the EU budget in return for continued participation in science and security agreements. To continue to invoke this figure is shameless. That is not a partisan sentiment: the head of the UK Statistics Authority, Sir David Norgrove, denounced Mr Johnson’s “clear misuse of official statistics”.

In the days that followed, the chief strategist of Vote Leave, Dominic Cummings – who, as Simon Heffer writes in this week's New Statesman, is widely suspected of involvement in Mr Johnson’s article – added his voice. Brexit was a “shambles” so far, he claimed, because of the ineptitude of the civil service and the government’s decision to invoke Article 50 before outlining its own detailed demands.

There is a fine Yiddish word to describe this – chutzpah. Mr Johnson, like all the other senior members of Vote Leave in parliament, voted to trigger Article 50 in March. If he and his allies had concerns about this process, the time to speak up was then.

It has been clear for some time that Mr Johnson has no ideological attachment to Brexit. (During the referendum campaign, he wrote articles arguing both the Leave and Remain case, before deciding which one to publish – in the Telegraph, naturally.) However, every day brings fresh evidence that he and his allies are not interested in the tough, detailed negotiations required for such an epic undertaking. They will brush aside any concerns about our readiness for such a huge challenge by insisting that Brexit would be a success if only they were in charge of it.

This is unlikely. Constant reports emerge of how lightly Mr Johnson treats his current role. At a summit aiming to tackle the grotesque humanitarian crisis in Yemen, he is said to have astounded diplomats by joking: “With friends like these, who needs Yemenis?” The Foreign Secretary demeans a great office of state with his carelessness and posturing. By extension, he demeans our politics. 

This article first appeared in the 21 September 2017 issue of the New Statesman, The revenge of the left