Politics: when thieves fall out

By Richard North - April 24, 2021

In a rare moment of candour, former Labour MP and now Telegraph columnist Tom Harris acknowledges that the press pack is “addicted to the soap opera of politics rather than to its substance”.

We didn’t really need him to state the obvious but it helps to have someone else say it for a change, especially as it has never been more obvious than with the current political saga engulfing the English media, summed up in the Telegraph headline: “Dominic Cummings declares war on Boris Johnson”.

Normally, the machinations of Cummings & Co are of very little interest. But when two of the most odious people in English politics start to fall out, one can only sit back, order industrial quantities of popcorn and enjoy the fireworks. If Johnson is not to be brought down by the substance, let him fall to the perennial soap opera that English politics has become.

As to the detail, this is classic “he says, she says” stuff, the nature of which the Westminster press bubble seem to delight in setting out, picking out a cast of characters such as Henry Newman, to illustrate quite what a ghastly crew is running the government these days.

We met Newman in his Open Europe days when his stupidity amongst men already marked him out for greater things, a man whose main success in life to that date had been to demonstrate that he was unable to understand the depths of his own stupidity.

Unsurprisingly, this venal creature is now part of Johnson’s “kitchen cabinet” – styled as one of his “three musketeers”. Ignorance combined with ocean-going stupidity seem to be primary requirements for preference in this government. Newman’s strong showing in these respects go a long way to explaining why the prime minister’s administration is so shambolic, constantly displaying its inability to grasp the detail which is such an essential part of good governance.

The current soap opera seems to centre on the stock-in-trade of the Westminster bubble – the “leak”. In this case, though, we seem to be dealing with multiple leaks, one of which concerns text messages to Dyson, with Johnson doing his “Jim’ll fix it” impression, sent to the doyen of empty vessels, Laura Kuenssberg, infester-in-chief of BBC television news.

This particular sub-plot in the ever-expanding soap opera has had Johnson’s director of communications (DOC), Jack Doyle, briefing the media that a “bitter” Cummings was responsible for the leak.

It is this which has brought the incandescent “Dom” out into the open, with a rare blogpost – rare in the sense that this one doesn’t ramble on for several thousands words dispensing tedium with a skill that only a staggering egotist like Cummings could achieve.

In a remarkably succinct (for Dom) 1100 words, Cummings absolutely denies being the source of this leak. In a typically forthright manner, he challenges Johnson to show the Cabinet Secretary on his own phone when the incriminating messages were sent to him, in order for him to have passed them on.

“It will therefore be easy to establish at least if I was ever sent these messages”, writes Cummings, who adds that would be happy to publish or give to the Cabinet Secretary the PM/Dyson messages that he does have, which concerned ventilators, bureaucracy and covid policy – not tax issues.

In the manner of things, though, this is only the warm-up. We then come to the “leak of leaks”, concerning the unauthorised disclosure last October of details of high level discussions over a second lockdown were leaked to the media. These details effectively bounced Johnson into a new shutdown, with the leaker being dubbed in the facile style of the Westminster commentariat: “the chatty rat”.

With Cummings also being fingered for this leak, he delivers a robust rebuttal, starting with a reminder that, last year, there was a meeting between the PM, Cabinet Secretary, the Director of Communications and himself regarding the leak.

The Cabinet Secretary apparently told the PM that the leak was neither Cummings nor the then Director of Communications and that “all the evidence definitely leads to Henry Newman and others in that office”.

In what could prove to be a very dangerous assertion for Johnson, Cummings then asserts that the prime minister was “very upset about this”, confiding with Cummings that, “If Newman is confirmed as the leaker then I will have to fire him, and this will cause me very serious problems with Carrie as they’re best friends”. After a pause Cummings claims that Johnson suggested getting the Cabinet Secretary “to stop the leak inquiry”.

In Cummings’s rendition, he told Johnson that this was “mad” and “totally unethical”, that he had ordered the inquiry himself and authorised the Cabinet Secretary to use more invasive methods than are usually applied to leak inquiries because of the seriousness of the leak.

He also claims to have told him that he could not possibly cancel an inquiry about a leak that affected millions of people, just because it might implicate his girlfriend’s friends. He says he refused to try to persuade the Cabinet Secretary to stop the inquiry and instead encouraged him to conduct the inquiry without any concern for political ramifications.

Shortly afterwards the Cabinet Secretary authorised the PM’s then Official Spokesman to tell the media that his inquiry had shown that neither Cummings nor the then Director of Communications were the “lockdown leakers” and he confirmed to Cummings in writing that he had so instructed the PM’s then Official Spokesman (who subsequently left).

Johnson himself confirmed in writing that the leak inquiry had shown that neither Cummings nor the then Director of Communications were the leaker, describing rumours to this effect as “total bullshit”.

Writes Cummings: “The PM therefore knows that I was not the source of the leak and that the Cabinet Secretary authorised the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman to tell the media this, yet he has now authorised his DOC to make this accusation”.

Nor has Cummings finished here. He moves swiftly on to the “flat leak”, noting that the Prime Minister’s DOC has also made accusations regarding himself and leaks concerning the PM’s renovation of his flat.

Writes Cummings: “The PM stopped speaking to me about this matter in 2020 as I told him I thought his plans to have donors secretly pay for the renovation were unethical, foolish, possibly illegal and almost certainly broke the rules on proper disclosure of political donations if conducted in the way he intended”. He refused to help Johnson organise the payments.

Concluding his blogpost, there is something of the Johnny Mercer naivety where he comments that “it is sad to see the PM and his office fall so far below the standards of competence and integrity the country deserves”. Mercer had just worked out that politics was “a bit of a cesspit” and now Cummings is questioning the “standards of competence and integrity” of the PM and his office.

On this basis, the BBC has Cummings launching “a blistering attack” on his old boss, questioning his “competence and integrity”. That’s a fair enough summary, but when was Johnson any different?

Johnson is now in a lockdown of his own, trying to play down the significance of recent events, declaring: “I don’t think people give a monkey’s, to be frank, about who is briefing what to who”.

Under normal circumstances, I would tend to agree but here we have the closest and most authoritative indication of how pervasive is the influence of Johnson’s paramour on matters of state, and how personal issues are driving the prime minister’s agenda.

Since his general incompetence and mendacity doesn’t seem to be damaging Johnson, one can only hope that these revelations do have an effect. In most instances, such accusations should take a significant toll so maybe, at last, we might see some of the Teflon wear off.