The New Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
From time to time, I have written what can broadly be classified as political posts. Most of these have been designed to present an overview to those readers who live outside of the UK and may not be familiar with the subtleties of British politics. Furthermore, I am not affiliated to any of the major UK political parties and broadly see myself as politically homeless at present. This post is a brief overview on today’s change in UK Prime Minister and is intended to explain how this situation has occurred and what happens next.
In the 2017 General Election the Conservative Party managed to bolster its reduced numbers in the House of Parliament by doing a deal with the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland, thus having sufficient seats to form a government. The leader of the Conservative party was at that time Theresa May, so by default she became the 54th Prime Minister of the UK. However, the issue of Brexit currently falls outside of traditional party lines and therefore cannot be seen purely as a “Left versus Right” problem. The Conservative Party has been and remains divided over Brexit and Theresa May has been fighting a running battle not only with opposition parties but with half of her own backbenchers. Due to current parliamentary arithmetic she has been unable to find any support for her Brexit Withdrawal Agreement and effectively lost the ability to lead her own party. Her departure from the office of Prime Minister is down to her own party, who concluded that she couldn’t deliver Brexit in a manner deemed suitable nor win a General Election. Hence, she was politically forced to go.
So in recent weeks there has been a “battle” to become the next leader of the Conservative party because that leader will by default become the next Prime Minister. Needless to say early opinion polls showed the Ex-Foreign Secretary and former Mayor of London Boris Johnson was heading for a substantial victory. Yesterday it was announced that he had won the leadership race against the current Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, by 92,153 to 46,656 votes. Now, it is very important to stress that this was not in anyway, a public vote. This was a vote of Conservative Party members; the members of the general public who are sufficiently engaged politically to pay their subscriptions fees and join the Conservative Party. It wasn’t a vote for Prime Minister but a vote on who would be the new leader of the party. But because that party is currently in government, then that new party leader automatically steps into the role of Prime Minister. Therefore the leader of the 5th largest economy in the world was decided by 138,809 people. The current electorate of the UK is 46.8 million people.
As of this afternoon, Theresa May has visited The Queen and formally resigned her premiership. Boris Johnson will subsequently have an audience with Her Majesty and state his intentions to form a government. Once these formalities have been addressed, he will return to 10 Downing Street and take residence. His next immediate duty is to sign the “letters of last resort”. These are four identically worded handwritten letters from the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom to the commanding officers of the four British ballistic missile submarines. They contain instructions to retaliate or not to retaliate against a nuclear strike, or for the Commander to use their own judgement or to place the vessel under command of an Allied Power. Once this has been done, then it is a question of politics. No doubt the new Prime Minister will make a formal statement to the British public before then proceeding with forming a new cabinet. Political opponents will be dismissed and those loyal, or invaluable will be given new positions. It should be noted that Boris Johnson is a controversial figure within his own party. That combined with current Brexit divisions means that some MPs will not work with him. Several Ministers have already resigned.
What happens in the next few weeks of Prime Minister Johnson’s term of office is much harder to predict. He has stated that he means to return to the EU and “re-open Brexit negotiations, although there is little or no political will from Europe to do such things. There is still very strong political resistance against “no deal” in parliament across all parties. Will there be any tangible movement on Brexit? I’m not so sure. Then there is the issue of international relationships and due to the shadow of Brexit, will there be a shift towards the greater ties with the US and its current incumbent president. There some in the UK that would like to see a Prime Minister that followed suite with President Trump and pursued a similarly unorthodox approach to government. One that is happy to break with tradition and existing perceived wisdom. Yet there are others both at a parliamentary level and as registered voters that are deeply sceptical of Boris Johnson, his political track record, associations and overall approach to politics.
If the new Prime Minster finds himself stymied on all fronts it may well lead to another general election. There is the possibility of a vote of no confidence by MPs or Prime Minister Johnson may well take a calculated risk to hold an election himself to give his position political legitimacy and to seek to increase the Conservative majority in parliament. It should be noted that one of the reasons that Johnson was voted into office by party members, is because he’s one of the few politicians that is recognised nationally. Because a substantial percentage of the UK electorate are not greatly politically engaged, he has the advantage of brand recognition and is perceived as affable and a charismatic. Therefore Conservative party members hope he be able successfully win a further term of office for the current government. Yet the recent Local Council Elections along with the European Election showed that the country remains divided and broadly entrenched in its political positions. I’m not sure if such a gamble would payoff or make any significant difference to the parliamentary landscape.
Effectively it is now just a question of time and waiting to see where Prime Minister tries to go politically. Will he pursue a dogmatic approach to Brexit or will he prove to be more pragmatic and flexible to get this extremely difficult matter resolved? Or will he be politically consumed by his Premiership as his predecessor? As for the man himself and the controversy surrounding him, I will leave that to others to analyse as they have far more information at their disposal than I. Here is a link to an article in today’s Washington Post by Ian Dunt is the editor of Politics.co.uk, in which he scrutinises Boris Johnson and reflects upon both his political and private personas.
UK Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer has resigned and intends to leave office before the parliamentary summer recess. By then Andy Burnham will more than likely be voted leader of the Labour Party and by default will become the new Prime Minister. Due to the current size of the incumbent Government’s majority, there is no pressing reason for a General Election that the UK’s right wing tabloid press is currently calling for. Whether this provides the Government with the reset they’re hoping for when Parliament reconvenes in autumn remains to be seen. With seven Prime Ministers coming and going in a decade, there are some serious questions to be asked about the current state of UK politics. However, the mechanics of contemporary politics, the decline of clearly defined ideologies and the people that seek elected office to be our leaders are only half of the problem. The other major impediment to the UK’s democracy functioning properly is the electorate.
Andy Burnham successfully won the Makerfield by-election yesterday, returning him to the House of Commons as a member of Parliament after holding the position of Mayor of Manchester for the past nine years. Prior to this, Burnham was Labour MP for Leigh from 2001 and 2017. He served in both the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown administrations and has held such senior governmental posts as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Secretary of State for Health. His return to Parliamentary politics is likely to result in a leadership challenge to incumbent Prime Minister Keir Starmer. When speaking after winning yesterday’s by-election Burnham spoke of “a final chance for change” the current trajectory of the present Labour Government. However, I don’t wish to focus on any of this at present. I am far more interested in the above picture, taken as the results were announced and what it says about UK politics.
The UK Government has formerly announced its intention to ban under-16s from using social media. This is due to increasing public pressure that “something must be done” about the perceived iniquities of many online platforms. However, as with most complex social problems of this nature, no one has any clear or practical ideas as to what that “something” is. It remains a nebulous, non-specific panacea and clearly someone else’s job to identify and implement. As ever, why choose a nuanced and multifaceted solution to a complex problem, when it is far easier and politically expedient to just “ban” something. The former requires effort and a degree of thinking. If such an approach fails it also means that those who came up with it now carry the can. The latter dumps the problem in the lap of various third parties, who can then be conveniently blamed when the ill conceived policy fails.
Every Thursday, Mrs P volunteers at a food bank that is run from a local church; Avery Hill Christian Fellowship. Today there was a shortage of staff so I agreed to help out. It proved to be an equitable arrangement as she collated the various orders and I packed the bags and took them to the respective clients. The food bank itself is organised and administered by the Trussell Trust, a UK based NGO and charity providing emergency food and support to people locked in poverty. It is open for 2 to 3 hours a week depending upon demand. During today’s session we served just six people. Some weeks its can be triple that amount. Upon closure, a member of staff from the Trussel Trust did a stock take and collated a list of what was needed. This is provided by various local church communities via parishioners donations, as well as local supermarkets who have an arrangement with the trust to provide surplus stock or good approaching the end of their sales window.
Under the First Past the Post electoral system, the candidate(s) receiving the highest number of votes in each constituency are elected. This system is used in the UK during general elections and in some local elections, such as those recently conducted in England. An alternative approach is the system of proportional representation, which aims to allocate seats in a manner that reflects the popularity of various parties. Both the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd in Wales employ systems of Proportional Representation. Historically, first-past-the-post has been seen as advantageous for the Conservative and Labour parties. It poses challenges for smaller parties whose votes are distributed evenly across different regions, making it difficult for them to secure seats. This dynamic effectively prevents potential competitors to the Conservatives and Labour from succeeding electorally. Consequently, due to this situation, voters may hesitate to support these smaller parties from the outset.
There are local elections being held across the UK today. Voters in Scotland and Wales will elect representatives to their respective national parliaments, while in England the voting is for local councils and regional mayors. These are the first major elections to be held in the UK since the 2024 General Election which saw the Conservative government of fourteen years, fall to the Labour Party. Midterm elections are often a litmus test for how the electorate think the national government are performing although local issues are also a major factor. The consensus among political journalists and commentators is that the incumbent government is polling extremely poorly and will subsequently face a backlash. In recent years the UK has seen a decline in traditional two party voting with Reform UK and the Greens gaining significant traction among the electorate. Hence today’s elections may well see both these parties make significant gains.
Our household is currently trying to reduce our monthly overheads in response to the ever increasing cost of living. April is not that far away and a great many service providers will increase their rates and tariff as the new financial year begins. Then there is the ongoing effects, both direct and indirect, of inflation to consider. Although the UK inflation rate is dropping, currently sitting at 3.4% in December 2025, food inflation remains higher at 4.5%. Being based in the UK, salaries and billed services tend to be administered monthly. You get paid usually at the end of the months and bills can turn up at any point, depending upon when you started a service. Any payments coming from central government, such as state pension or other benefits, are paid every 4 weeks. This means that there are 13 payments in a year. I thought it pertinent to clarify this point as other countries, such as the USA, favour a fortnightly financial cycle. Hence as a household we work around a monthly budget.
I don’t know if you have noticed that there are quite a lot of companies that have names taken from Tolkien’s Legendarium. At first glance, this seems innocuous enough. Tolkien’s writings grew in popularity over the seventies and eighties but since the release of the film trilogy at the start of the twenty-first century, his work has become more well known and been assimilated into our wider pop culture. Hence, it seems quite logical that a startup tech company, for example, would choose a name from his writings. No doubt the founders grew up reading The Lord of the Rings and are fans. That all seems plausible. However if you take a further look, it gets somewhat more complex. Here are four companies that have Tolkien based names.
“Managed decline” is a phrase that refers to the processes associated with the end of a specific lifecycle, with the goal of minimizing costs or other forms of loss. The concept originated in business where it referred to the management of companies and industries. More recently it is used in wider contexts. The concept gained prominence with regard to urban policy, particularly in the UK during the eighties when several major cities suffered economic and political collapse. Of late, the term has been applied to the UK, encompassing a systematic weakening of the economy, social structures, and cultural values, as well as its global political and diplomatic force. In each case, managed decline involves making strategic choices about resource allocation and accepting the consequences of those decisions. It is a complex issue with ethical and practical considerations, often sparking debate about the best way to address decline and reverse the process.
I still maintain a legacy presence on Twitter/X and I follow my local MP (member of Parliament) Louie French. It’s not something I especially relish as I am not a supporter of the Conservative party (or any other) and I did not vote for him in the last election. I just like to know what he is up to as he is the political representative for our constituency. As the Conservatives are out of power at present, to all intent and purposes, Mr French is a backbench MP although he has a minor position as Shadow Parliamentary Undersecretary (Culture, Media and Sport). However, with that being said he is hardly a key member of the shadow cabinet. Hence he focuses on constituency work and that which is generated by his shadow posting. He will also lend his voice, when required, to any major policy decision or statement made by his party.
Sunday 6th April is the start of a new financial year, here in the UK. According to data from numerous financial and economic institutions, an estimated million plus households will be facing annual increases of £400 to £500 as the proverbial “cost of living” goes up. Everything from Council Tax to Mobile and Broadband costs are being increased. Future cost hikes are expected in our energy and water utilities. As bills start going up across the country today, average wages remain stagnant. Middle-income and poorer households have been worst hit by this wage related issue. Hence the tabloid press have labelled the start of the new financial year as “Awful April”. Hyperbole aside, this is a very real issue which due to its complex, global causes, doesn’t have a quick fix solution.
I consider myself to be a grounded, rational individual. I am not excessively emotional. I like facts, data and reason as opposed to hyperbole, rhetoric and bluster. That being said, I am aware that the world is an imperfect place. Opinions are often not based upon empirical fact but personal perspective. Hence many people experience reality differently to me. They are driven by their feelings and other factors. However, despite these differences in philosophy, for most of my life the world has remained functional and over time slowly improved in subtle ways. Deference to expertise, a sense of community and basic pragmatism meant that people broadly pulled in the same direction. Of course there has always been dissent but it has been within a stable system. However, of late I feel that this era is now finally over. Things are no longer stable. We live in an uncertain world.
Newspapers were an integral part of UK culture in the seventies. During the week, they were delivered prior to going to work, so you would peruse them over breakfast. Alternatively you would buy one en route to your place of employment and read it on the bus or train. In a world before 24 hour, rolling news, they were the primary means of keeping the public abreast of events and as such, enjoyed a substantial audience. On occasions a newspaper story could make or break a political career or launch a crusading campaign to address a social ill. Newspapers were a force to be reckoned with and therefore a significant part of the socio-political landscape. However, due to a strong union presence within the workforce, the UKs newspapers often lagged behind other industries with regard to the technology.
The First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system used in the United Kingdom, as well as in several other countries such as the US and India, has both advantages and disadvantages. However, despite being a simple and straightforward system it has been abandoned by many democracies in favour of more proportional and equitable methods. The primary criticism against FPTP is that it allows a minority of the electorate to return a majority government. Since 1935, there have been majority governments 90% of the time, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. At present, the current UK government has a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share.
Politicians have a distinct way of talking when being interviewed or giving a press conference. It is often characterised by a strategic use of language, centred around rhetorical devices, persuasion techniques and a careful framing of messages. Direct answers to questions are usually avoided, with tangential responses being preferred. Opinions and specific perspectives are frequently presented as facts. There is also a propensity to focus on “problems” and apportioning blame, rather than “solutions”. It’s important to note that the use of language in politics is a complex and dynamic process influenced by various factors, including cultural context, media dynamics, and the evolving political landscape. Different politicians may employ different communication strategies based on their individual styles and objectives. Here are some key aspects of how politicians use language:
The United Kingdom is one of the few democratic countries in the world that does not have a single, written constitution. Others include Canada, New Zealand and Israel. To date, its constitution is a combination of written and unwritten sources, including statutes, common law, conventions and somewhat esoterically, royal prerogatives. The reason for this is predominantly historical. Since 1688, Britain has not experienced a revolution or regime change, which often leads to a constitutional initiative, such as the American or the French Revolution. Britain’s constitution has evolved slowly over time under relative stability and as such, it has never been deemed necessary to list the fundamental laws and principles of the country's political system.
On Friday 15th September the former actor and comedian turned internet social commentator, Russell Brand, released a video on his YouTube channel addressing allegations about his personal life, ahead of a forthcoming UK current affairs documentary. Brand vehemently denied what he described as “very serious criminal allegations”. The following day Channel Four broadcast “Russell Brand: In Plain Sight”. During the course of the program Brand was accused by one woman of rape and by three others of sexual assaults, and emotional abuse between 2006 and 2013. During the course of the week, further claims have been made against him and that his “predatory” behaviour was an open secret within the TV industry. Furthermore, women would warn each other in advance if they had any dealing with him. All of which has played out against a mixture of broadsheet analysis, tabloid hyperbole, performative politics and internet bluster.
For those who live outside of the UK, let me categorically state that Brexit has broken British politics. Prior to 2016, national politics still broadly functioned along traditional party political lines, with income and class substantially determining voter allegiance. The big three cities (London, Birmingham and Liverpool) maintained their liberal dispositions and Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales were dominated by their regional politics. Brexit changed all this creating fault lines that fell outside of the existing political status quo. Opinions differed based upon where you lived, how politically literate you were and even education. Your party political allegiance no longer indicated what stance you took on this matter. Furthermore, the discourse around this complex subject was quickly debased into a bipartisan culture war that was toxic and dangerous.
Okay, keep up as there’s a lot of ground to cover. The UK government is currently suffering in the opinion polls and after 13 years in office, is facing potential oblivion at the next general election. In an attempt to shore up support among the party faithful, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, is currently pursuing a hardline with regard to immigration. According to Ipsos, as a political issue about 29% of the electorate consider immigration to be a major problem. The remainder either think current levels are manageable or have no substantive view on the matter. However, as a “culture war” issue that can be weaponized by the tabloid press, which often has direct links to the Conservative Party in the UK, immigration is a hill to die upon. Hence you will find a lot of rhetoric that is anti-immigration and any contrary view is tarred with trite pejorative terms such as “lefty”, “liberal” and “woke”.
Last April, the Election Act 2022 became law within the UK. The Act introduced a requirement for all those voting in-person to produce photo identification when attending a polling station. This is the first time that such an ID has been required. Prior to this, voters could either bring their polling card to verify their identity at the polling station, or confirm their registered address from the electoral roll with staff. Now a UK driving licence or passport are considered the primary means of identity. A list of additional photo identification that has been deemed acceptable, is available on the UK government website. For those members of the electorate who do not have any of the qualifying ID, there is a Voter Authority Certificate available, which can be applied for online. This photo ID is linked to the applicants National Insurance Number. For further impartial information on photo ID and registering to vote, visit the The Electoral Commission website.
I am writing this post from the perspective of a UK citizen, but the sentiments expressed are applicable to anyone who lives in a country where you have democratically elected local political representation. IE someone who is supposed to advocate on behalf of your community or for you personally as the duly elected political representative. Here in the UK, the country is divided into 650 constituencies, each returning one Member of Parliament. Irrespective of whether you voted for your MP or whether you support the political party that they belong to, they are obliged to represent you and advocate on your behalf, if you request it. Such is the relationship in principle between constituents and MPs in the UK. It is important to be aware that your local MP is not a delegate whose sole purpose is to represent majority constituency views. Under the UK political system, an MP makes decisions on behalf of constituents and can take a position counter to local opinion, if they feel that is in the best interest of the constituency.
It is difficult to write about the state of UK politics with any degree of intellectual rigour when the entire situation has become so utterly farcical. My initial reaction to the recent departure of Liz Truss after just 45 days in office, was to laugh with abject scorn and derision. She was destined to fail due to utter lack of ability. However, there is still the outstanding matter of the country lacking a credible and functional government to address inflation, the cost of living crisis and resolve all the issues stemming from Brexit. There are problematic national and international events taking place that need addressing. A united, pragmatic and empathetic government is required to solve both these short term and long term needs. Sadly, the governing party is riven with opposing factions and there is no commonly held policy or underlying ideology. The PM may well have changed but the underlying flaws remain.
Conservative Party has been in government in the UK since 2010. During that time there have been three Prime Ministers. Today we moved onto the fourth. After Boris Johnson resigned on 7th July, the nation has had to endure a tedious two month process in which the Conservative Party elects a new leader. That person then becomes the PM by default. Many readers unfamiliar with the UK political system may be surprised that a change of leader has not led to a General Election. That is because the Conservative Party still holds a parliamentary majority of 71 elected Members of Parliament. Hence it is still constitutionally quite able to govern, despite Boris Johnson being forced from office. Therefore party members vote for a new party leader who gets the top job by default. Remember that in the UK, the Prime Minister is not the head of state and does not have the executive powers of a President.
I try to keep my thoughts on political matters to a minimum here at Contains Moderate Peril, mainly because UK politics and the current state of discourse associated with it has become an absolute shit show in recent years. Brexit broke traditional politics and has made matters far more tribal and partisan. The two main parties have declined from having clear ideologies, identities and manifestos, to becoming either a lobby group for the specific demographic group that supports them, or a conflicted, divided and schizoid shadow of its former self. I’ll let you work out which is which. Politics is no longer about governing a nation for the benefit of all its citizens. Now you simply pick a side and join the ongoing culture war against everyone and everything else. This rotten system produces rotten leaders. Hence, when Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson became Prime Minister in December 2019, it was clear that the nation was taking a major risk on such a man. His failings as a politician and a person are a matter of public record for anyone who has the eyes to see them.
The title for this post is a quote from The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien. I’ve used it as a verbal cue to try and give readers an overview of the point I’m striving to convey. Because I want to talk about modern life in western civilization, specifically its complexity and increasing uncertainty. If you’re extremely wealthy you can mitigate these two points but I’m working on the premise that most of the people who read Contains Moderate Peril are not. The blogging community, of which I am a participant, is a diverse group but from what I’ve observed it’s not populated by millionaires. In fact most of the people I know, both online and in person, are just holding down a job, trying to keep a roof over their head and pay the bills. Often they’re doing the job they do in default of anything else and they’re at the very least ambivalent towards it. The pandemic has also brought home how fragile so-called “normality” is. Modern politics are also volatile and life in general just doesn’t seem as certain as it was twenty years ago.
The Conservative Party successfully held onto their “safe seat” of Old Bexley and Sidcup in yesterday’s closely watched by-election. However their overall majority was reduced by more than half amid a very low voter turnout. Conservative councillor Louie French becomes the country’s newest MP after winning 11,189 votes, more than 50 per cent of those cast, in the seat previously held by the former cabinet minister James Brokenshire. Mr Brokenshire died in October from lung cancer aged 53. The closest challenger was Labour’s Daniel Francis, who secured 6,711 as the Tory majority fell from nearly 19,000 to 4,478, the equivalent of a vote share swing of 10 per cent to Labour. Turnout in the constituency was just 34%, down from the almost 70% who voted in the 2019 general election.
Political events in the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup have moved forward in the last few weeks, following on from the death of incumbent MP James Brokenshire on 8th of October. Although no formal announcement has yet been made regarding the date of the forthcoming by-election, the major political parties have started announcing the names of their respective candidates. There were initial concerns among some constituents that this safe Conservative Party seat may have been used as a means of parachuting in a candidate favoured by central office, rather than one determined by the local Conservative Association. Fortunately, that has not been the case. The UK Government currently enjoys a parliamentary majority of 79 seats and is therefore not in any urgent need of fast pathing further political allies.
Roger Edwards
Yesterday afternoon, Nigel Farage the Member of Parliament for Clacton and leader of the Reform Party, held a press conference in which he declared that he would be resigning his seat and thus triggering a by-election. He cited the following list of grievances that have led to him making this decision. That the Parliamentary standards investigations were being politicised, the media and other parties were conducting a coordinated campaign against him and that he had endured years of threats and physical attacks. He further asserted that his family’s privacy and safety had been breached as well. He finished by alleging that the political system was repeatedly changing rules to obstruct Reform and that he was the most attacked politician in the UK. Rather than be judged by the legacy media and the “establishment”, he would rather put the issue of his political integrity to the electorate of Clacton. He even offered to pay for the cost of the by-election.