125. THEMS THE BREAKS - When a Resignation Isn’t a Resignation
Like many people *lucky* enough to be able to follow the news all morning on Thursday 7th July I waited in anticipation for the promised resignation of Prime Minister Boris Johnson, following two days of high profile resignations and the de facto collapse of his government. That he was going to resign was, like everything his government has done since 2019, leaked prematurely to the press along with the expectation-lowering message that although he was resigning he wouldn't actually be going anywhere until a new leader of the Conservative Party, and Prime Minister, was chosen, possibly months from now.
Sure enough, despite hours of speculation regarding the untenability of such a position, out he came around half twelve and told us that it was the will of the parliamentary Conservative Party that there should be a new leader. He said he would be sad to go and that "no one is remotely indispensable" in politics, but most of the speech was him bragging about all his perceived accomplishments as leader and the fact he would stay in place while the new "Darwinian" leadership contest takes place. At no point did he address the reasons why so many of his colleagues had resigned throughout the week and what it was that had made his leadership untenable. At no point did he apologise or hold himself accountable for anything. In fact he doubled down on his false claims about doing a great job on covid and the "levelling up" that no one has actually experienced yet. There was no evidence of any remorse, learning, or changed behaviour. It was just a party political broadcast with no new substantive content beyond what had already been headlined by the leaks. We could have spent the hours of speculation waiting for a lectern to be put up outside Downing Street and then listening to Johnson's empty words getting on with our lives, and government could have got on with actually running the country and choosing a new leader without delay.
It was a disappointing speech and damp squib ending to the drama of the preceding days. Before his resignation he was Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party, and after his resignation he remained Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party. No substantive change to reality occurred through his resignation and I was left genuinely wondering if he had actually even resigned?
But then I remembered that my own resignation was even worse than Boris Johnson's. Johnson, at least, will be gone by September or October. Two or three months from now. And the process of finding a new leader hopefully begins fairly swiftly. I resigned from my own job on January 1st and am still here now until the end of the term. Effectively I made the same argument Johnson did: I will go but for stability of our exam classes and to ensure a smooth transition to a new department (the other member of my department is also leaving this year) I shall stay until the summer. I wondered why my own slow resignation - making my statement to the Head in January and then still attending work in exactly the same way that I attended before my resignation for the last seven months - seemed completely acceptable to me and yet Johnson's far less lengthy suggestion seemed so egregious.
The answer was obvious: I was actually resigning. I was resigning out of personal choice, and my resignation would impact on my school negatively because they did not want me to go and my leaving would cause various inconveniences and problems for them. By offering to stay out my final two terms of school I was giving them plenty of time to resolve those issues, with my help wherever needed, and keeping them informed of my intentions so that they could plan strategically for the future without interruption of service. I hadn't been fired. Being fired, or asked to leave, is fundamentally different because if you ask me to leave - if you fire me - and my response is to stick around for seven more months then I have clearly not understood the message. And if I have been fired because of failings in my role, or because my being there was somehow damaging or dangerous, then my choosing to ignore that firing by remaining in post would actually be to the detriment of the school. It would give me seven more months to continue to fail or cause whatever damage I had been causing that led to my termination.
We call what Boris Johnson did a resignation, but it wasn't a resignation. It was a firing. Against his will, Johnson was told he was no longer capable of performing the job and therefore had to leave. The way he dealt with the Chris Pincher scandal was the last straw, but there were so many prior scandals, lies, and incompetence under his leadership that it had become clear he was a busted brand. He could not command the confidence of his party, or of the voting public anymore. They wanted him gone.
Imagine a different scenario: Johnson, in this imaginary example a fairly decent PM, decides he doesn't want to be Prime Minister anymore. He misses journalism and wants to spend more time with his family. He realises the timing isn't perfect. War in Ukraine, cost of living crisis, ongoing pandemic. But he needs to prioritise his mental health and happiness and recognises he won't be a great Prime Minister if his heart isn't in it anymore. In such a scenario it might make sense to arrange for a slow withdrawal as a new leader is found to replace him. He could announce his resignation and a timescale and it would all be perfectly reasonable, maybe even honourable.
But that isn't what happened.
What happened was he was kicked out because he couldn't do the job and had presided over scandal after scandal.
It was only a resignation because of the face-saving convention we have allowed for all fired politicians to enact a little fantasy that they are leaving by their own volition. The "resignation letter", often written for them by the press secretary of the person who fired them. They weren't pushed, they jumped. And we all allow the fantasy because it seems polite. It even seems harmless - why not allow them to leave with some dignity? We all know, after all, what the so-called resignation really means.
But perhaps this institutional muddying of the truth is indicative of one of the many problems with modern politics: it leaves open a door for those without scruples to discard truth all together, or pick the truth that suits them best. Johnson has been doing this his whole career. Lie after lie after convenient lie. Repeat the claim over and over so much it doesn't matter whether it is true anymore because it feels true. And if this really is a resignation and not a firing, as the repeated language tells us it is, then Johnson seems well within his rights to do the honourable thing and see out his job until a suitable replacement is chosen.
But he isn't within his rights. When you acknowledge the truth behind the misleading conventional language this isn't a resignation. It is a dismissal. Boris Johnson has been fired. And any suggestion of his calmly staying in place in the role is a wilful and bullish rejection of those basic facts. A break from reality that leaves the country dangerously exposed to several more months of this demonstrably reckless Prime Minister's continuing deceptions, failing and scandal.
Author: DaN McKee
My book - AUTHENTIC DEMOCRACY: An Ethical Justification of Anarchism - is available HERE , from the publisher, and from all good booksellers. Read my Anarchist Studies journal paper on Anarchism and Character Education here. For everything else DaN McKee related: www.everythingdanmckee.com