Boris stays. But can he shake the fallout from 'partygate'?

After 'partygate,' Boris Johnson narrowly escaped a bid to oust him as Prime Minister. But the scale of the Conservative rebellion is raising questions about his ability to govern at a time of increasing economic and social strain.

Leon Neal/AP
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson (left) addresses his Cabinet during his weekly Cabinet meeting on June 7, 2022 in London. Mr. Johnson survived a no-confidence vote in Parliament this week. Critics say the vote has left his ability to govern severely impacted.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson scrambled to patch up his tattered authority on Tuesday after surviving a no-confidence vote that laid bare deep divisions in his Conservative Party and raised serious doubts about how long he can stay in office.

Under party rules, Mr. Johnson is now free from another challenge for a year. But previous prime ministers who have faced no-confidence votes have been terminally damaged – and a growing number of Conservative lawmakers worry that the famously people-pleasing Mr. Johnson is now tarnished by the “partygate” ethics scandal and has become a liability with voters.

Mr. Johnson nevertheless vowed to “get on with the job” and focus on “what matters to the British people” – defined by him as the economy, health care, and crime – after Conservative lawmakers voted by 211 to 148 to support him as leader.

“We are able now to draw a line under the issues that our opponents want to talk about” and “take the country forward,” Mr. Johnson told Cabinet colleagues.

But the scale of the rebellion raised serious questions about his ability to govern at a time of increasing economic and social strain. Former Conservative leader William Hague called on Mr. Johnson to step down, saying “the damage done to his premiership is severe.”

“Words have been said that cannot be retracted, reports published that cannot be erased, and votes have been cast that show a greater level of rejection than any Tory leader has ever endured and survived,” Mr. Hague wrote in a Times of London article whose words were splashed across the British media.

“This is not over,” echoed Philip Dunne, a Conservative lawmaker who voted against Mr. Johnson in Monday’s no-confidence ballot.

The vote was triggered because at least 54 Tory legislators, 15% of the party’s parliamentary caucus, called for a challenge to Mr. Johnson.

Mr. Johnson needed the backing of 180 of the 359 Conservative lawmakers to stay in power. He got more than that – but although he described the win as “convincing,” the rebellion was larger than some of his supporters had predicted.

The margin was narrower than the one his predecessor, Theresa May, got in a 2018 no-confidence vote. She was forced to resign six months later.

“It will come as a big blow. And I think they will worry that this story isn’t over yet,” said Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London. “The reality is that these contests have a habit of exposing quite how weak the authority of a prime minister is.”

The rebellion was also a sign of deep Conservative divisions, less than three years after Mr. Johnson led the party to its biggest election victory in decades. Most British newspapers were in little doubt that it was bad news for a leader who has always before shown an uncommon ability to shrug off scandals.

The Conservative-supporting Daily Telegraph announced “Hollow victory tears Tories apart,” while The Times called Mr. Johnson “a wounded victor,” and the left-leaning Daily Mirror said bluntly: “Party’s over, Boris.”

But some staunch supporters tried to move past the vote on Tuesday. Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab said the party should “draw a line in the sand after this vote.”

“It was clearly and decisively won,” he said.

The vote followed months of brewing discontent over the prime minister’s ethics and judgment that centered on revelations of lawbreaking parties in the prime minister’s office when Britain was under lockdowns during the coronavirus pandemic.

In a report last month on the “partygate” scandal, civil service investigator Sue Gray described alcohol-fueled bashes held by Downing Street staff members in 2020 and 2021, when pandemic restrictions prevented U.K. residents from socializing or even visiting dying relatives. Ms. Gray said Mr. Johnson and senior officials must bear responsibility for “failures of leadership and judgment” that created a culture of rule-breaking in government.

Mr. Johnson also was fined 50 pounds ($63) by police for attending one party, making him the first prime minister sanctioned for breaking the law while in office.

The prime minister said he was “humbled” and took “full responsibility” – but went on to defend his attendance at parties as necessary for staff morale and call some of the “partygate” criticism unfair.

Mr. Johnson still faces a parliamentary ethics probe over “partygate,” and his government is also under intense pressure to ease the pain of skyrocketing energy and food bills, while managing the fallout from Britain’s exit from the European Union.

Polls give the left-of-center opposition Labour Party a lead nationally, and Mr. Johnson will face more pressure if the Conservatives lose special elections later this month for two parliamentary districts, called when incumbent Tory lawmakers were forced out by sex scandals.

Mr. Bale said Mr. Johnson would likely fight back with tax cuts and other policies designed to appeal to his party’s right-leaning base.

“The problem with that is that it’s proposing, if you like, policy solutions to a personality problem,” he said. “It looks from opinion polls that the public have turned against Boris Johnson in particular, and that’s in part what’s dragging the Conservative Party down.”

This story was reported by The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Boris stays. But can he shake the fallout from 'partygate'?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today