Johnson at 10: The Inside Story: The Bestselling Political Biography of the Year

Product Information

The third is a moment in which Seldon and Newell analyse one of the elements in Johnson’s downfall. This is what they say: A myth peddled that he was the best leader given the toughest brief and any failures are to do with others (Trump often blames is failures on his predecessors). Evidence proves his personal floors were such even if he had become PM at the 1st time of asking, it would likely still have been a disaster. The final chapter was gripping as the administration fell and all Johnson's personal failings caught up with him.

During one of many episodes of derangement in Downing Street, Johnson is to be found raving: “I am meant to be in control. I am the führer. I’m the king who takes the decisions.” The would-be great dictator was never in control because he was incapable of performing even some of the most basic functions of a leader. After worrying in his first few months that he would end up being the briefest PM in history ( that honour fell to his successor, on whom Seldon is presumably only preparing a pamphlet rather than a full book), Johnson then assumed that with Brexit done, life would be relatively plain-sailing. A desperate desire to hold court/power over his court. In some way BJ revelled in the chaos of having three different factions within his team, as shown by the story of Carrie and DC. It actually gave him protection and an ability to blame others. Similar to Hitler, who was well aware of the egos/dislike many German generals had for one another. Appointing capable senior ministers might have compensated for some of his weaknesses. Johnson deliberately stuffed his cabinets with mediocrities who knew they were expected to be “nodding dogs” and whom he disdained as “the stooges”. “We don’t want young, hungry lions”, an aide recalls him saying when Rishi Sunak proved to be a less pliable and more popular chancellor than Johnson had anticipated. Johnson was a gifted orator and writer but he was hopeless at converting his woolly ideas in substance. With Johnson trust was temporary, what he believed in really was mistrust. He wanted to run No 10 with responsibilities fuzzed, everyone distrusting each other, currying favour and owing their loyalty to Johnson alone - very similar to another politician of recent times.This was an explosive book! The tell all details of Boris Johnson's short reign as Prime Minister of what was once a first world country but which is now rapidly becoming a third world country, and all deepened by the rule of a short term egotistical man. Johnson’s inadequacies meant that Cummings was perhaps a necessary evil. To the extent that Johnson had priorities, he could achieve little without Cummings’s support. The prime minister was incapable of determining what he wanted to achieve and how to achieve it and needed someone else to do the work. He did not understand the detail and could not be bothered to master it. Could he have been a better leader, if he had paid more attention to his briefs, liaised closer with his own cabinet ministers, MPs and cabinet staff, despite Covid and the war in Ukraine? I’ve read a number of political memoirs by Anthony Seldon and find his approach to his subject well balanced and supported by meticulous research and sources. This book is written in collaboration with Newell, also politically well informed and the result makes compelling listening or reading. Well,” he says, “this is the reason why for the moment Starmer is disappointing, because there is this enormous desire for renewal. But Starmer seems micro when he could be macro, cautious when he could be passionate, dull where he could be inspirational.”

He was exceptional. . .. he was ‘exceptionally bad’ as commented by Jenny Jones on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Any Questions’ in July, 2022:https://fromtheheartofeurope.eu/johnson-at-10-the-inside-story-by-anthony-seldon-and-raymond-newell/ In another of his roles, Seldon has been tasked with examining how institutional competence and trust might be re-established. He has recently become deputy chair of something called the Commission on the Centre of Government, created by the Institute for Government, which will recommend steps to improve the workings of the Cabinet Office and No 10, post-pandemic and Brexit and Johnson and Cummings. Of his time in the Foreign Office, the book says: “Johnson had forged some important personal relationships that were to bear fruit later, but had learned little of value as foreign secretary about leadership to take forward with him into Downing Street, least of all about the kind of people on whom he would have to rely, and about how to define strategy then to deliver it.” This, we are told, was a “squandered opportunity that was to cost him dear”. It’s difficult to understand, at times, how this self centred egomaniac ended up as Prime Minister. Until one realises that without exception, every prevarication and wavering was a means to ensure that his own needs came first. Never mind what may be good for the country or the people, as long as Boris got what he wanted. Upon seeing the manifesto BJ was furious that none of his ambition/ideas was inserted – which is another reason why his premiership failed so badly. The manifesto did not actually contain any policies on levelling up/BJ hated it. He did not realise that it was designed to purely secure victory and be as risk free as possible – undermining his claim that he had a mandate from the British people. Carrie Simmons became increasingly involved in the campaign, and was worries about the impact that skipping an Andrew Neil interview would have. BJ to her face agreed to do the interview, only to turn around to Cain and DC and say to their face, you are correct we must not do the interview. This demonstrated a key trait of BJ and why he never could build a successful team around him because he could never trust anyone (which DC loved as it gave him more power. DC would regularly talk about the need to have a good team, but knew this would expose his own weaknesses).