The unexpected departure of Boris Johnson yesterday night occurred just a few hours after the publication of his much-anticipated honors list.
The Institute for Government (IFG) stated that it seems as though he has “gazumped the controversy” over the selections by resigning as an MP; in addition, his list has raised “important issues” that should not be overlooked.
According to the IFG, this includes an effort to “stretch conventions around Lords appointments” and to “drag the monarchy into politics” because King Charles is required to formalize nominations.
Hannah White, Director of the IFG, stated that the timing of Mr. Johnson’s departure was a “cynical act” that “once again demonstrated a disregard for the principle that the monarch should not be embarrassed or drawn into politics” in a blog post that she published for the IFG.
“Solidifies his reputation for constitutional recklessness.”
“but this key principle of our constitution is no longer as robust as it was before Boris Johnson’s premiership,” she remarked, referring to the fact that the status of King Charles will not be harmed by this.
Ms. White also noted that “throughout his premiership, Johnson attempted to push the boundaries of the constitution, and his approach to his resignation honors was no different,” and she said that this is what Johnson did.
She stated that eight people whom Mr. Johnson intended to ennoble were turned down by the House of Lords nominations Committee “on the grounds of propriety,” and that “it is apparent that he attempted to stretch the conventions around appointments to the Lords.”
The fact that there are seven new classmates on the list indicates that the acceptance percentage is lower than fifty percent. The historical average hovered between around 10%. The combination of this information and Johnson’s prosecution by the Privileges Committee for deceiving parliament will further cement Johnson’s image as being constitutionally irresponsible.
