AMBER Rudd has denounced Boris Johnson for his “back-seat driving” on Brexit, making clear that she did not want him managing the process of Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.
The Home Secretary, who backed Remain during the EU referendum campaign, also agreed with Ruth Davidson’s suggestion that the Foreign Secretary’s 4,000-word article on Brexit, which came as police hunted for the Parsons Green bomber and just days before Theresa May’s keynote speech on Brexit, was in appropriate and ill-timed.
Cabinet colleagues of Mr Johnson, including the Prime Minister, are said to be incensed by the Secretary of State’s intervention, which has been seen by some as, at best, pressuring Mrs May to hold to a hard Brexit and, at worst, as a bid to undermine her position and manoeuvre himself ready to put himself forward if she were to step down.
One former Tory minister said: “It is completely disgraceful. You do not write an article like that without consulting the Prime Minister and your Cabinet colleagues. It is a complete abdication of Cabinet responsibility. This is all about Mr Johnson, Mr Johnson, Mr Johnson, not about the interests of government or the country.”
A senior minister, who backed Remain, said Mr Johnson "needs to go and do something else" if he "can't settle" into his role as Foreign Secretary while a former minister said the former London Mayor was "sailing within an inch of being thrown out of the Government".
Sir Craig Oliver, David Cameron’s former communications chief, said even if the genuine intention was to support the PM, it was obvious it would be seen in Westminster as a "direct challenge".
Yet as the furore raged, Mr Johnson insisted in a tweet he was "looking forward to PM's Florence speech," declaring: "All behind Theresa for a glorious Brexit."
Appearing on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Ms Rudd - who during the EU referendum campaign famously said the Foreign Secretary was not the “the man you want driving you home” after a party – hit back at her Cabinet colleague.
She said; “You could call it backseat driving, absolutely. I don't want him managing the Brexit process. What we have got is Theresa May managing that process.
“She is driving the car...and I’m going to make sure that as far as I’m concerned and as far as the rest of the Cabinet are concerned, we are going to help her do that.”
Asked about Mr Johnson’s contribution to the Cabinet, Ms Rudd replied that he brought "enthusiasm, energy and sometimes entertainment".
The Home Secretary said Ms Davidson “has a point” with her suggestion that Mr Johnson’s intervention was poor timing. Noting how the Foreign Secretary was an “irrepressible enthusiast” for Brexit, Ms Rudd was asked if his intervention had been helpful. “Time will tell,” she replied.
Damian Green, the PM’s deputy, tried to downplay the row, describing Mr Johnson as an “entertaining writer” and that nothing in the article came as a surprise.
Asked if he was going to be sacked, the First Secretary replied: “No, he isn’t. The reason is he, like the rest of the Cabinet and the PM, is wanting to get the best deal for the British people.”
Meanwhile, Sir Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat leader, urged Mrs May to fire Mr Johnson.
"It's a terrible situation and it puts Theresa May in an impossible position,” declared Sir Vince, noting: "I just don't understand why she hasn't fired him.”
The party leader went on: "It's like a school that's completely out of control and the head teacher is sitting in her office paralysed and impotent.
"And if you're Mr Barnier negotiating with this Government and you've got senior Cabinet ministers with entirely opposite views of what Britain's negotiating position should be, what do you do?
"It is complete and absolute loss of authority and the Prime Minister on Monday morning should fire this guy, otherwise her own credibility is reduced to zero," he added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel