Replacing the Prime Minister must not take months

“Them’s the breaks,” said Boris Johnson as he announced his decision to stand down as Conservative Party leader and resign as prime minister when a replacement is chosen. It was a characteristically unapologetic reflection on an extraordinary few days that have seen the politician who won an 80-seat majority in December 2019 with the biggest share of the vote for the party since 1979 pushed out of office.

He follows his immediate two predecessors, Theresa May and David Cameron, in leaving before his intended time. But his departure to some extent echoes Margaret Thatcher’s in 1990 in that the coup de grace was delivered by the Cabinet, many of whom either refused any longer to serve under his premiership or told him he could not continue. Ironically, this included Nadhim Zahawi, the man he had only the previous day appointed as Chancellor of the Exchequer.

A frenetic morning in Downing Street led to the confirmation that Mr Johnson had finally conceded that his days were numbered, with another visit from Sir Graham Brady, bearer of the black spot from the backbenchers, the clincher. He told Mr Johnson that another no confidence vote would be held next week and this time he would lose. Mr Johnson said he would remain as Prime Minister until the new leader is chosen.

However, this could take two months. Mr Johnson himself has indicated he might remain in post until October, something many in his own party find unacceptable given the circumstances of his departure. He has lost the confidence of his MPs and while he has recast his Cabinet after a spate of resignations – even bringing back ministers he previously sacked – he cannot be allowed to limp on as a lame duck for such a long time.

The Government has many important issues to face and decisions to make, such as pay settlements in the public sector at a time of rampant inflation. There is also the threat of a summer of strikes to contend with. Is it seriously being suggested that Mr Johnson is in any position of authority to deal with these matters?

It is critical, therefore, that the process to find a new leader of the party is accelerated. The 1922 committee executive will announce a timetable next week that must not emulate the last one in 2019 which took eight weeks. To whittle down the field from the outset, a candidate should have the backing of 15 per cent of the parliamentary party, or 54 MPs, which means only serious contenders could take part. In 2019 just eight supporters were needed, and there were six rounds of voting over seven days.

That should be reduced to no more than three rounds, conducted on the same day if possible to produce two contenders who will go before the party membership for a final ballot. This process can take weeks as each candidate sets out their stall.

Mrs May announced that she was stepping down on May 24, 2019 but Boris Johnson was not installed as the new leader and Prime Minister until July 23 – itself a full month after the final two candidates (the other being Jeremy Hunt) – had been chosen by MPs. They spent that time on hustings events around the country. These should be curtailed if not abandoned. The final two contenders can set out their positions in a personal manifesto sent to every party member and a vote held within a few days of their receipt.

There is no obvious reason why it cannot be completed by the end of July. Indeed, it is to the advantage of both the system of governance and the party that it happens sooner than that. As the pollster John Curtice points out, the longer Mr Johnson remains in office the greater the damage inflicted on the standing of the Tories in the polls.

If it is not possible to speed up this process then thought should be given to a caretaker prime minister whereby a senior Cabinet minister assumes the reins of office from the Queen while the leadership poll is conducted. That would put the individual in a strong position to take over permanently assuming they wished to stand.

Another alternative would be for the final two candidates to agree a coronation and obviate the need for the party in the country to vote. Mrs May was elected unopposed in 2016 after Andrea Leadsom dropped out so there is a precedent.

Whatever the party decides to do next, it needs to do it quickly. The country will not understand or forgive a protracted leadership contest in the middle of an economic crisis and with a threat of a wider war in Europe ever present. Mr Johnson said these were the reasons why he was reluctant to stand down and he considered it “eccentric” that he was being forced to do so by MPs who owed him their seats.

He was right to say there are pressing issues for the Government to address. That is why his successor needs to be in place within days, not weeks – and certainly not months.