10–20 minute read

It has taken a war in Europe for Britain to open its eyes and openly acknowledge what should have been accepted long ago. Vladimir Putin has successfully infiltrated British politics and society and interfered in British democracy.

The evidence was in plain sight. Warnings and evidence were ignored, and the Conservative Party, in particular, have played fast and loose with the country’s security and democracy in favour of political power and greed.

Timeline of Russian interference in British politics

1999 – Putin becomes the president of Russia.

2000, January – Putin’s forces bomb the Chechen city of Grozny. A UN report says Grozny is the most destroyed city on Earth.

2006, 23 November – Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned on British soil with polonium, a highly radioactive isotope, probably the most toxic poison known to man when swallowed or inhaled. He died 23 days later. The assassins left traces of this substance across London. It was an act of terrorism.

2007, January – Six weeks after Litvinenko dies, Russian ex-banker Lubov Golubeva makes her first donation to the Conservative Party. She is the partner of Vladimir Cherlukhin, a former Kremlin deputy finance minister. Her name will appear again later.

2008 – Labour government introduces the golden visa system – A fast track to UK citizenship via investments of at least £1m in the UK and to invest £750,000 in UK government bonds.

2008, May – Conservative MP Boris Johnson is elected mayor of London.

2008, August – Putin invades and occupies parts of the independent nation of Georgia.

2009, January – Former Russian KGB spy Alexander Lebedev buys the London Evening Standard newspaper. He appoints his son, Evgeny as senior executive director.

2010 – Johnson and Evgeny Lebedev become friends, often dining together.

2011, October – After relentlessly campaigning for five years, Litvinenko’s wife Marina eventually won the right to a coroner’s inquest into her husband’s murder.

2012, May – Lebedev’s London Evening Standard publicly backs Johnson’s mayoral re-election campaign. That year he stays at Lebedev’s castle for free, which he does every year for the next five years.

2013, July – Theresa May refuses to hold a public inquest into Litvinenko’s murder. Later she would admit her refusals were over concerns about the potential impact on “international relations”.

2014, February – Russia invaded and subsequently annexed the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine. Britain, together with Russia and the USA, were signatories to the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, which guaranteed Ukraine protection of its sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for giving up one of the largest nuclear arsenals in Europe. No country, including the UK, reacted appropriately to this act of aggression.

2014, July – Putin backed separatists shot down passenger Malaysian Airline’s MH17 passenger plane over Ukraine with a Russian missile killing 298 civilians.

2014, 18 September – The Scottish independence referendum – in 2020, the Russia report would confirm Russian interference in the campaign.

2014, November – Government makes changes to, and increases the golden visa scheme investment to £2m. Concerns have already arisen about the weakness of the scheme

2015, 27 January – More than eight years after his murder, the public enquiry into the assassination of Litvinenko begins.

2015, March – Metropolitan Police investigated £180m worth of UK property bought with corrupt money from offshore companies. They and anti-corruption campaigners say the problem is exacerbated by continuing secrecy, obscuring the beneficial ownership of properties held in tax havens like the Channel Islands and the British Virgin Islands.

Deutsche Bank reported “a considerable chunk of UK’s £133bn of hidden capital inflows since the mid-1990s is related to Russian capital”. An incredible £93bn of that was since 2006, with the pace accelerating since 2010 to around £1bn a month. “Hidden inflows … raise major questions over the UK’s role as a refuge for international capital flight and the need for better data and more rigorous oversight on property transactions”, they warned.

2015, September – Putin sends its air force to Syria to prop up Bashar al-Assad. Evgeny Lebedev pushes the UK to ally itself with Putin. Johnson writes a column in The Telegraph with the headline ‘Let’s deal with the devil: we should work with Putin and Bashar al-Assad in Syria’.

2015, November – Transparency International releases its aptly named 80-page report ‘Don’t look, won’t find – Weaknesses in the supervision of the UK’s anti-money laundering rules’. It stated:

The report made multiple recommendations and conclusions. Once again, the British government did nothing.

2016, January – Public enquiry into Litvinenko’s murder ends and finds that it was an FSB (one of the successors of the KGB ) plot and likely approved by Putin.

2016, 9 May – Johnson, then foreign secretary, comes under criticism for being a ‘Russian apologist’ after seemingly blaming Russia’s invasion of Ukraine’s Crimea on the European Union. He told reporters, “If you want an example of EU foreign policymaking on the hoof and the EU’s pretensions to running a defence policy that has caused real trouble, then look at what has happened in Ukraine”. It was something then UKIP leader Nigel Farage had verbalised, along with his admiration of Putin.

Their words were a severe distortion of the facts regarding who was responsible for the worst threat to European stability and security since World War II. Both anti-EU men who just happened to be the most dominant faces of the pro-Brexit campaign.

2016, 23 June – The EU referendum: 51.9 percent of the votes cast favoured leaving the EU.

2016, 31 December – The US select committee on intelligence on Russian interference in the 2016 election releases documents.

2017, February – Head of the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre Ciaran Martin, asserted that the Russian government had stepped up its online aggression against western countries. He cited 188 significant cyberattacks against the UK government over three months, most connected to Russian and Chinese actors.

2017, March – Newspaper Novaya Gazeta and Reuters detail a ‘global laundromat’ involving an estimated 500 Russian individuals/organisations/bankers with connections to the FSB. $22.3bn had passed through Moldova using Russian shell companies and fictitious loans from offshore companies in Britain from 2011 to 2014. The UK government said they would investigate.

2017, November – US news outlet CNN alleges that the Russia based troll farm “internet research agency” used Twitter accounts to generate pro-Brexit messages before the UK referendum.

The intelligence and security committee of the UK parliament begins its investigation into Russian influence in British politics and society.

Theresa May, in an address to the Kremlin, says, “we know what you are doing … and you will not succeed”. She accused Moscow of attempting to “weaponise information” as part of a “sustained campaign of cyberespionage and disruption”. Russia’s actions were “threatening the international order”, she said.

2018, January – US senate released the document ‘Putin’s asymmetric assault on democracy in Russia and Europe: Implications for US National Security’. It stated that Russia had interfered in the Brexit referendum and “the Russian government has sought to influence democracy in the United Kingdom through disinformation, cyberhacking, and corruption” and, the “UK political system vulnerable to anti-democratic meddling via social media and ‘possibly illicit’ campaign funding”.

Additionally, UK campaign finance laws do not require the disclosure of political donations from the beneficial owners of non-British companies incorporated in the UK and carrying out business in the UK. The report suggests this “may have enabled Russian related money to be directed with insufficient scrutiny to various UK political actors”. Senators point out that UKIP and its then-leader Farage did not just fan anti-EU sentiment but also criticised European sanctions on Russia and provided flattering assessments of President Putin.

The University of Edinburgh asserted that more than 400 of the Internet Research Agency Twitter accounts that had been active in the US election had also been highly involved in posting about Brexit, while CNN alleged numerous accounts had also blasted out pro-Brexit messages before the UK referendum

The University of California at Berkeley and Swansea University in Wales reportedly identified 150,000 Twitter accounts with various Russian ties that disseminated messages about Brexit before the referendum.

2018, March – Russia carries out a chemical weapons attack on British soil. Former Russian military officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal were poisoned in the city of Salisbury with the nerve agent Novichok. Two UK police officers had minor injuries, and one detective was hospitalised. This was a terrorist attack.

The UK’s assessment that Russia was responsible was supported by 28 other countries, who expelled 153 Russian diplomats in total.

2018 – After the Skripal poisoning, the government reviews the golden visa scheme. Despite the pressure, that review has never been published. We know that 97 percent of investors were subject to scant checks on the legitimacy of their wealth. More than 3,000 people were granted investor visas between 2008 and 2015, including 705 Russians. The UK has the fastest golden visa system globally, given in just one to three weeks of applying.

2018, April – Hours after a NATO meeting, Johnson now foreign secretary, ditches his security to visit the Lebedev’s castle in Italy, where he meets Alexander Lebedev. The next day he was reported as being alone at the airport, dishevelled and hungover. He cannot explain why he did not have his 24/7 security with him.

2018, 30 June – Seven miles north of Salisbury, a public member Charlie Rowley found a perfume bottle in a litter bin and gave it to Dawn Sturges, who sprayed it on her wrist. She fell ill within 15 minutes and died. Charlie was hospitalised but survived. Three members of the GRU (Russian foreign military intelligence agency of the Russian armed forces) who had travelled to the UK were identified as responsible.

2019, October – Johnson starts his new general election campaign. The same month, Johnson is given the long-awaited Russia report but does not release it or share its contents.

2019, 11 November – After leaks, CNN released its investigative report into Russian interference under the heading the ‘UK parliament was warned about alleged Russian interference’. Sources told CNN the committee heard from multiple witnesses who alleged that Russia has “built a network of friendly British diplomats, lawyers, parliamentarians, and other influencers across the political spectrum”.

Bill Browder a financier and once one of Russia’s most prominent investors, provided testimony to the UK parliament. He said, “The people we have seen working to further Russian interests in the UK are some of the people at the highest level of the establishment. I would not have submitted these claims if I hadn’t confidence in the evidence”.

Another source accused authorities of “putting political considerations ahead of the national security and Russia is potentially the most significant threat to the UK’s institutions and its way of life”.

2019, November – Johnson states there is “absolutely no evidence that I have ever seen of any Russian interference in UK democratic process”. A couple of days later, on BBC Question Time, when probed about not releasing the Russia report, he said, “this is complete Bermuda triangle stuff”. He has now had the Russia report for a month.

2020, March – Johnson nominates Evgeny Lebedev for a peerage. British intelligence advised against the appointment on the grounds of national security. Johnson defies the security services advice.

2020, July – After nine months, parliament’s intelligence and security committee published the long-awaited Russia report, heavily redacted. It found Russia had interfered in elections and the Scottish referendum. The committee recommended an investigation of the referendum, saying:

Within an hour of the report’s release, Johnson rules out an investigation into interference in the Brexit referendum.

A key strand called for a crackdown on London being a laundromat for illicit Russian cash. The government also dismissed this, with the prime minister’s spokesperson saying the UK has “some of the strongest controls in the world”.

The report confirms many oligarchs close to Putin are integrated into the British business, social, and political scene. Several members of the House of Lords have business links to Russia or work directly for major Russian companies linked to the Russian state. It called for more scrutiny and more decisive action. Downing Street declined, saying they were confident the House of Lords could oversee proper rules on the registration of donations to its members

2020, 22 July – Johnson says in parliament, “there is no country in the western world that is more vigilant or in protecting the interests of this country or the international community from Russian interference”.

2020, 23 July – The Times reports that the Conservative Party’s finances have come under renewed scrutiny. Two of its MPs on the intelligence watchdog committee and 14 ministers had accepted donations linked to Russia.

The same day, the Tatler reports Lubov Chernukhin, the most significant female donor in the history of the Conservative Party, is the wife of a former Kremlin deputy finance minister. She has given around £2m since 2012, including paying £160,000 to play tennis with David Cameron (the then PM) and Johnson as London mayor. In December 2021, the Conservative Party accepted £80,250 from her. That was just four months ago.

2021, June – The High Court rejects a case brought by MPs to force Johnson into investigating Moscow meddling in UK politics. Ben Bradshaw MP added:

2021, October – Christopher Steele, once MI6’s top Kremlin expert, and former spy who wrote the infamous dossier on Donald Trump and whose advice was sought by UK officials long after he left the service, stated that Russia’s leaders believe they are “at war” with the UK and its allies, but Britain is failing to deter the threat.

2022, 17 February – Home Secretary Priti Patel announced that the golden visa scheme would end with immediate effect to help stop “corrupt elites who threaten our national security and push dirty money around our cities”.

2022, 23 February – At prime minister’s questions, Caroline Lucas accuses Johnson of “turning a blind eye” to clear evidence in the Russia report of meddling adding, “Why is he playing fast and loose with our national security?”

2022, 24 February – Russia invades the independent country of Ukraine. Civilians are bombed, and at the time of writing this article, over three million refugees have fled Ukraine.

2022, March – It transpires that so far, eight sanctioned Russian oligarchs bought their British citizenship through the golden visa system. As Chris Bryant MP said on Twitter, “a shocking indictment of how the UK sold its birth right for a mess of dodgy money for years”. By the end of March 2022, 2,581 Russians had bought their citizenship on the golden visa scheme.

Conclusion

There is only one conclusion. The United Kingdom and successive governments have failed to protect British democracy from interference. The evidence is there, and without doubt, a public enquiry would expose shocking failures. Yet Prime Minister Johnson seems unwilling to look too closely. He likely knows what would be disclosed.

That being, he was a willing participant in allowing Russian influence to grow and taint the EU referendum by Russian influences. Johnson is Brexit’s figurehead, and Brexit is the Holy Grail that the current Conservative government are trying to protect. After all, who wanted Brexit even more than Farage, Johnson, and the Eurosceptics in the Conservatives Party? Putin himself.

Acknowledgement and thanks to YouTuber Political X. Many critical dates and inspiration came from his 2020 video ‘A Timeline of Russian Interference’, which you can watch here:

On Wednesday 30 March, Prime Minister Johnson appeared before the Commons liaison committee to answers questions on the situation in Ukraine and the cost-of-living crisis. This was the second time in a few hours that Johnson was asked difficult questions, having attended prime minister’s questions (PMQs) just three hours earlier.

The cross-party liaison committee, chaired by Sir Bernard Jenkin (Conservative) is made up of select committee chairs. It is the only government committee that can question the prime minister on policy, which it does three times a year. On this occasion, the meeting was chaired by Clive Betts (Labour), as Sir Bernard Jenkin was suffering from Covid.

Partygate added to the agenda

Before getting to the main topics, Betts raised the issue of the 20 Fixed Penalty Notices (FPN) issued by the Metropolitan Police the day before. Pete Wishart (SNP) asked Johnson if he was one of the 20 recipients, and if not, whether he expected to receive a fine in due course. Johnson replied, “I’m sure you’d know if I were”, before reverting to a now common theme of not giving “a running commentary” on an ongoing investigation.

Johnson in front of the Liaison Committee, claims the ministerial code and his conduct are matters personal opinion and, if he is fined, he will come back to be "interrogated". In my view, a crystal clear indication that he has no intention of resigning, even if guilty. ~AA pic.twitter.com/PtTELnh57g

— Best for Britain (@BestForBritain) March 30, 2022

Wishart suggested that if Johnson were served with a fine he would be “pretty much toast” adding that “no prime minister could survive” being found guilty of criminality. When Johnson refused to even acknowledge any criminality had taken place, Wishart listed Johnson’s many and varied prior excuses. He added that it was “crystal clear” that Johnson had broken the ministerial code and this was a “resignation issue”. The public, he said, would be “frustrated and disappointed” with Johnson’s non-answers. Johnson again refused to comment, saying he would return to be “properly interrogated” by the committee, and parliament, once the investigations had concluded.

Catherine McKinnell pressed Johnson about “whether any laws were broken”– especially in light of the FPNs. He refused even to acknowledge that simple fact, saying “I’m not certain of that. You may know something that I don’t”.

Both Wishaw and McKinnell drew attention to the insensitivity of holding a lavish dinner on the anniversary of the Covid memorial. Johnson’s response was to say how incredibly hard the government had worked during Covid and how proud he was of their achievements. He described the government’s record on handling the pandemic as “pretty remarkable”.

The Ukraine crisis

Tom Tugendhat (Conservative) asked Johnson of the value of President Macron continuing discussions with Putin. Johnson said Putin was “clearly not to be trusted”. He added that it was not the objective of the UK government to remove Putin from power, despite President Biden apparently wishing to do so. Tugendhat also asked about additional military and civilian assistance. Johnson wouldn’t be drawn into specifics but said the government was looking at “going up a gear”.

Johnson said the UK should “continue to intensify sanctions with a rolling programme” until all of Putin’s troops are out of Ukraine. When questioned, Johnson said this included Crimea, but wouldn’t be drawn with regards to Georgia.

Sarah Champion (Labour) had previously written to Johnson with regard to the £400m humanitarian aid pledged by the government to supporting Ukraine. As Johnson had failed to reply to her letter of 9 March, she again asked how much of the pledged funds had actually reached organisations in Ukraine, in other countries and in the UK. Johnson would have to get back to her, he said

Support for refugees

Dame Diana Johnson (Labour) asked if the prime minister had given consideration to an emergency humanitarian visa, especially as the family visa was so complex and was causing confusion. He wanted a “light touch”, he said, and didn’t seem to appreciate the difference between the two options.

Dame Johnson pointed out that just 1 percent of applications for Homes for Ukrainians had resulted in a visa. Both agreed that the British public had shown enormous generosity, with 200,000 people having signed up to the scheme to offer accommodation to refugees – rather different to the figures of 2,700 granted visas.

"We must match our words on Ukraine with action." Boris Johnson, speaking to the international community, 6 March 2022

Those were the words. Here are our actions. ~AA pic.twitter.com/nIz1JOCNUN

— Best for Britain (@BestForBritain) March 30, 2022

Chair Betts asked Johnson to confirm the funding arrangements, as different committees had previously been given different versions of the details. Johnson confirmed that under the Homes for Ukrainians scheme, local authorities would receive £10,500 per annum, per person. However, he confirmed that under the family reunion scheme, there was no financial support for local authorities, despite the costs being the same.

He described the access to free travel, education, benefits etc – without any additional local authority funding – as “a considerable package of support”. Johnson was unable to explain the difference between the two schemes in terms of the demands they would make on local council budgets.

The cost-of-living crisis

Conservative MP Neil Parish raised the issue of rising food prices, and concerns over food production in Ukraine, the “bread basket of Europe”. In response to concerns over food and drinks exports, Johnson insisted UK exports are “colossal”.

Concerns were raised by Philip Dunne (Conservative) about the burden of rising fuel costs. Johnson stated that the UK had “failed for a generation to put in enough long-term supply”. He blamed the Labour Party for the failure to commission more nuclear power stations, saying that nuclear had “massive potential”. Johnson admitted that nuclear was a long-term solution and unlikely to make a difference for a decade. However, “I’m optimistic”, he said, “we’ve shown that we can do things fast”. A cue, naturally, for a mention of the booster vaccination roll out.

Johnson dismissed Dunne’s questioning of the government’s recent commitment to net zero, made at the COP26 conference. Johnson said the net-zero ambition “had not been adulterated or lost”.

Labour’s Stephen Tibbs challenged Johnson over his recent misrepresentations, at PMQs, of numbers of people in work. Eventually, Johnson accepted Tibbs’ point, but not without declaring that the government’s employment record was “outstanding”. Johnson insisted he had since corrected the record – Tibbs said he was unaware of such a correction. Hardly surprising considering no such correction has been made.

The Prime Minister told MPs earlier he “thinks” he’s taken steps to correct the record on false claims about employment.

He hasn’t. pic.twitter.com/IbaoYuEE96

— Full Fact (@FullFact) March 30, 2022

Tibbs went on to query why no help was offered in the spring budget for unemployed people on benefits, struggling with fuel bills. The unemployed would see the percentage of their income spent on fuel costs rise from 20 percent in 2020, to 25 percent in April, to 47 percent in October. Johnson said he knew “how tough it is”, going on to say that priorities had to be set, in the best interests of the country. The government’s pockets were not bottomless and raising taxes was to be avoided at all costs. “We are better off”, he said, “helping people into work”.

McKinnell challenged Johnson over the government’s levelling up plans, asking if he knew how many times child poverty is mentioned in the government’s levelling up white paper. None, as it turns out, despite the rising levels of child poverty and the further expected rises. The omission was merely a “formal accident”, Johnson said.

Mel Stride (Conservative) raised the issue of trade as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), and the impact of Brexit on post-pandemic recovery. All countries had seen exports dip due to the pandemic, but where EU countries had recovered, the UK had not. When challenged to predict how long it may take the UK to recover to pre-Brexit levels, Johnson refused to prophesise, saying there was “no natural impediment to our exports”. All it takes, he said, is “just will, energy and ambition”. But not a strategy, apparently.

Only the “right people” are welcome

A failure to answer questions, a reliance on unsupported optimism or a retreat into meaningless rhetoric are now the norm for our prime minister. However, on this occasion Johnson was not responsible for the most disturbing assertion of the day. That came from Sir Bill Wiggin. At a time when the British people are opening their hearts and homes to desperate refugees, the Conservative MP for North Herefordshire expressed concerns that only the “right people” be let into the UK. Those “right” people include wealthy Qataris, apparently, but definitely not anyone arriving by rubber dinghy across the Channel.

We are all holding our breath for the day we will finally have a government that demonstrates honesty, realism and compassion. Only then will we be able to claim to have the “right people” running the country.

On Thursday 24 March, leaders from across the globe – including President Joe Biden – met in Brussels to discuss the Ukrainian crisis. The first meetings – of Nato and G7 members – included Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Biden was also present at a later meeting of the European Council (EC), having been specially invited to attend. That invitation was not extended to Johnson.

Johnson sidelined

The government had expected that Johnson would be on the EC summit guest list, especially since the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, attended an earlier summit at the start of the crisis. Of course, that was before Johnson opened his mouth and inserted both feet. Once again, our PM had said the wrong thing, at the wrong time, causing considerable resentment and outrage.

Johnson’s comments, comparing the fight of the Ukrainian people to Britain voting for Brexit, caused widespread offense at home and abroad. As a direct result of his inappropriate remarks, Johnson’s invitation to attend was never issued. Boris, in the words of the Express, had been “snubbed”.

Like night follows day… pic.twitter.com/oldlo07xYC

— Edwin Hayward 🦄 🗡 (@uk_domain_names) March 22, 2022

Johnson’s isolation was plain to see when leaders of the western world met before the world’s press. Where heads of state were seen greeting each other warmly and shaking hands – in particular seeking out President Biden – Johnson was given a wide berth. Boris no-mates stood alone, with nowhere to put his hands but in pockets.

Global Britain. 🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/m32DzGdLPW

— Brendan May 🇺🇦 (@bmay) March 24, 2022

Zelenskyy appeals to Nato

A month after the Russian invasion began, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine appeared before Nato via video link. He appealed directly for help, saying the only way “to save our people and our cities” from Russian attack was with Nato’s help. Specifically, he called upon Nato to provide “effective and unrestricted” support. He thanked world leaders, including Biden and Johnson, for the equipment provided so far, but said much more was needed.

Johnson urged UK’s “allies and partners to step up military and economic support” in a thread posted on Twitter. He listed the military aid the UK would be providing, and on this occasion, managed to avoid his usual ‘world-beating’ rhetoric. Perhaps, for once, he had learned something from his recent misplaced comments.

I’m at @NATO where I’ll be urging our allies and partners to step up military and economic support to Ukraine, strengthening their defences as they turn the tide in this fight. We cannot and will not stand by while Russia grinds Ukraine’s towns and cities into dust. 1/6

— Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) March 24, 2022

Following the meetings, Nato leaders issued a joint statement agreeing to reinforce their defences to the East. They plan to “significantly strengthen” their defence posture and to “further develop the full range of ready forces and capabilities necessary to maintain credible deterrence and defence”. The Nato alliance, according to Biden, has never been more united that it is today.

Brussels – centre of the free world

The European Commission summit brought world leaders back into the room, to continue where earlier meetings had left off. This time, the participants were spared the sight of loose-end Johnson, as they made further important international decisions, without input from the UK.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen commented that, “Brussels is today the centre of the free world”. In a tweet showing the flags of the EU, USA, Canada and Japan, but not the UK, she said, “our bonds are stronger than ever before”.

With 🇪🇺🇺🇸🇨🇦🇯🇵 leaders here, Brussels is today the centre of the free world.

Together, we will step up our support for Ukraine. Sharpen our sanctions.
And break free from Russia´s fossil fuels.

Tomorrow with @POTUS we will open a new chapter in our 🇪🇺🇺🇸 energy partnership. pic.twitter.com/JyAr4DJ79U

— Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen) March 24, 2022

Addressing the media directly she added, “we have decided to step up our support for Ukraine, to sharpen the sanctions against Russia and to break free from Russian fossil fuel”. Tomorrow, in conjunction with President Biden, the EU will present “a new chapter in our energy partnership”.

Earlier in the day, von der Leyen declared “our most valuable asset” against Putin was “our unity, the speed of our action and our determination”. That unity now largely excludes the UK. Britain – once an important voice at the top European table – is now, thanks to Johnson, terra non grata.

Johnson has removed the ‘great’ from Britain and the ‘united’ from Kingdom. It’s time we removed the Johnson from Downing Street before any more damage can be done.

Johnson's comparaison of the courageous fight of Ukraine with Brexit is insane…

Brexit was about undoing freedoms and leaving the EU…Ukrainians want more freedom and to join the EU! https://t.co/DOtaNTpiWN

— Guy Verhofstadt (@guyverhofstadt) March 19, 2022

Johnson’s latest insult

The offending statements were made at the Conservative Party Spring Conference in Blackpool on 19 March. In his closing speech, Johnson told delegates the Ukrainian struggle for freedom was comparable to the British people voting for the freedoms of Brexit. He did so in front of the Ukrainian Ambassador.

As with Foreign Secretary, Liz Truss, before him, Johnson levelled an attack on ‘woke’ issues, using the Ukrainian crisis as a weapon in the ongoing Tory culture wars.

Widespread condemnation

While it’s not unusual for his remarks to draw criticism, Johnson’s latest appalling comments have drawn widespread condemnation. The Tories have been doubling down, repeating Johnson’s insensitive and damaging rhetoric, and applauding (literally) his every word.

If we are to ultimately defeat Putin we require international leadership and unity.

Comparing the Ukrainian people's fight against Putin's tyranny to the British people voting for Brexit damages the standard of statecraft we were beginning to exhibit. https://t.co/r5dvD6eJ8b

— Tobias Ellwood MP (@Tobias_Ellwood) March 19, 2022

A notable exception came from MP and Defence Select Committee member, Tobias Ellwood. He tweeted that “international leadership and unity” are required if we are to defeat Putin, the implication being that Johnson is a threat to both. Of Johnson’s suggestion that the Ukrainian peoples’ struggle and British people voting for Brexit are comparable, Ellwood said it “damages the standard of statecraft we were beginning to exhibit.”

Quite the opposite: it shows exactly why he must be removed from office. Comments like this are a smear on Britain. And strategically, they risk the unity of the Western response.

— Ian Dunt (@IanDunt) March 19, 2022

The strength of feeling levelled at Johnson’s comments came from a wide range of sources. Some expected, some not. Ian Dunt spoke of his “disgust” and how what Johnson had said was “gnawing away” at him. Jessica Simor, QC, described Johnson’s speech as “utterly grotesque” and “stomach turning”. She added that, “for this alone” it was time for the Tories to “get rid of him”.

Best for Britain CEO, Naomi Smith said, “Equating the Brexit vote to Ukrainian plight is not only a disgraceful insult to those in the grip of war, it dismisses the fact Ukraine has applied to join the EU, the greatest peace project in human history.”

Johnson told the Ukrainian Ambassador that the struggle for Brexit was like the Ukraine’s struggle against Russia. For this alone @OliverDowden you should get rid of him. Utterly grotesque and a disgrace to us all. Stomach turning. https://t.co/BI4bD8AsWy

— Jessica Simor QC (@JMPSimor) March 20, 2022

Johnson’s comments also drew strong criticism from outside of the UK. Two senior European politicians, Donald Tusk and Guy Verhofstadt – both rather familiar with Brexit themselves – added their own condemnation. Verhofstadt called Johnson’s remarks “insane”, pointing out that “Brexit was about undoing freedoms and leaving the EU”. Ukrainians, however, “want more freedoms and to join the EU”. Tusk levelled his comments directly at Johnson, saying, “Boris, your words offend Ukrainians, the British & common sense.”

The response from self-proclaimed “staunch Brexiter”, Julia Hartley-Brewer was, perhaps, more unexpected. She said that comparing the vote to leave the EU with the Ukrainian people’s struggle against a foreign invader was “an insult to their bravery and sacrifice”, describing it as “totally cringe”.

Even as a staunch Brexiteer, this is totally cringe from @BorisJohnson. Comparing the vote to leave the EU with the Ukrainian people fighting for their lives against a foreign invader is an insult to their bravery and sacrifice. https://t.co/RwA4PEbG25

— Julia Hartley-Brewer (@JuliaHB1) March 19, 2022

Deflection and distraction

In many ways, the Ukrainian crisis has perhaps been a welcome distraction for our PM. With our focus quite rightly on the terrifying plight of the Ukrainian people, those pestering niggles that have threatened Johnson’s position have faded into the background. Few are asking what happened to the Sue Gray report, the Met Police investigation, or various other scandals involving the leader or his party.

One exception has been the focus on Russian money, donors and close ties with the Conservatives. Another exception must be the UK’s continued failings towards Ukrainian refugees. Despite constant suggestions from Johnson to the contrary, the UK is not a generous or welcoming host. Where our neighbours have bent over backwards to help those in desperate need – waiving visas, helping find food, shelter, work – the UK is making the process as difficult as possible.

We're the only country in Europe not to waive visa requirements for Ukrainian refugees. This is a disgrace.

Write to your MP using our one-click tool and demand the Home Secretary waives visas for Ukrainian refugees 👇

— Best for Britain (@BestForBritain) March 10, 2022

Ukrainians refugees must apply for a visa – assuming they have family connections or a sponsor. Not only that, but every stage of the application process seems deliberately designed to make things more fraught, gruelling and off-putting.

Johnson and his government insult us all further when they dare to suggest what a great job they have done supporting other refugees, such as those fleeing Afghanistan and Syria. The sheer audacity of such obvious lies is exasperating.

Self-inflicted damage

The pain, the anger, the disbelief that Johnson’s comments have caused will be with us for some time. The debate as to whether Johnson deliberately aims to offend, or does so by accident, will continue. Perhaps just as worrying is the fact that a team, presumably, of so-called experts would have approved his speech beforehand. Not only will they have agreed the content, but they will have thought it was just what was necessary.

If the aim was to please the Brexit extremists, maybe they have succeeded in the short term. But if this crisis has taught us anything, it’s that the British people are a lot more caring, a lot more generous, a lot more empathetic than the government, or the PM that represents us.

Johnson may have won over a few right-wing back-benchers, but he has distanced himself from the “will of the people” and damaged his chances of keeping his job. By supporting his stance, his own party have weakened their own position, furthered their own demise and distanced the UK from its former friends and neighbours.

The Conservatives might not yet be ready to get rid of Johnson. The country, however, is. If the party won’t rid themselves of their leader, Johnson will take them all down with him.

Now that really would be worth a standing ovation and a round of applause.

Lord David Frost, former Brexit negotiator, is having a bit of a tantrum. Yes, another one. It seems he is not taking criticism of his recent speech well, accusing critics of not having read the speech first. The Churchill lecture was given at the EuropaInstitut at the University of Zurich on 15 March. I’m sorry to report that I have read more than enough of it, so at least you don’t have to.

According to the Spectator, Frost set out a potential basis for future relations between the UK and the EU in a “warm” tone. His comments mark a “deliberate attempt to move on from scratchy relations of the last few years”, while failing, naturally, to accept any responsibility for how his own bombastic, truculent style affected EU/UK relations. For good measure, and without a hint of irony, Frost argued there is a “need to recognise that the EU is a natural ally”, adding that the UK and EU should “seek – as sovereign equals – ways to cooperate and work together more”.

Empty threats on the Northern Ireland protocol

The threat of triggering Article 16 – effectively suspending the Northern Ireland protocol – was one often bandied about by Frost, and by the prime minister. They have each claimed, on occasion, that the protocol has caused “serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties”. In doing so, they say, it has reached the necessary threshold to ‘justify’ triggering Article 16.

Maroš Šefčovič, vice president of the European Commission, described these threats as “enormously disruptive” and could result in “very serious consequences”. Increasingly, however, the EU politely dismissed them merely as empty threats.

Fast forward to his speech and Frost half-heartedly suggests the threat be taken off the table. Not without a quid pro quo though. In exchange for not throwing our toys out of the pram (again), Frost demands the EU accept the need for a fundamental renegotiation of the protocol. Should the EU fail to accept a renegotiation – something they have adamantly and repeatedly rejected – then surprise, surprise, we’re back to invoking Article 16. After all, according to Frost, the protocol was “always temporary” and it was “not realistic” to expect the border in the Irish Sea to last forever.

I would appreciate it if those commenting would actually read my speech tonight before doing so.

The message is not that of this headline.

Incidentally, "Tory public schoolboys", however unwelcome their existence may be to some, are still allowed to have a view on things. https://t.co/4X59U71Kdb

— David Frost (@DavidGHFrost) March 15, 2022

Or, to put it another way, as the Telegraph did, the “Tories should pledge to tear up the Northern Ireland protocol unless EU backs down”. It seems though, that Frost’s message was “not that of this headline”, according to his tweet.

Also, he’s a bit touchy about being referred to as one of those “Tory public schoolboys”. Duly noted

Questionable judgment and false statements

In a Twitter thread, Professor Steve Peers points out a number of false statements (lies) made by Frost in his speech. Frost claimed the protocol was “imposed on us” – a rather different picture from the one painted at the time of his signing the deal. So much for that glorified “oven-ready deal” sold to the country, which parliament voted for and Conservatives applauded.

Frost also suggested that Theresa May’s government was only interested in a “simulacrum of leaving”, which was clearly untrue. May had, from very early on, taken the single market and freedom of movement off the negotiating table, thanks to her obsession with immigration. But even May’s Brexit had not been hard enough for Johnson or Frost.

Peers acknowledges Frost’s positive suggestions on how the deal could be improved, such as youth mobility and cooperation on foreign and defence policy. However, this would involve the reversal of policies that Frost himself had negotiated, and, says Peers, “frankly, this calls his judgement into question”.

I've read the speech. @hayward_katy's critique is justified; the Telegraph headline is fair; and the speech is profoundly intellectually dishonest. Let's have a closer look. 1/ https://t.co/eTrPAUxqdI

— Steve Peers (@StevePeers) March 16, 2022

Peers also disagrees with Frost about the accuracy of the Telegraph headline, describing it as a “fair” interpretation. The speech, however, he described as “intellectually dishonest” – a description that could equally be levelled at the Tory public schoolboy.

Frost, you so often try to give the impression that the #NIProtocol’s content is not your doing and an unwelcome surprise. It is an international treaty. You negotiated it. You knew its implications. Or if you didn’t, then you were and are unfit for high office.

— Lord DomB of Vladivostok #FBPE (@NotaTory67) March 16, 2022

Distorted Brexit reality

When Brexit was ‘done’, Frost signed an international, legally binding agreement that he never read, never understood, or never had any intention of implementing. He was given a Cabinet role by Johnson and elevated to the House of Lords, before resigning in a fit of pique when the EU exposed the weakness of his arguments. If he ever understood the way the EU works, negotiates, or protects its values, he has a strange way of showing it.

With every speech, including those made to parliament, Frost has never lost his ability to distort Brexit reality. Despite having negotiated a hard Brexit deal, including the protocol he now hates, his own deal was never extreme enough for his own liking.

I’ve had quite enough of Frost, and Tory public schoolboys, to last me a lifetime. Johnson and Frost have damaged our economy, our reputation and the democracy they falsely claimed to prize. You’ll have to read the next Frost speech yourselves, as I won’t be bothering. I know what he will say. The same as he always does – trumped up nonsense divorced from reality. Just like Brexit.

I would appreciate it if those commenting would actually read my speech tonight before doing so.

The message is not that of this headline.

Incidentally, "Tory public schoolboys", however unwelcome their existence may be to some, are still allowed to have a view on things. https://t.co/4X59U71Kdb

— David Frost (@DavidGHFrost) March 15, 2022

When Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper addressed Home Secretary Priti Patel at the despatch box on Thursday, she expressed feelings that much of the country could associate with. Showing passion, frustration and anger at the woeful government response to the Ukrainian refugee crisis, Cooper pointed out the shocking inadequacies and failings of the Home Office scheme.

Yvette Cooper – Why does it always take the Home Secretary to be dragged into the HoC to make basic changes to help vulnerable people.. her response has been a total disgrace… if she can't sort this out, frankly, she should hand the job over to somebody else who can. pic.twitter.com/cVvvyiXsSZ

— Haggis_UK 🇬🇧 🇪🇺 (@Haggis_UK) March 10, 2022

Cooper described the government’s response to the Ukraine refugee crisis as a “total disgrace” and highlighted the fact that Patel had to be “hauled into the House of Commons to make basic changes to help vulnerable people” fleeing Ukraine. She acknowledged some progress since last week but criticised the slow pace of action, especially considering that the government has known about a likely Russian invasion for weeks.

Ukrainian refugees left out in the cold

Meanwhile, desperate Ukrainian women and children are facing a bureaucratic nightmare, often waiting outside warm, relatively empty buildings for hours in freezing temperatures. Worse still, when they finally start the complicated visa application process – assuming they have made or can get an appointment – they have been sent to another town, or even another country, to continue their application.

The list of requirements is lengthy, and would be a bureaucratic nightmare under normal circumstances. Add in the complexities of fleeing a war zone in haste, often without even a suitcase, and demands for proof of residency or the production of a utility bill make even less sense and are even more degrading and inappropriate. Many refugees will be lucky to escape with their passport, let alone any other paperwork required by the British authorities. Thankfully, the system is being improved to allow online applications, though many won’t be able to take advantage of this addition to the process.

#KayBurley – Ukrainians are having to jump through hoops to apply for a visa into the UK.. these are people fleeing from war.. we need to do something about this?

James Heappey – It's a hard job being Home Secretary

KB – It's hard to flee a war. pic.twitter.com/lNFDSMV2Rw

— Haggis_UK 🇬🇧 🇪🇺 (@Haggis_UK) March 10, 2022

A risk to national security?

In a ridiculous attempt to justify their position, the government is insistent that the extensive checks and bureaucratic hurdles are necessary to protect our security. Despite the fact that the applicants are vulnerable women and children, almost exclusively with family in the UK, apparently they are a potential security threat.

Not only does the government, presumably genuinely, believe that Russia will take advantage of this crisis and import spies to the UK amongst the refugees, but it has criticised Ireland for their “liberal policy”. A government source told The Telegraph that, “Ireland has basically opened the door to everyone in Ukraine”, creating a problem due to the lack of biometric checks in the common travel area.

Already in trouble for a series of false claims – such as suggesting it was offering help in Calais when it wasn’t – the government’s criticism of Ireland’s approach has been described as “dirty propaganda”

Doubling down

In addition to claims made by the home secretary, government ministers and MPs have been doubling down on the rhetoric.

Interviewed on Sky News, James Heappey, representing the Ministry of Defence, said it was “a hard job being home secretary”. Not as hard as being a refugee fleeing a war zone, Kay Burley reminded him. On BBC Breakfast, Charlie Stayt asked Heappey why refugees couldn’t be brought to the UK and the paperwork sorted out on British soil. Heappey reiterated that the home secretary “has to weigh that up against risk”. He added, “we are not making the mistake of dropping our guard altogether”. In response, Stayt suggested that the premise that women and children escaping a war zone are a security risk was “bogus”.

Charlie Stayt – Why not bring ukrainians to the UK & allow border control to deal with them when they get here?

James Heappey – Priti Patel had to weigh tbat up against risk…

Charlie Stayt – This is bogus, that women & children are a risk to our security.. #BBCBreakfast pic.twitter.com/Qbw7jCOpIi

— Haggis_UK 🇬🇧 🇪🇺 (@Haggis_UK) March 10, 2022

Leading the effort against Russia

On Monday evening, a special hour-long edition of BBC Question Time was dedicated to the Ukrainian war. Following the government line, Education Secretary Nadam Zahawi suggested the UK was leading the efforts and that Russia regarded Prime Minister Boris Johnson, as a leader in this field.

That put him and the Tories in their place. It’s about time someone said it. Well done @HelleThorning_S Bloody brilliant. #bbcqt pic.twitter.com/W1tq9WlIwb

— 💙💛Maria Del Greco (@MariaDelGreco1) March 9, 2022

His comments drew derision, both on the programme – most notably from the former Danish prime minister, Helle Thorning-Schmidt – and later on social media. Thorning-Schmidt said that Zahawi almost made her “chuckle” with his ridiculous claims, and that the European Union is “leading the effort against Russia”. Regarding his claim about Johnson, she suggested Russia would not see our prime minister as a leader and Zahawi should set the record straight.

Turned on #bbcqt special to see @HelleThorning_S calling out @nadhimzahawi's nonsense that UK can't waive refugee visas (unlike rest of Europe) because Putin sees UK as most dangerous enemy.

She correctly points out that Putin will be more concerned about EU.

— Siobhan Benita 🇺🇦🌻 (@SiobhanBenita) March 9, 2022

UK shamed by EU

According to the United Nations, over two million refugees have already fled Ukraine. Only 760 of those desperate people have been granted UK visas to date. As the fighting continues, the number of people expected to be displaced could exceed four million, with 18 million people projected to be affected.

EU countries, albeit geographically closer to Ukraine, have taken tens, even hundreds of thousands of refugees. In Poland’s case, it’s over 1.4 million. Even Ireland, with its relatively small population (just over five million), has taken in over 2,500 refugees – a third of them children.

Across the EU, refugees are being welcomed with open arms, being offered sustenance, free travel, accommodation and support. They are welcome to stay for three years, and without the need to apply for visas or jump cumbersome bureaucratic hurdles.

Many refugees are only seeking a temporary solution to the crisis and will want to return to their homeland at the earliest opportunity. But regardless of whether they wish to stay temporarily or permanently, they deserve our help and support.

The government response – hostile, and deliberately so – does not, however, represent public opinion. The generosity shown by the British people when the government launched its Ukraine Humanitarian Appeal demonstrates a sincere wish to offer help. The public are showing a level of compassion and humanity the Home Office would do well to emulate. In denying Ukrainian refugees the support they so desperately need and deserve, the government is also denying the public the opportunity to do whatever they can to help.

In an earlier article, I referred to the government’s handling of the Ukrainian refugee crisis as “world-beating indifference”. But it’s worse than that. In Yvette Cooper’s words, it’s a “total disgrace”. We can do better than this. And we should.