LONDON – Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson has always taken a seat-by-the-pants approach to governance. But even with Mr. Johnson’s shameless improvisational standards, the country’s troubles and epidemics and Brexit are two of the most pressing issues this week.
On Wednesday, concerned about a resurgence of the coronavirus, Mr Johnson announced that the British government would ban gatherings of more than six people, encouraging people to return to work after a week, dine at rest restaurants, rent pubs and send their children. Back to school.
Hours earlier, the government had introduced legislation on Northern Ireland that would override a landmark Brexit deal that Mr Johnson himself struck with the European Union, shepherd in parliament and won a landslide victory in last year’s election.
The government acknowledged that this unpredictable move violates international law, which critics say raises a tough question: Why should Mr. Johnson abide by the new rules on social distance when he violates a shameless legal treaty?
“It’s crazy, there’s no restricted style of governing,” said Mujtaba Rahman, a Brexit expert at Eurasia Group’s political risk consultancy. “Put on your accelerator as hard as you can and push yourself towards the rock.”
It is not yet clear whether Mr Johnson’s bilingualism with the EU will break existing trade negotiations or enable it to strike a better deal. European officials have called for urgent talks with Britain over threats to rewrite parts of its withdrawal agreement with Northern Ireland. But they did not break the second set of negotiations in London for a trade deal.
Anyway, Mr Johnson’s move showed readiness – one that dates back to his days as mayor of London – to abruptly change course, contradict himself and thumb his nose according to traditional standards in search of his goals. And, as in the past, his methods have led many to disrupt Britain’s founding.
One of its Conservative predecessors, John Major, said of the Brexit coup, “If we lose our reputation for honoring the promises we made, we will lose something more than the price that will never be returned.”
Mr. Johnson’s face was a clear case of leaning against the evidence that the virus had spread. After a quiet stretch in June and July, new cases began to burn in August. By last Sunday, they had grown to about 3,000, the highest daily number since May 23.
Health officials said they were concerned that many cases were among young people, putting Britain at risk of moving on the same path as France and Spain, where a surge in cases prompted Britain to impose travel facilities on both countries.
The country’s infection rate rose from 12.5 per 100,000 people last week to 19.7 per 100,000, indicating that the “R number” – a measurement that shows the average number of people infected by the virus per person – has increased by more than one. , An important threshold.
Mr Johnson was told by his chief medical and scientific advisers at the employers’ conference, “It’s time to save nine people. “These measures are not the second national lockdown. The whole point of them is to avoid a new national lockdown. “
Health experts praised Mr Johnson for now imposing modest sanctions instead of risking a big spike, which would require tougher action. But they said Britain’s policies remain inconsistent. Authorities allowed the crowd to gather for the opening day of the horse race on Wednesday in Doncaster, north England, before suddenly shutting down the rest of the race to spectators.
“The UK government is confused and needs to come up with a clear strategy because the current approach will hurt both health and the economy, and public compliance will continue to decline,” said Devi Sridhar, a professor and chairperson of Global Public. Said. Health at the University of Edinburgh.
These composite messages reflect the long-term tensions between Mr. Johnson’s cabinet and the party, who are concerned about the deadly second wave of infections this fall and winter, and who argue that more lockdowns will swallow the economy. Even now, Mr. Johnson insisted that schools remain open and that people should consider returning to work until they are safe.
Critics also blame the government for months after failing to conduct an efficient national testing and trace program. Labor leader Carey Starmer clashed with Mr Johnson in Parliament on Wednesday and people were told they would have to travel hundreds of miles to take the exam.
The government said police would impose a fine of about 120 on those who violate the six-person limit. But Mr. Johnson ignored questions about whether he intended to cancel Christmas, a sentence that suggests the government will make difficult decisions as the fall and winter decide on the virus.
For Mr Johnson, analysts said, it was too easy to choose to fight the European Union. Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary at the University of London, said Mr Johnson had turned to the Conservative Party’s hard-working Brexit-based test strategy in raising the language on Brexit.
Critics and establishment figures such as Mr Major and former Prime Minister Theresa May have been outraged by Mr Johnson’s threat to renew the treaty, as the government appears to have calculated a slight push from political circles in Westminster.
“They seem to see the violation of international law as a beltway issue that bothers most people – and in that, they are almost certainly right,” said Professor Bale and Washington, referring to Washington’s parochial politics.
Still, four months before the deadline for a trade agreement is not without the EU’s adverse risk. Mr Rahman said he now believed Mohammed Johnson would fail for a deal with Brussels and start a period of disruption at the peak of the epidemic.
The election promised to “complete Brexit,” analysts said, adding that Mr Johnson was also taking the risk of shortening his term, as many Britons are just sick of hearing about it. In January, if scientists’ fears are true, it could face a more serious health crisis.
“Covid is a very big challenge and the political risks of being seen as unworthy are high,” Professor Bale said. “Most voters are more concerned about Kovid, which has a direct impact on him than the technology of legal interpretation.”
