How can Boris Johnson bounce back against Keir Starmer?

We’re hearing a lot about “bouncing back” at the moment, and the bullish tone coming from (some) businesses and public services is obviously heartening.

However – there’s always a however in politics – there does seem to be some doubt about the ability of the prime minister himself to bounce back from his current travails. Context is important though – the prime minister still enjoys very healthy public support by historical standards, and the Tories lead Labour in the opinion polls by around 20 points. The next general election may be almost five years away. Still, politics is a volatile old game.

Another disappointing (for the Conservatives) session of prime minister’s questions highlights how much the political dynamic has changed since Keir Starmer became leader of the opposition on 4 April. Mr Johnson is faced with new and formidable challenges.

Obviously allowance must be made for the unique circumstances of the time, and for Boris Johnson’s own health, gradually recuperating as he must still be from his own time in hospital. His doctors were, after all, preparing to announce his death, according to the account given to The Sun during his exclusive interview with them. Mr Johnson does though seem to have regained much of what he calls his “terrible buoyancy” in recent weeks.

The problem is political, and the question is what can the political product branded “Boris” do about it?

The obvious answer is that he needs to do much more to sharpen the government’s response to the pandemic. All manner of excuses are starting to emanate from Downing Street and Whitehall about what is going wrong and what has gone wrong. The scientists are starting to be given some of the blame. The civil service machine, especially in the Cabinet Office, is said to be ineffective, and the rest is apparently bad luck. Arms-length agencies such as Public Health England are being lined up to take responsibility for equipment shortages and a lack of planning. Such career-saving themes will become increasingly familiar as the public enquiry approaches.

So far the public seems inclined to believe that ministers are doing their best in difficult circumstances, but more failures, needless deaths and mass unemployment could see a dramatic switchback in sentiment. Mr Johnson’s poll ratings are already slipping, and if there is, say, a second wave of Covid-19 cases that overwhelms the NHS, Italian-style, then the public will be unforgiving. Even now, after many months, the provision of ventilators to deal with an influx of new cases is inadequate. The excuses are running out.

Second, Mr Johnson needs a sound media strategy. He cannot continue with a situation where informal anonymous briefings, authorised or not, confuse messages and self-generate rapid policy U-turns, as we saw with the “roadmap” of our lockdown. Policymaking and “comms” do not have to be such a chaotic omnishambles, even in an emergency.

Mr Johnson could also move to sack his most obviously incompetent, lacklustre and unpopular ministers because he is getting little support from them. Priti Patel is the standout flop of the cabinet, allowed out only with supervision and shortly to star in her very own employment tribunal case. Others too have shown themselves wanting, with Michael Gove nowadays a caricature of the evasive politician, as if imagining himself living out a script from The Thick of It. The presentational skills of Alok Sharma, Liz Truss and Dominic Raab are yet to find their right showcase, shall we say. Neither has Matt Hancock shone brightly, being described by Charlie Brooker, cruelly, as “your sister’s first boyfriend with a car”. But demoting the health and care secretary right now would probably look too much like an admission of failure. Apart from the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, the cabinet looks out of its depth but also looking for a lead from their chief, who is not giving it. Maybe replacing them with more nonentities would not make that much difference?

Mr Johnson could usefully jettison policies that are patently unfair, and are just gifts to the opposition. The NHS surcharge for foreign workers now being levied on the very NHS “heroes” saving lives is basically indefensible and beyond Mr Johnson’s ability to defend it. He seemed uncomfortable when Labour and the SNP raised it yesterday. An exemption for staff in the NHS and care sectors would cost little, and the government might even be defeated on a Commons vote on the issue. Better quietly bury it under another “review”.

In truth, compared to giving his government some stronger leadership and strategic direction, PMQs are the least of Mr Johnson’s problems. The pandemic has meant that Brexit and the “levelling up the north” projects have been neglected, while the economy has gone from sluggish growth to deep recession, and no guarantee of a rapid bounce back there. Mr Johnson should probably prepare better for his weekly skirmishes with Sir Keir; past premiers have dreaded their interrogations and spent entire mornings in rehearsals with their advisers devising wisecracks and memorising key facts. Mr Johnson uses the term “forensic mind” to deride his opponent, unwisely.

Tony Blair cut back the twice-weekly sessions established in the time of Harold Macmillan, going from two quarter-hour sessions on Tuesdays and Thursdays to one half-hour exchange on a Wednesday. Since then, especially under Speaker Bercow, the questions have stretched to an hour. Mr Johnson could ask Speaker Hoyle to shorten the ordeal, but that is about as far as he can go to avoid his weekly beatings.

The saving grace is that, as William Hague discovered in his unhappy time as leader of the opposition, being brilliant at PMQs and making a fool of the prime minister every week for four years is no guarantee of electoral success. For that, a government needs selflessly to supply you – and the public – with a constant stream of reasons why nobody should vote for it. That is why Mr Johnson isn’t very bouncy just now.