Why Boris Johnson’s election win puts British democracy at risk

It is one thing for a government to win an election; it is quite another for it to start rewriting the very rules that govern our democracy. This, however, is precisely what the Conservatives promise to do.

There are two ways of discerning what the Tories have planned for the next five years. One is to see what they actually say they will do, much of which is to be found on the now-notorious page 48 of the Conservative manifesto. The other is to examine what the Conservatives studiously omit to say, or occasionally ominously hint at.

The manifesto itself is a fairly terrifying document for anyone who cares about such things, and Conservative politicians have been asked virtually no questions about the plans – far-reaching though they are.

First, they would restrict the ability of the House of Commons to seize control of the order paper, to force the government to follow policies it does not wish to, to use various archaic procedures to make this happen, such as the “Humble Address” to the Queen; and generally be a nuisance to ministers who’d prefer to simply rule by decree.

On the other side, they propose to “look at” the “functioning” of the royal prerogative, which, given recent history, can only mean they would wish to strengthen it at the expense of both the monarch and parliament.

Second, they propose to “ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays”. Which means they will clip the Supreme Court’s present absolute discretions – itself causing a constitutional crisis. They might even require parliamentary (ie Tory) approval of new judges.

The House of Lords, which has formed a constitutional safeguard in the past, also looks to be reformed, and weakened.

To do all this the Tories will establish a “Constitution, Democracy & Rights Commission”. Who chairs and serves on this body will be crucial – but it might be assumed that they will tend to be men and women of the world who may prove sympathetic to the government.

As for the franchise, this looks to be changed with the effect of aiding the Conservatives. Expats, traditionally Conservatives, will find it “easier to vote” in British elections and get rid of the “arbitrary 15-year limit” on their rights. Thus someone who has not set foot in Britain since, say, the Beatles broke up, could vote; but a Pole or a German settled her for decades, like other EU citizens, would have no such right to vote in general elections (though, for historic reasons, those from Malta, Cyprus and Ireland do).

There is also a fiercely controversial proposal to introducing identification to vote at polling stations and restrict postal voting – both measures widely thought to suppress the franchise in the Conservatives’ favour.

Human rights will be reformed in an indeterminate way; and there will be no further moves to regulate the (overwhelmingly Tory) press or wider media.

Then there are the things where the manifesto says little or nothing.

With the BBC, for example, the manifesto says nothing much, but Boris Johnson has publicly raised the issue of the licence fee for what he calls the “Brexit Bashing Corporation”. The charter comes up again in the later 2020s, but fear of what might befall the BBC may have a chilling effect on its journalism. Similarly, Channel 4 cannot feel confident of its future, again to be decoded in this parliament, after substituting an ice sculpture for Mr Johnson in a TV debate.

Last, the prime minister and his colleagues retain vast powers of patronage. Key appointments such as the next Governor of the Bank of England are approaching, and the top echelons of the civil service, diplomatic corps, military, security apparatus, quangos, commissions and watchdogs can all be gradually populated by the sort of people Margaret Thatcher once styled “one of us”.

The 2019 election will also be the last one when the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act is still on the statute book. When it is abolished, a prime minister will once again enjoy complete freedom to call an election at time that best suits them politically, and manipulate the economy in order to win that election, as used to be the case.

Mr Johnson, in other words, will accrue to himself more powers than any peacetime prime minister in history – almost an elected dictator. How he exercises such powers remains to be seen.