Boris Johnson's UK: The immoral in pursuit of the indefensible

But this is precisely what happened in the Second World War, when Churchill took over from ­Chamberlain. Indeed, because the war in the East only ended when Japan surrendered on September 2, 1945, the British changed prime ministers TWICE during a war, as Attlee took over in July 1945. This means that the UK had THREE prime ministers during a war.

Also, if it is true to say that Putin will be ­upset because Johnson is still in post, this means the Russian leader has real control over ­British ­politics and democracy. It also means that there is no one who can replace Johnson. While it is certainly the case that the pool of Tory ­talent is incredibly shallow, there is bound to be ­someone avid to take over. Looking at you, ­Michael Gove.

Moreover, the fight with Putin is all about the rule of law and democracy. If Johnson stays it is a gross insult to people fighting and dying for principles abroad that count for nothing at home. It will just not do to claim that ethics is very important, but now is not the time.

The whole of France will also find this a fanciful argument. Right now, they are smack in the middle of a hard-fought presidential election.

Now let’s move to some broader points. ­Under the British constitution, Parliament is ­sovereign. Not the people. Not you and me – Parliament. But with power comes responsibility.

This gift of sovereignty means that Parliament must adhere to moral principles. As soon as it detaches itself from morality, the argument for its continuing sovereignty falls. Kings and queens have gone for less. Indeed, some also conspicuously lost their heads.

The Tory party has lost its head over ­condoning immorality and unethical behaviour. If they have any sense, the consequences at the polls must make them shudder. Imagine arguing there is no alternative to a corrupt and dissolute prime minister.

Here is a serious question. Why should ­anyone now obey the law in Britain?

In a growing ­number of respects, the UK sometimes has the appearance of a failing state. It has an economy that lacks resilience, it’s led by a corrupt elite held hostage to Russian funds and intentions, with a weakness for spending public money like drunken sailors.

As the economic squeeze grows, more and more of the ruled may be tempted to ape their rulers. Why not, they will argue? If they can do it, so can we. Besides, we are broke, and my family needs support the state is unwilling to provide. They look at the elite and think, they did it, even when they didn’t need the money. I have a stronger case than they.

Morality matters. It underpins the way ­people work together. It may be implicit rather than ­explicit, but it has the vital effect of making ­societies cohesive. Without it, anything goes. And the law is built on sand.

This is where we are in the UK. A state that urged written, codified constitutions on all and sundry, but not for itself. Instead, the British state was content to rely upon a hotchpotch of conventions, ill-remembered rulings, and ­honourable members behaving honourably. Johnson put an end to all that.

What we are left with is rule of the ­immoral in pursuit of the ­indefensible. This cannot hold. When laws are ignored by law makers it opens the floodgates. What about ­international ­treaties? Can these too be ignored with ­impunity? What about the Treaty of Union? Can those who dislike it, merely ignore it?

How long will civil servants obey orders from the morally bankrupt? Why should taxpayers honour their obligations, if those in charge shirk them?

Do forgive me, dear reader, if I return to the subject of BBC Scotland. Another institution exhibiting all the signs of terminal malaise. Here is a small example of its collective tin ear. Let’s say you are incensed over some element of BBC Scotland coverage and want action.

According to its website, BBC Scotland ­requires comments about programmes, ­websites and policies to be directed to a PO Box in Darlington. Does this sound remotely like an organisation keen to keep in touch with its audience? Or is it more akin to a bureaucracy that would rather exploit its compulsory levy on viewers, with the minimum of audience interference?

Let’s accept the Westminster connection is finished and resolve to build a better Scotland based on a modern constitution, where the ­people are sovereign.

Amanda Burgauer is this week’s guest on the TNT show. Join us on IndyLive at 7pm on Wednesday