No tracking. No cookies
Subscriptions
Subscriptions
Why Dirty Dossiers Matter
The fact that Conservative leadership candidates are gathering and sharing dirt on each other has serious implications for national security and democracy, say Sam Bright, Sian Norris and Iain Overton
Newsletter offer
Newsletter offerSubscribe to our newsletter for exclusive editorial emails from the Byline Times Team.
Boris Johnson had barely finished telling the world he was resigning, that the gloves had come off in what is already looking like the dirtiest Conservative leadership contest in years.
In both televised leadership debates so far, the comments have been personal and the animosity between the candidates impossible to hide. So febrile were these encounters that the debate planned for Sky News has been cancelled, with many Conservative MPs worrying that the TV appearances are harming the party’s image.
In 2019, when Johnson was selected for the top job, there was a sense that the party was going through the motions. It almost seemed an inevitability that Johnson, a longstanding darling of the Conservative grassroots, would eventually storm the contest.
His predecessor Theresa May had an even easier ride – anointed by Conservative MPs after a Johnson-Gove firefight knocked out Vote Leave’s two big-hitters.
This year, it all feels different. While Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have some brand recognition, none of the leadership hopefuls have much political clout. There’s no clear winner, no obvious leader-in-waiting – and so, in order to climb above the rest, the candidates have been forced to resort to old-fashioned political skulduggery.
Indeed, as the candidates put the finishing touches to their campaigns, The Times reported how “at least two rival leadership campaign teams have passed the Labour Party a digital dossier containing a series of lurid allegations about their potential opponents”. Apparently included in the documents are evidence of affairs, penchants for BDSM, and explicit photos that could be used as kompromat.
A lot of this is prurient tittle-tattle: fodder for the tabloid press.
However, the dirty dossiers matter on a more fundamental level – not because of the lurid stories they may reveal, but because of how they can be used to compromise MPs beyond these leadership contests, polluting our democracy.
National Security
There’s only one reason why such a dossier exists: to influence political outcomes.
In this case, candidates hope that by making it known they have salacious details about illicit activities, their rivals will be forced to step aside, assisting the dossier-holder. The dossier is designed to compromise its targets.
Undoubtedly, this process of blackmail isn’t the way in which most voters want the next Prime Minister to be selected, and the implications are profound. If embarrassing materials exist, and are being used to put pressure on senior MPs to quit a leadership race, they can also be used in the normal process of politics – forcing ministers to adopt certain policies, or MPs to vote against their conscience.
Holding politicians to account for their personal behaviour is not about pearl-clutching or trying to impose a moral code. It’s generally a positive thing that society is more tolerant and accepting of certain facts of life – relationships break down, affairs happen, people have a range of legal sexual preferences.
But when private issues become a source of embarrassment, or something an MP is keen to hide, they can become a weapon of blackmail. This is a threat to national security – not least when hostile states are more than willing to use kompromat to get what they want.
When unproven and prurient allegations emerged that there was a tape of former US President Donald Trump with sex workers in a Moscow hotel, intelligence officials expressed concern that such compromising materials could be wielded by Russian intelligence agents to manipulate the Commander-in-Chief.
As for Britain, Boris Johnson has even provoked security concerns for his laissez faire attitude to phone security, with his personal phone number having been displayed publicly online for 15 years, including when he was Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister.
This is particularly important during a time of Russian interference in British politics, when geopolitical balances are shifting and new superpowers emerging. Can we trust ministers to make the right decisions for the country and the world, if they are always looking over their shoulders, hoping a secret doesn’t come out?
Wielding the Whip
As well as a threat to national security, the use and abuse of kompromat makes for a weakened political system.
When Gavin Williamson was the Government’s Chief Whip, it was well-known that careers could be shaped by his little black book of secrets. While serving as Education Secretary, Williamson was pictured with a whip on his desk, after announcing an embarrassing U-turn on the grading of students during the pandemic. This was thought to be a veiled threat to those who had been critical of his decision.
It has also been argued that Williamson’s knighthood from Boris Johnson was more to do with staying quiet on what he knows, than a reward for his (poor) performance in his Cabinet jobs. Williamson is now assisting with Rishi Sunak’s leadership campaign.
Such a style of leadership does not make for a healthy democracy.
It’s not just the existence of dirt that’s the problem. It’s the opportunistic way it is being used by the current crop of leadership contenders. There are questions to be asked as to why certain would-be leaders decided not to run. Did they just not have the appetite for the hurly-burly of the campaign trail, or were they forced to make a decision in the face of a threatened front-page splash?
Indeed, the media is complicit in this process – avidly lapping up the spoils of political warfare.
What we do know is that rather than offering a persuasive and detailed political platform, candidates are instead trying to discredit their rivals with ugly rumours. This has become a contest of who is best at strategy and power games, not who is best to run the country and hold power.
And if you want further evidence of the broken system produced by the supersedence of Machiavellian plotting above effective policy-making, just look at the last 12 years.
This article was produced by the Byline Intelligence Team – a collaborative investigative project formed by Byline Times with The Citizens. If you would like to find out more about the Intelligence Team and how to fund its work, click on the button below.