Boris’s boat is nothing more than another hopeless vanity project

Some big boats have a purpose; Boris Johnson’s new one will not, but let’s just add it to the list of hopeless projects the prime minister has been responsible for, writes Chris Blackhurst

(PA)

Once, I was fortunate enough to be invited aboard the Leopard, the spectacular racing yacht then sponsored by the City firm ICAP.

As we cruised in the Solent, I marvelled at the vessel. Below deck it had powerful computers that would tilt the keel at the optimum angle for speed. It was applying the very latest technology.

I asked the firm’s founder, Michael Spencer, why he did it. Without hesitation, he pointed to the giant sail, bearing the name “ICAP”. That, he said, “is one huge advertising hoarding. We can take it anywhere and anchor it any harbour. No one can miss it.” He added that when its picture appeared in the press – as it often did because Leopard was winning races and breaking records – that was also more brand promotion.

Put like that, his company’s estimated £3m a year sponsorship deal looked reasonable, a bargain even. Spencer’s rationale came to me as I was contemplating Boris Johnson’s planned £200m successor for the Royal Yacht Britannia.

The intention is that the ship – not a yacht, note – will be used to host ministerial summits and diplomatic meetings as part of Johnson’s plan to build links with other countries following Brexit. It’s expected to be in service for about 30 years and will be crewed by the royal navy.

Johnson said: “This new national flagship will be the first vessel of its kind in the world, reflecting the UK’s burgeoning status as a great, independent maritime trading nation. Every aspect of the ship, from its build to the businesses it showcases on board, will represent and promote the best of British – a clear and powerful symbol of our commitment to be an active player on the world stage.”

Spencer, I get. Johnson, I don’t. The former’s yacht was serving a smart commercial purpose, netting an obvious return; the latter is sheer vanity. Sadly, it’s another in the Johnson list of grands projets.

We’ve had a cable car across the Thames that is hopelessly underused; a Garden Bridge and presidential White House-style media briefing room that never were. To them can be added the Boris Island airport and the bridge connecting Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Johnson is opposed to flying on eco-grounds. So, he goes back to the sea, which is environmentally more acceptable

What’s depressing is that Johnson comes out with this guff and his nodding dog ministers and supporters repeat it. Can’t they see it is nonsense?

Buckingham Palace did. They arched an eyebrow and turned down the proposal to name it after the late Prince Philip. A royal source was quoted as saying the suggestion was “too grand” and added: “It is not something we have asked for.” That is understated code for: “You’ve got to be kidding.”

Except it isn’t a joke. Johnson believes (or says he believes) a boat that is bound to be smaller, less equipped and not as luxurious as the biggest superyachts belonging to the super-rich will “sell Britain”.

If he means a floating museum promoting a country that is mired in the past and still clings to the delusion that it’s a sea-faring superpower, as he seems to be implying, with an empire dotted around the globe, based mainly in far-flung islands, then fair enough. The sight of “HMS Boris” will fit the bill.

The world, though, has moved on from a period when Britain would flex its muscle via gunboat diplomacy and in more peaceful times, the Queen and Prince Philip could voyage across oceans and come down gangplanks to mass bands, bunting and cheering crowds.

Do global leaders really relish holding meetings while bobbing up and down at anchor? No chance.

However large the ship, it will still be cramped. How can it genuinely “showcase” the best of British business? There won’t be room to show much of anything.

Tycoons possess yachts, sure they do, but for leisure. Will the would-be investors, the Silicon Valley brigade or the Chinese multibillionaires, be impressed by a state-owned boat docking in San Francisco or Shanghai? Will being aboard a boat make a scrap of difference to whether an investment is made or a trade deal is struck? Not at all.

The money could be better spent in the UK, of that there is no doubt. Johnson, though, does not see the cost (what’s the likelihood of the £200m being exceeded? in those terms. This is all about glamour, about making a big, bold statement, a splash. Unfortunately, as with so many of the creations that emerge from Downing Street (God forbid there is a “reject” pile), it is preposterous.

It’s a throwback to a bygone age, one where journeying by ship was the only way to travel. Now, of course, we have aircraft. Johnson is opposed to flying on eco-grounds. So, he goes back to the sea, which is environmentally more acceptable. It’s as if he has never heard of electric aircraft, of the type that the likes of Airbus and Boeing are racing to develop.

It’s inconceivable that ministers and senior business figures will go on long sea journeys, they cannot afford the time. They will fly to wherever the ship is docked. So, the eco-saving will be non-existent.

My betting is that like other Boris wheezes the national flagship will be quietly sunk.