Well, things carry on not happening.
May has suggested she may have a reshuffle as soon as this weekend, but her ability to do so is questionable. On the one hand, there's obviously pressure to sack Johnson. But Johnson's allies are instead calling for her to sack Hammond - and the DUP have expressed 'deep concern' about him. He's suggested there should be a deal with the EU, making him a "traitor" and a "saboteur". (calling the EU "the enemy" hasn't been enough to get back in their good books). Hammond has the support of more MPs, but Johnson's fans are more vocal, and may be more numerous among the grassroots. It would be hard to sack either without sacking the other now, since either way the fans of the loser will feel outraged that an equally "disloyal" minister hasn't been equally punished. Besides, sacking either would be read as the PM having an opinion on Brexit, and May's entire survival policy is not having any opinion on Brexit (or, rather, persuading both sides that she secretly agrees with them but is just having to pretend to have not made up her mind yet).
So she could sack neither of them. But having hinted at a reshuffle, anything less than a major scalp will look like cowardice. Plus, apparently now a lot of younger Tory backbenchers are sick of the lot of them and want a major clearing out to let new, younger names get more senior jobs. So then the alternative option is sacking both of them, which would provoke a major rebellion.
What she should do is sack both of them (even though Hammond hasn't done anything wrong), and stamp her authority on the party - either she'd be quickly sacked herself, or the party would be cowed into obedience. What she'll probably do, though, is have a pseudo-reshuffle in which a few minor names are moved around to look like she's doing something, but nothing will really change, and the chaos and disloyalty will just get worse and worse until she ends up being sacked anyway.
Meanwhile, allies of Hammond have apparently persuaded allies of Merkel to go on record blaming Johnson for the lack of progress in Brexit, which is an interesting spin, but probably won't work.
Oh, and Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, has condemned as "unthinkable" the 'no-deal Brexit' that Davies and Rees-Mogg are advocating, and that the PM has just announced that she is preparing for.
[What often happens in the case of cabinet sackings is that people aren't "sacked", but moved "laterally" in ways that demote them. The problem is, Hammond and Johnson occupy two of the Great Offices of State - there aren't really any other jobs (other than Home Secretary) that aren't obviously a massive demotion, so there's no polite middle way here. One possibility would be moving one of them to Party Chairman - an eminent office and a great honour, but with little power. But Johnson apparently says he doesn't want the job, and the party probably wouldn't want Hammond.]
Anyway, Trump's recent problems and the Catalan situation have rather occluded the leadership issue... but it's still there!
In policy news, incidentally, the Tories have been showing how much they care about the working man.
On the one hand, they've introduced an irritating tax on poverty. They're rolling out something called Universal Credit, which sounds like universal basic income, but is actually a way to consolidate various welfare payments into one, much smaller, payment, and it's confusing, and very unpopular. There's a helpline you can call if you're desparately poor and you want information and advice about the new Universal Credit, which sounds like a good idea....
...and the government are charging the poor 55p a minute to phone the helpline.
Now, the PM has U-turned and has "scrapped" the fee. But the papers today are reporting that this hasn't actually changed the fact that you have to pay to phone them, it was just a soundbite.
On the other news, since the Tories are traditionally (as the old land-owning party) opposed to the Death Tax (ie inheritance), Hammond has had the bright idea of going further and imposing a Life Tax. More specifically, the plan is for a "tax on age": poor people who fail to die early enough will have their pensions and benefits reduced, in order to give the money to young people. Now, there's some reasoning behind this - lots of young people do feel cheated by the older generation, and this is clearly part of the May-Hammond strategy of dragging the youth vote away from Corbyn. But, particularly when combined with the brouhaha around the proposed tax on dementia in the spring, such a blatantly political attack on older voters, the Tory core demographic, seems... courageous.
But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!