Many in this
election won’t decide how they vote based on policy. They either find it all
too confusing or irrelevant. They don’t trust politicians to do most of what
they say anyway. Instead they will give their vote to whoever they think seems
will be the “best” leader for the country. And in this pivotal moment in
British history many will vote for the leader they think has the skills to get
us the best Brexit deal. I think policy really does matter. However, I can
totally understand why some will vote on the leader’s personality rather than
policy. But what I would say is to judge who is a better leader we need to look
behind the act- behind the make-up, the posturing and the sloganeering. We need
to try to get to the real heart of the leader behind the façade. No matter how
many times someone tells you they are a “strong and stable” leader does not
make them a strong and stable leader!
But in
assessing who is a better leader what are the qualities we looking for? As a
Christian, I would say that as in all areas of life we need to be guided by the
principles we see in the bible and the person we see in the ultimate good
leader- Jesus Christ. The sort of attributes that God looks for in a good
leader are not necessarily the same as most of the world looks for, certainly
not our media. Too often in politics the “good leader” is portrayed as the one
who acts the best leader, i.e. who comes up with the more polished
performances, the cleverest quips and soundbites and who looks good on the
telly. Against those standards Tony Blair and David Cameron would probably be
considered our country’s greatest ever leaders. Yet one of those leaders ended
up misleading the country into fighting a disastrous illegal war in Iraq which
has brought on us much of the terrorism we suffer today. The other led the
country into the potential economic disaster of Brexit despite his strong
opposition to it.
Jesus's
background marked him out as "the wrong sort" to be a leader. He was
untrained and inexperienced as a teacher- not schooled as a rabbi and with the
wrong background; an illegitimate son of a simple carpenter from Nazareth. As
one of his critics said, can anything good come from there? Interestingly,
being the “wrong sort” is something they seem to share with most of the
greatest leaders in the bible God chose. Abraham, Moses, Gideon and David all
appeared to be the wrong sort to be leader when appointed; too old, too young, too
inexperienced etc. In fact, very often it is the people who in human eyes seem
the least likely sort to be leaders are the right sort in God’s eyes . “People
look at outward appearances, but the Lord looks at the heart”. 1 Samuel 16 v 7
We also need
to recognise that in choosing our leader that no man or woman is going to be a
perfect leader. We are all broken, sinful people. Jesus Christ is the only
perfect leader. I believe he will one day return to be leader of the whole
world, to bring true and lasting peace, prosperity and justice for the poor and
for all. In the meantime we have to settle for mere fallible men or women as
our leaders. Yet as a Christian I believe in choosing a leader you need to
assess how both their character measures up against him. (They will all fall
short of course).
So what
qualities does God look for in a good leader? Being a “strong and stable”
leader matters but if you look at the bible these are not the key requirements
in God’s eyes. It’s the characteristics of the Messiah, the perfect leader to
come predicted in the Old Testament vision (see eg Isaiah chapter 11) and that
we see displayed in the life of Jesus Christ, the man who would be that leader.
In one sense what God requires from a leader is what he requires from all us;
“…and
what does the Lord require of you? To act
justly, love mercy and walk humbly
with your God.” (Micah 6 v 8)
If we unpack
that into the principles of good leadership extolled across the bible I would
suggest the key characteristics we should be looking for are:
- A heart for the poor and needy
- A peacemaker
- Of good character
- Able to teach and reach people
- Humble
- Wise and listening to good advice
- Strong and stable
So how do
Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn measure up to those characteristics?
A Heart for the Poor and Needy
“…with righteousness he will judge
the needy, with justice he will give decisions for the poor of the earth.” (Isaiah 11 v 4)
Jesus saw
his mission particularly to “bring good news to the poor” (both spiritually and
materially). (Luke 4 v 18) and when Jesus returns as the ultimate leader he
“will give justice to the poor and make fair decisions for the exploited”.
(Isaiah 11 v 4) Jeremy Corbyn as a politician makes it very much his own
mission to support the poor and needy. For example, speaking out against
welfare changes that have doing such great harm done to poor and needy in our
country and speaking out for the plight of refugees. Theresa May's own record
in standing up for the poor is rather more mixed. To her credit she has
maintained the government's pledge to devote 0.7% of GDP to help the world's poorest.
However domestically whilst she has certainly talked about helping those who
are struggling the policies of the government she has been part of have greatly
harmed the situation of society's poorest especially the cruel welfare benefits
cuts and sanctions (see my previous blog).
A Peacemaker
“…blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of
God…” (Matthew 5 v 9)
“If possible, so far as it depends on
you, live peaceably with everyone.”
(Romans 12 v 18)
“Now a leader must be… not violent
but gentle, not quarrelsome.” (1 Timothy 3 v 2/3)
Jesus was
the ultimate peacemaker, reconciling men and God through his crucifixion. In
his earthly mission he demonstrated this by reaching out to reconcile those
considered to be beyond society’s pale, “the sinners” such as prostitutes and
tax collectors. Indeed, he was much criticised by the establishment for even
eating with such outcasts. He also spoke
out against armed violence “Those who live by the sword will died by the
sword,” he warned Peter. His was a peaceful revolution of heart and mind. You
will also hear much criticism of Jeremy Corbyn for having associated with his own
“sinners” like palestinian terrorist groups or the IRA. Yet he appears to have
done so only in order to try to bring reconciliation and peace. Indeed, Jeremy
Corbyn has strongly spoken out against the use of violent force in Iraq and
elsewhere and instead encouraged more peaceful means of resolving conflicts. He
is someone who enjoys engaging and talking with people even those he strongly
disagrees with. On a personal level
colleagues and even opponents all testify to how well they get on with him.
Whilst he argues passionately for the causes he believes in his tone is
generally quite gentle and respectful and he generally avoids personal
criticism.
By contrast Theresa May likes to style herself as
difficult and combative in order to get her way rather than a peacemaker.
Indeed, she prides herself on being described by her former colleague Ken
Clarke as a “bloody difficult woman.” This was illustrated in the rather
hostile and unproductive Downing Street meeting she had with EU leaders just
before the election. She has also shown herself rather too ready to resort to
personal abuse of her opponents. She has voted for every proposed military
intervention since she has been a MP including in Iraq and Libya. Peacemaker is
certainly not an obvious quality you would ascribe to Theresa May.
The
qualities of peacemaker could be very important when it comes to leading Brexit
negotiations. Our Prime Minister will be dealing with a bigger and stronger
party and trying to browbeat them into submission is just not going to work.
Any experienced negotiator will tell you that is not how you best negotiate
with a stronger party. Taking too forceful an approach is likely to risk the
door just being slammed in our face.
Of Good Character- faithful, righteous, self-controlled,
respectable, sober and hospitable
“Now a
leader must be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled,
respectable,
hospitable,
…, not given to drunkenness.” (1 Timothy
3 v 2/3)
“Righteousness
will be his belt and faithfulness
the sash around his waist.” (Isaiah 11 v 5)
It’s rather difficult to compete with Jesus
over “good character” as he was and is the perfect, sinless son of God.
However, good character is very important in a leader. Jeremy Corbyn
exemplifies key points of good character that the bible says should be looked
for in a leader. He is indeed temperate, gentle and self-controlled in his
speech and does not do “personal” sniping and insults (but sticks to the
issues). Anyone who has met him even if they strongly disagree with him speaks
about how “nice” and decent and hospitable he is, for example offering to share
his sandwiches with them on the train. Whilst he strongly disagrees with Donald
Trump he commented he would look forward to inviting to Downing Street to share
a cup of Yorkshire tea and try to persuade him why he was wrong over climate
change. Far from being a drunkard he is teetotal (and a vegetarian). Without being perfect he appears to be about
as honest as a politician can be. In fact, many would criticise him for being
too honest and at times saying his first thoughts aloud before he’s thought
through how they be interpreted. He has been accused of dishonesty over trying
to cover up his previous alleged dealings with terrorists. However, an
examination of the facts does not bear out the allegation that he ever condoned
terrorist violence. He merely spoke with certain groups associated with terrorists
to promote dialogue and peace. The worst he can fairly be accused of is
naivety.
Theresa May
professes to be a Christian and she may well be. Not knowing her personally I would not
presume to judge how genuine her Christian faith is. Generally there seems to
be nothing obviously immoral about her own personal character or conduct that
makes her unsuitable to lead. However, I would raise some question marks over
her honesty. Such as her repeated election pledges since 2010 to reduce immigration to 10,000s whilst doing nothing
really to bring that about when she had the power to do so as Home Secretary
and then Prime Minister. Her spurious reasons for breaking her promise not to
call an early election because of opposition faced on Brexit when Parliament
had already given her the authority to trigger article 50. (The real reason was
because she had a huge poll lead). Even in this election campaign she clearly
seemed to be lying when she tried to deny that her major immediate change on
social care funding was not a u turn. Looking in her eyes you could almost read
she knew she had been caught out there.
Of Good character- not a lover of
money?
“Now a leader must be… not a
lover of money.” (1 Timothy 3 v 2/3)
“For the love of money is a root of all kinds
of evils.” (1 Timothy 6 v 10)
“By justice a king gives a country stability, but one who is greedy for bribes tears it down.” (Proverbs 29 v 4)
Jeremy
Corbyn is certainly not a lover of money. He is no champagne socialist but
lives quite simply, wearing ordinary (sometimes slightly scruffy) clothes. With
no flash car, he rides a bike and uses public transport. He generally makes the
lowest expenses claims of all MPs. Most
importantly, there is no hint that he is open to any sort of bribe
By
contrast Theresa May does lead a rather
more lavish lifestyle and is well known for her fine clothes and chique shoes
(witness her Vogue shoot). Her husband Philip is a multi-millionaire investment
banker with one of the largest investment houses in the world and who make much
of their money from helping multi-national tax avoiding clients like Amazon.
Whilst such an association by her husband does not per se make her unsuitable
to be the country's leader it does raise a question mark over how influenced
she might be personally be by the love of money and by wanting to preserve the
position of the super-rich against those they may exploit. After all. she
herself through her husband is part of that rich elite.
There is
nothing particularly egregious about Theresa May's character or lifestyle but
nothing particularly to commend her either and there is some cause to question
her character as less than fully honest and not entirely untainted by the love
of money. If she hadn't told us she was a Christian it would certainly not be
obvious she was by her conduct. By contrast if Jeremy Corbyn hadn't told us he
wasn't a Christian we might well suspect he was one.
Able to Teach and Reach
“Now a
leader must be…able to teach…” (Also 1 Timothy 3 v 2/3)
Jesus was
brilliant at this- able to communicate his message to people from all
walks of life from the highest to the lowest. We can’t expect our own leaders
to be as good. However, it is very important that they be able to teach and
reach with their own particular messages; both to make themselves and their
policies understood to the ordinary citizens they serve and also to get their
points across to and persuade those they need to deal with to carry out their
policies. This applies especially of course to the EU leaders with whom they
must negotiate Brexit terms.
Neither
Jeremy nor Theresa are great orators, although both are pretty articulate. In
terms of polished prepared speech making Theresa is possibly slight better.
However looking beyond the superficial polish and sound bites who does
communicate better with ordinary people? All the evidence now suggests Jeremy
wins that hands down. Many are still wary of him for various reasons but there
are also many who have been won over by his down to earth message and his more
ordinary less polished human touch. He is very much a people person who thrives
on being out there communicating with ordinary people even ones he disagrees
with. This was seen in his leadership election campaigns where thousands
flocked to hear his message. That same message is now inspiring many other. By
contrast Theresa seems often very fearful of contact with other people and
quite ill at ease. She generally shies away from contact with the ordinary
public unless it is well controlled and stage managed. And, of course, she was
unable to face up to debating with the 6 other part leaders on live TV- a great
opportunity to convey her message to a wider audience. Rather than justifying
her positions with evidence or even articulating detailed policy she mostly
resorts to rather bland soundbites whose
meaning is at best unclear; “Brexit means Brexit” “A red white and blue
Brexit “no deal is better than a bad
deal" “strong and stable leadership.” This does not really teach and
inform the electorate as to what she really wants to do or why she is doing it.
So, what
about their ability to get their points across to other fellow leaders? With
Jeremy it’s very difficult to know because he's never sought or held high
office. Some will point to the massive vote of no confidence in him by his own
MPs as evidence that he is incapable of persuading other politicians to his
point of view. However that's not strictly true, because his leadership
challenger had himself been persuaded to adopt Jeremy's policy ideas almost
entirely (save for Trident) And this is now reflected in Labours manifesto now
warmly endorsed even by the MPs who rebelled against him. If he has failings as
a leader it’s not because of being unable to persuade others of his position.
Theresa May by contrast has held high office but how has she
done with persuading other leaders to her point of view? Rather badly I think.
As Home Secretary from 2010 she pledged to reduce net immigration below 100,000
and even though most of our immigration comes from outside the EU free movement
zone she singularly failed in making any progress with this target. In fact, at
one immigration was over three times this level. Even more recently we have
seen her immediately pull back from her own new policies once met with
opposition- on raising national
insurance for the self-employed and removing caps from social care. Despite
these clear failures to bring others round to her position she would say she
has a great track record in getting what she wants out of the EU. She will
point to her success in 2014 when as Home Secretary she persuaded the EU to let
the UK opt out of the Lisbon agreement on policing and criminal justice and then
cherry pick just 35 out of 110 measures that she liked and where she opted back
in. She would like to think she can do a similar a landslide carte deal with
Europe over Brexit- just tell the EU waiter what we want and as long as you
shout loud enough he'll bring it. However, the strategy of “exit then
cherry-picking” worked with the Lisbon treaty only because Tony Blair in 2007
had set this up as an “exit plus cherry-picking” deal in the Treaty itself. It
is a colossal error to think that the same approach can work in the case of
Brexit – a negotiation of phenomenally greater complexity, and where opt-outs
have not been negotiated by existing treaty provisions. Her dealings over the
Lisbon treaty whilst successful are nothing very remarkable and do not overcome
the concerns arising from her failure to persuade on other matters.
Humble
“[Jesus]
being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be
used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very
nature of a servant …he humbled himself by becoming
obedient to death- even death on a cross.” (Philippians 2 v 6-8).
“You know
that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and
their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among
you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever
would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not
to be served but to serve…” (Mark 10 v 42-45)
Humility is too often
devalued as a leadership quality, but it should be a key characteristic we look
for and was exemplified in Jesus’s life. Like Jesus Jeremy Corbyn does not seek
leadership for his own personal advantage but only to fulfil a mission for the
good of others. If he wanted to grasp at personal advancement he would not have
spent over 30 years as a backbencher, speaking up for often unfashionable causes.
He is noticeably uncomfortable when asked by interviewers to sell himself as a
leader and will instead gravitate to the policies that he wants to promote.
Contrast this with Theresa May who tried to style her whole election campaign
around what a great leader she claims to be ; the strong and stable leader
which she contrasts with the poor leadership of her opponent. She also has
something of a fondness for showing off fine clothes especially those shoes!
She does not display very obvious humility.
Wise and listening to advice
“The Spirit
of the Lord will rest on him- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding”
(Isaiah 11 v 2)
“Without wise
leadership, a nation falls; there is safety in having many advisers.”
(Proverbs 11 v 14)
Many have questioned Jeremy Corbyn's political judgments over the years as foolishly
extreme. I'll admit I haven’t shared all of them but looking back I have to say
he was very often proved right when many were wrong:
·
Calling
for sanctions against apartheid South Africa when our government was still
treating them as a friend
·
Calling
for talks with Northern Irish terrorists to bring about a lasting peace
·
Opposing
new Labour's continuing Tory privatisation of the running of our public
services
·
Opposing
disastrous military interventions in Iraq and Libya that have exacerbated the
conditions that breed poverty mass migration and terrorism
·
Opposing
savage and economically self-defeating austerity and welfare cuts.
Part of
being a wise leader however is listening to and working with a team of wise
advisers. In this election Jeremy has rightly talked about a good leader
listening to advice. However, I’m afraid he has not always put this into
practice. In his time as Labour leader he too often ignored the advice of his
cabinet colleagues and went it alone and seemed to sometimes make up and
announce policy on the hoof without consulting his colleagues. This came to a
head during and immediately after the EU referendum where he had failed to
co-operate with the Labour remain campaign and immediately afterwards without
consultation called on the Prime Minister to trigger article 50 straightaway.
It was this not his policy positions that ultimately led to his MPs rebellion
(See my earlier blog last year explaining why I would not be voting for him in
the second Labour leadership election). I think it is understandable how a man
who had previously devoted his whole political career to being a lone backbench
rebel has struggled to work with a cabinet of colleagues. Has he learned from,
can he learn from those mistakes? Frankly I don’t know. There have been
positive signs in this election campaign where he has been more measured in his
words and has tried to avoid contradicting his colleagues. Only time will tell.
I have to
say I’ve not seen a great deal of wisdom on Theresa May’s part. As Home
Secretary with responsibility for immigration supposedly her big policy was
bringing down immigration to 10,000s. Nearly all economists warn that for the
near future this would be economically disastrous. Thankfully she singularly
failed to achieve that target. However, the setting and failing to reach that
target greatly stoked up the fire of fear over immigration levels. It therefore
massively contributed to the vote to leave the EU, something which Theresa May
herself had firmly if quietly opposed. She became Prime Minister on the back of
the leave vote and overnight converted herself from a quiet if firm supporter
of the EU to an evangelist for a hard Brexit which placed full control of
immigration and our laws as the red lines and free trade and economics as an
afterthought. Most economists believe her priorities for Brexit will lead to
the imposition of serious barriers to EU trade which will be economically
disastrous. (See my earlier blog article on the Brexit myths). She also
appointed leading Brexiteer MPs into the key cabinet positions dealing with the
EU including probably the most unsuitable and undiplomatic Foreign Secretary
ever Boris Johnson who has promptly set about upsetting as many of our near
neighbours as possible. None of this strikes me as very wise. Nor her decision
to increase national insurance on the self-employed (in breach of a Tory
manifesto promise) which when opposed she almost immediately withdrew nor her
surprise announcement to remove any cap on funding of social care costs in the
new manifesto (“the dementia task”) which again when opposed she almost
immediately changed.
Generally, I
would say that she has shown she can and does work alongside colleagues who
advise her. She had after all been a government cabinet member for six years
before she became Prime Minister and a shadow cabinet member before that.
However, a number of those she has appointed to her own cabinet I would suggest
are not wise advisers to have around you, e.g. Boris Johnson. And her “dementia
tax” debacle by all accounts was a policy she came up without any detailed
consultation with her cabinet colleagues.
A strong and stable leader?
“…the Spirit
of counsel and of might…” (Isaiah 11 v 2)
“… the one
who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That person
should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. Such a person is
double-,minded and unstable in all that they do.” (James 1 v 8)
Theresa May
has styled her whole campaign around being the “strong and stable” leader that
our country needs to negotiate the best Brexit deal we can with the EU.
But on the
available evidence how strong and stable a leader has she proved to be? And how
does she measure up against Jeremy Corby for strength and stability?
Strength
Strength
Theresa May
certainly talks “strong” and “tough”. For example, the hard line she proposes
towards immigration- to reduce it by 1/3rd to 10,000s. Similarly, past
cabinet colleagues have even described her as being a “bloody difficult woman.”
She would say she has the strength of character to put to the British people
the tough choices we need to make like how some people having to pay more in
tax or how we fund social care for our growing number of elderly. She will say
by toughing it out with the EU as Home Secretary she was able to force them to
accept the cherry-picked opt ins she wanted to the Lisbon treaty on police and
crime. She might even cite how she stood up to the EU leaders in the Downing
Street meeting at the start of the election in setting out her Brexit demands
which got Jean-Claude Junker so wound up.
The trouble
is her “tough talking” has actually got her or the country nowhere. This is the
third election in a row where she has proposed slashing net immigration only to
fail spectacularly badly and do nothing effective to prevent it rising further
(It is now falling finally but only because of Brexit). She made tough calls
over taxation and funding social care by raising self-employed national
insurance in the recent budget and by proposing in her budget uncapped social
care contributions from people’s homes. But as soon as these proposals faced
any vocal criticism in days or even hours she reversed those policies. That is
surely a sign of weakness not strength. The opt out/in to EU crime and police
measures might be seen as a sign of her “strength” succeeding. However as noted
above she was only putting into practice what Tony Blair’s deal on this had set
up for her. And as for her “tough talking” with the EU leaders over Brexit so
far all this has done is get their backs up. As a result, even her supposed
conservative ally Chancellor Merkel warned (in rather more subtle language than
Mr Junker) that she was being “illusionary” over her Brexit expectations. This
certainly was evidence of her being a “bloody difficult woman” but not in a way
that is likely to be at all helpful when negotiating with a stronger party.(See
my comments above re “peacemaking”)
And then
what about all the causes and people that she has not stood up for or stood
against? What about standing up against
the richest and most powerful to help the weak? Jesus was no respecter of the rich and
powerful and was prepared to challenge them directly. Jesus warned “woe to you
rich”, who would find it very hard to get into his kingdom and he often
encouraged them often to give away their wealth. He tackled head on the hypocrisy of the religious
establishment- the Pharisees and Sadducees, speaking out against them - “woe to
you Pharisees.”
Theresa May talks quite a good talk about
standing up for the just about managing and seek a country that works for all
and being prepared to intervene to do this. She has more recently proposed
certain policies that in limited ways seek to do this eg adopting Labour's
policy in fuel capping (but then watered it down in her manifesto) and even her
controversial removal of certain pensioner entitlements some might view in that
way. However overall as a member of the government since 2010 she has mostly
very much stood up for the interests of the rich and powerful against the poor
e.g. the choices to reduce taxes for rich individuals and corporations whilst
slashing welfare spending for those most in need. And what about standing up to
other world leaders when they are clearly in the wrong? Instead of criticising
Saudi Arabia for its involvement in the Yemeni bombing of innocent civilians
she supports selling arms to help them do it. Or what about standing up to
President Donald Trump and some of his policies that threaten the world? She
was about the only European leader who refused to sign the recent letter
condemning his foolish and damaging decision to pull out of the Paris climate
change deal. She just said it was “disappointing” but it was “up to him.”
Again, that is weak not strong leadership. And then in this election campaign
we see her running away from the live BBC leaders’ debate, sending Amber Rudd
instead (even though Amber had just lost her father that week). This is
weakness not strength.
Compare this
with Jeremy Corbyn. He generally has a gentler, friendlier style (for which
many in his party have criticised him). However, politeness and gentleness
should not be mistaken for weakness. He has stuck very firmly to his core
political beliefs and policies, even when it seemed all the world was against
him. He was therefore fully prepared to vote against his party’s own government
on numerous occasions when he disagreed with them. (Perhaps rather too much but
we’re taking about strength not wisdom here.) And after the EU referendum we
then saw most of the country (including myself) and most of his MPs join David
Cameron’s call, “God sake man go”. He stood his ground and fought off his
leadership challenge because he was still convinced he had an important job to
do.
And unlike
Theresa May but like Jesus Jeremy does have the inner strength to take on
vested powerful and rich establishment interests. Time and again he has spoken
out against individuals and governments who act unjustly and spoken for the
poor and oppressed. Even if you think some of that was naïve it shows strength
not weakness. And he continues to stand up to the powerful when he believes
they do wrong. Witness his very clear condemnation the other day of President
Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Change Agreement. And unlike Theresa
May, Jeremy has also shown his never afraid to engage with anyone in debate and
discussion.
Jeremy beats
Theresa hands down when it comes to real strength.
Stability
Jeremy Corbyn
has been pretty consistent and stable in sticking to the principles and
policies he believes in, especially to bring about a more peaceful, just and
equal society and world, This is what led to him being a serial rebel as a
Labour back bencher over 30 years. It is also part of what landed him in
trouble with many of his own MPs as leader eg his firm opposition to airstrikes
in Syria and his opposition to Britain’s own “independent” nuclear deterrent.
He has however shown at times that he is prepared to listen to other views and
take account of new evidence that have changed his standpoint. For example,
having been an advocate of leaving NATO as an archaic organisation post the
cold war, in the light of more recent events he has accepted it still has a
role to play On the EU his position has also changed but has been rather more
consistent than some politicians. He was never more than lukewarm about our
membership of the EU, having supported our withdrawal from the EEC in 1983. Subsequently
he did accept there were greater benefits than losses from being an EU member
but even in the Remain campaign he had his doubts and said he was 7/10 for
staying in. From being a lukewarm remainer before the Referendum to seeking a
medium soft Brexit after it is a broadly consistent position I’d say.
Before she
was Prime Minister Theresa May was a loyal MP and front bencher who nearly
always supported and followed the party line. In that sense she also can be
said to have been stable in her political positions (albeit in an opposite way
to Jeremy Corbyn!). However since becoming Prime Minister a year ago, and
especially recently, she has shown a rather worrying tendency for major policy wobbling and even completely
backtracking. Examples include:
·
Her
sudden conversion from quite but firm EU remainer to hard Brexit, evangelist
happy to have no free trade deal in order to have complete control of
immigration and law
·
Promising
to give workers a place on company boards- massively watered down in the
manifesto
·
Promising
to cap energy bills-again massively watered down in the manifesto
·
In
the last budget increasing national insurance contributions on the
self-employed (in breach of a Tory manifesto commitment) only to reverse it
days later following the string adverse reaction
·
Declaring
seven times that there would be no election until 2020 to ensure a period of
stability before suddenly announcing this snap election
·
The
“dementia tax” fiasco. Proposing in her manifesto to remove any cap on funding
social care from people’s home. Within hours following adverse reaction the
policy was reversed to put back a cap.
One cannot
escape the impression that Jeremy Paxman was right when he described Theresa
May as a “blow hard who collapses at the first sight of gunfire.” As was also
pointed out. with such a record isn’t the the EU is likely to regard her as a
weak rather than a strong negotiator? She likes to style herself as the Iron
Lady number, like Mrs Thatcher known for wielding her handbag with the EU
leaders in order to get her way. But Theresa May rather seems to be all talk
and no hand bag!
Despite the
rhetoric I would suggest the evidence indicates that Jeremy Corby is a far more
strong and stable leader than Theresa May.
Conclusion
Against all these key biblical characteristics of what makes a good leader I believe neither Theresa May nor Jeremy Corbyn perfectly fulfil them. On most of them I suggest the evidence indicates both of them partly fulfil the characteristics but on each of them Jeremy fulfils them rather better (although they are possibly closer on wisdom and following advice). However, it’s on the very quality that Theresa May extolls in herself - being “strong and stable”- that she performs particularly badly and Jeremy particularly well. If you want a strong and stable leader in the true senses of those words then he is the one. He is also the one who seems to best have the gifts to be a successful negotiator for Brexit, as he appears to have rather better personal communication skills and be a much better peacemaker.
If you are
deciding your vote on the character of the leader alone I would suggest you
should certainly be voting Labour.
No comments:
Post a Comment