
Theresa May must stand for something
When the PM launched her Manifesto, she declared “there is no Mayism”. Now we’re wondering if she was telling the truth.
Prime Minister Theresa May had a relatively good last few weeks of ‘term’ before the summer parliamentary recess. Regaining some of her authority thanks to the 1922 backbench committee granting her the freedom to fire and hire new ministers if her current cabinet prove just too disoloyal, May heads off for a much-needed summer break. The last holiday she took was a walking holiday in Snowdonia in April, when she famously decided to call for a snap General Election that would eventually erode her Conservative Party’s Parliamentary Majority. Now she has gone on another walking holiday, what other crazy decisions could she really make?
The craziest decision she could make is to resign. The country cannot be put through a gruelling Conservative Leadership contest that it narrowly avoided last year when Andrea Leadsom, thankfully, pulled out before the contest went to the Tory membership. But those were different times; the Brexit vote may have been dnestablaising, but not as so as one in the middle of the withdrawal negotiations. But that’s not to say that simply staying in 10 Downing Street will spare the country instability and uncertainty; a two-year long leadership contest certainly would afford that outcome. That will be the result if Theresa May is unable — or not allowed — to govern to the best of her abilities.
That is why Theresa May must tell her Party and her country what she truly stands for. Her Party Conference Speeches last year were widely applauded for their detail and their stances against things that have annoyed certain Conservatives for years: liberals that claim to be “citizens of nowhere”; human rights ‘culture’ that ‘threatens the status’ of the Armed Forces; while also outlining the future of the Government’r programme for Brexit under her leadership. This year, that won’t be enough. Although she tried to lay out her vision; her fundamental ideology in the theme of “change”, she has failed since then to act on almost anything, allowing her speech to largely fall by the side-lines.
I like Theresa May — she is an effective Minister and a good Prime Minister — but we cannot escape the failures of the first year of her Premiership. Since May’s conference speech, we’ve had the proposal to force corporations to publish lists of their foreign workers announced by Amber Rudd and then quickly dropped. Then, in Spring, we had the progressive proposal to increase National Insurance contributions for the self-employed to be in line with employees announced, before being dropped quietly before Prime Minister’s Questions a week later. Then came her manifesto launch during the election campaign; supposedly a blueprint for a changed Conservative Party. After the result of a hung parliament, most of it was abandoned.
It’s not difficult to see why the charge that May doesn’t really believe anything is an easy one to make, especially considering she is up against Jeremy Corbyn, a man who sticks to his ‘principles’ even when it means he is condoning terrorism on Britain’s streets. But this needs to change. In September, after summer recess, May needs to come back to her cabinet with a vision and a programme to achieve that vision. Her warm words when she first become Prime Minister on making Britain a more equal country are the basis for that vision — it is clear she strongly believes in the cause for social justice — but the PM has failed to put the meat onto those initial bones. Her vision of greater equality remains just that: a vision.
What does May stand for?
Some of her policies from the election were distinctly ‘Theresa’. No other Tory leader in living memory would have proposed stealing Labour’s 2015 policy of capping energy prices, alongside social care reform and the cutting of pensioner benefits. But most of these policies were technocratic and small change. The one that stood out was the social care reform. ALthough it was dubbed by the Labour leadership as a ‘dementia tax’, some on the left — like former Labour Minister Alan Johnson — were secretly respectful of the plan, not because of what it means for social care, but because it targeted one of the biggest sources of inequality today: inherited wealth.
That, although unpopular, is what Theresa May should build from. Greater equality can come from ensuring that more people start from a level playing field, redistributing the wealth of the rich when they die and ensuring younger people feel they are more equal within the economy. A conservative leader that will probably not see another General Election doesn’t need to worry about angering the Tory grassroots, especially when the alternative is Jeremy Corbyn, who would tax them even more. But instead of it being a target, they need to be convinced that this is for the good of the country and for greater quality; they need to, in May’s own words, “remember the good that Government can do”.
May needs to lay out her vision alongside Education Secretar Justine Greening for greater technical education, which will be greatly needed with stricter immigration controls after Britain leaves the European Union. She also needs to come with Chancellor Philip Hammond and Business Secretary Greg Clark and lay out the Government’s new industrial strategy, and lay out what Brexit will mean for Devolution, our universities, the future of farming (in England, at least) and other policy areas. Brexit means Theresa May has so much to work with if she can just spend the summer thinking about what she stands for, and what her aims are for the coming parliamentary session — which might well be her last as Prime Minister.
The term ‘Mayism’ might well have to go out the window, but at least Theresa May wouldn’t waste her final days as Prime Minister and would leave a legacy beyond losing the Government their majority in an unnecessary election.
