I feel very angry this morning, and duped by our prime minister. Theresa May went to the polls with a massive opinion poll lead. It was all supposed to be about delivering Brexit. Strong and Stable. Trust her. She dropped the Conservative brand and asked her candidates to do the same. It became a presidential fight. A fight between a Marxist and a strong and stable government, led by May.
Where did it all go wrong?
It was supposed to be about a “Strong and Stable Britain,” about delivering Brexit. That should have been the only issue on the table.
Firstly, the Conservative Party manifesto was written by a small clique. May is not a collegiate person, she relies on the views of a very small coterie of advisers. That little group decided that they would tackle the cost of elderly care. It was a boil that needed lancing, but not a couple of weeks into an election, a bolt out of the blue, but not by resurrecting a policy that had been kicked into the long grass in 2010. It was arrogance. Her people thought they could get away with a daring policy, which would affect her hardcore voters — the pensioners.
In the United States, you will understand the hard debates over healthcare. This was an argument May did not need to have. It was labeled a “dementia tax.” The polls not only wobbled, they tumbled. This was the beginning of the end to a good campaign.
Then the Labour Party opposition, led by Jeremy Corbyn, released their manifesto. Chavez and Castro would have been proud of their brother: 70 percent taxes on the “rich,” renationalisation of industries (costing billions), a unicorn for every household and their shadow home secretary floundered on every interview, her sums didn’t add up.
Corbyn was a supporter of terrorist groups in the Middle East, Hamas and Hezbollah. “Great, the people won’t vote for this,” Conservatives thought.
May tried getting back on the Brexit track since that’s where she was “strong and stable.” Then we had the London terror attacks.
When May was home secretary, she presided over a 20,000 cut in frontline police staff. Firearms officers also had a large reduction in numbers. Remember, my U.S. friends, this is a Conservative! Terrorism and how to keep us safe became a frontline election issue.
The Conservative Party, who were always the strong and trusted party on policing and defense, was looking very weak and wounded. Luckily, or so we thought, Marxist Corbyn (who makes Bernie Sanders look like a Trump supporter), would be weak in this area. He had stated that he did not believe in a “shoot to kill policy.”
If he had been in charge last Saturday night when the jihadis unleashed their terror, the police officers would not have been armed, let alone shot dead the attackers before they were able to carry out more carnage.
But the police went on the offensive, saying that May’s cuts affect their ability to identify and stop jihadis. Former senior police and armed forces officers criticized her approach and cuts. This was unprecedented. After the London attacks, her mantra was “enough is enough.” She wouldn’t answer her critics on cuts on her watch. No one knew what “enough is enough” meant.
May was wounded. As a rather knee-jerk reaction she said we would derogate powers from the European Court of Human Rights and its Acts. Labour contradicted her, saying it was not necessary as they have the power to convict and monitor suspects. Yet she didn’t hit back. She should have said no outside supranational power will have jurisdiction over keeping Britain safe and deporting criminals. The victims are more important than criminals and terrorists’ rights. She should have promised our own very British Bill of Rights.
She sounded vague and unconvincing. And that’s because she is vague and unconvincing. She is not a visionary, she never laid out what it is to be British and proud or what a Brexit deal will look like, and when under fire she looked wooden and unprepared.
My friends in her party blame their losses firmly at her door. She has been the worst Conservative Party leader in my lifetime.
I first met her when she was head girl of a group called Women2Win, which I was a member of. This group helped women to get selected and elected, helping with public speaking, dress code, etc. May always stood apart from us, wooden and unapproachable.
David Davis, the Secretary of State for Brexit, once remarked to me that “no one knows what she stands for.” And that was certainly true of this election. The only reason she became leader of the Conservative Party and, by default, prime minister, was because her rivals were picked off by their enemies.
Boris Johnson by Michael Gove — both brilliant men, but Gove’s ambitions and his Lady MacBeth wife finished Johnson off. Then a Brexit female MP was picked off because she implied May would not be such a great leader as she didn’t have children.
Hence we were stuck with May. Like Nigel Farage, I backed her because she promised to deliver Brexit and we both urged UKIP supporters to back her. Yet, some of them voted Labour because Labour also promised to deliver Brexit.
In times of crises people want leadership, vision, and to know where their politicians will take them. You had that in the U.S. with Donald Trump. His enemies criticised his lack of elocution. Yet we heard loud and clear his vision for your country: Make America Great Again, America First, Build that Wall, Jobs First and the promise to look after veterans.
We had none of this. We had empty words, phrases and slogans. Turning our politics into a presidential campaign backfired.
We need President Trump and our special relationship more than ever. I urged him to reject the Paris Climate accord and he did. I urged him to back Brexit and he did.
Right now, we need a Trump-like figure in the U.K. Someone who believes in Britain and with a vision. I cannot see one.
Janice Atkinson is an independent member of the European Parliament, representing South East England.
Thinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions.
