Ben Worthy and Mark Bennister reflect on Theresa May’s short premiership and argue that, though her personal power did diminish after the 2017 general election, in this latter phase she retained more power of political office than often assumed

Bennister, Mark

Worthy, Ben

English

LSE Research Online

The	art	of	political	survival:	three	lessons	fromTheresa	MayBen	Worthy	and	Mark	Bennister	reflect	on	Theresa	May’s	short	premiership	and	argue	that,	though	her	personalpower	did	diminish	after	the	2017	general	election,	in	this	latter	phase	she	retained	more	power	of	political	officethan	often	assumed.Picture:	By	Jay	Allen/Number	10	/	(CC	BY-NC-ND	2.0)	licenceLeadership	has	become	the	focus	of	the	world’s	attention	right	now,	and	we	instinctively	look	to	the	past,	searchingfor	lessons	good	and	bad	in	former	Prime	Ministers	and	Presidents.	FDR	and	Churchill	spring	to	mind.	But	what	ofmore	recent	leaders,	like	Theresa	May?	May	appears	to	be	only	a	lesson	in	poor	leadership.Whichever	definition	of	leadership	we	take,	it	would	seem	she	failed.	If	leadership	is	about	manipulating	situationsso	you	can	win,	then	May	very	clearly	didn’t	do	that,	losing	an	election	and	her	major	policy.	If	it	is	about‘disappointing	followers	at	a	rate	they	can	stand’	then	she	didn’t	do	that	either	–	she	disappointed	everyone	far	tooquickly	and	pleased	no	one.	If	being	a	leader	is,	according	to	perhaps	the	most	famous	definition	by	Neustadt,about	the	power	to	persuade,	then	May	failed	to	persuade	anyone.	She	failed	to	persuade	the	public	to	give	her	amajority,	failed	to	persuade	her	MPs	to	support	her	Brexit	policy,	and	then	failed	to	persuade	her	party	to	keep	herin	place.But	digging	deeper,	Theresa	May’s	three-year	premiership	is	more	puzzling.	Her	time	in	office	is	divided	into	twovery	distinct	phases,	before	and	after	the	snap	election	of	June	2017,	when	her	dominance	was	transformed	intodefensiveness.	Few	leaders	seem	to	have	fallen	so	far	and	so	fast.	If	May’s	first	year	invited	comparisons	withMargaret	Thatcher,	her	second	led	to	commenters	likening	her	with	John	Major,	James	Callaghan	or,	mostdamaging	of	all,	Neville	Chamberlain.	This	invites	two	questions,	one	obvious	and	one	less	so:	why	did	it	all	gowrong	and	how,	after	2017,	did	May	then	survive	in	office	another	two	whole	years?One	way	of	answering	these	puzzles	are	to	track	how	a	leader’s	authority	changes.	Our	Leadership	Capital	Index(LCI)	measures	authority,	or	leadership	capital,	in	terms	of	a	leader’s	skills,	relations	and	reputation.	It	tries	tocapture	what	Machiavelli	said	was	the	difference	between	the	personality	or	character	and	the	tides	offortune.	Applying	this	to	May	tells	us	more	about	why	May’s	authority	was	lost	but	also	about	how	she	hung	on	solong.	Tracing	her	leadership	capital	over	time	shows	that	May’s	authority	was	certainly	over-inflated	in	2016–17	butunderestimated	2017–19.	May	wasn’t	as	strong	as	she	looked	before	June	2017	but	not	as	weak	as	she	appearedafterwards.1.	Beware	of	expectation	inflationDemocratic Audit: The art of political survival: three lessons from Theresa May Page 1 of 3		Date originally posted: 2020-04-03Permalink: https://www.democraticaudit.com/2020/04/03/the-art-of-political-survival-three-lessons-from-theresa-may/Blog homepage: https://www.democraticaudit.com/Most	Prime	Ministers	are	over-valued,	and	mostly	at	the	wrong	time.	Honeymoons	fail	to	last	and	messy	fallings	outof	love	with	the	party	and	people	can	be	brutal.	Tony	Blair	complained	that	as	Prime	Minister	you	‘begin	at	yourmost	popular	and	least	capable	and	end	at	your	least	popular	and	most	capable’.May	certainly	appeared	capable	in	2016.	Taking	over	after	the	shock	Brexit	result,	with	the	media	and	her	partyfirmly	behind	her,	she	appeared	to	have	political	capital	to	spare.	At	this	high	point	she	declared,	in	a	hubristicimpulse	that	would	create	a	neat	petard	to	hoist	her	on	later,	‘Brexit	means	Brexit’	and	she	added	‘we	will	make	asuccess	of	it’.	As	the	second	British	female	Prime	Minister,	her	pitch,	like	Thatcher’s,	was	as	a	woman	and	self-styled	outsider.	She	was	the	‘Vicar’s	daughter’	taking	on	the	‘establishment’,	encapsulated	by	her	promise	to	‘fightagainst	burning	injustice’	and	govern	‘for	the	many’	(against,	of	course,	the	famous	‘liberal	elite’	and	‘citizens	ofnowhere’).This	inflation	helped	drive	a	series	of	poor	decisions,	when	May	called	for	a	hard	Brexit	in	October	2016	at	her	partyconference	and	triggered	Article	50	in	March	2017.	These	actions,	intended	to	offer	a	radical	solution	and	reassureBrexiteer	MPs,	proved	divisive.	They	were	also	miscalculations,	as	they	pushed	Remain	voters	towards	Labour,while	failing	to	build	the	winning	coalition	of	Leavers	she	sought.	May	gambled	her	leadership	capital	on	a	series	ofbets,	none	of	which	paid	off.	By	the	time	May	pushed	her	own	Chequers	agreement	a	year	later,	is	was	too	late	tosalvage	the	authority	to	get,	as	it	were,	‘Brexit	done’.2.	Beware	of	weaknessesPower,	as	Lyndon	B.	Johnson’s	biographer	Robert	Caro	famously	pointed	out,	reveals.	May’s	declining	leadershipcapital	after	June	2017	revealed	her	divided	party	and	her	poor	political	skills.	Parties	are	the	key	to	a	leader’sstrength	or	weakness:	they	can	make	or	break	a	Prime	Minister.	May	began	with	a	majority	of	17	but	inherited	an‘increasingly	over	the	shoulder	politics’	of	backbench	rebellion,	worsened	by	deep	splits	on	Brexit.	After	2017,Theresa	May,	like	Callaghan	and	Major,	became	leaders	struggling	not	to	break	their	party,	and	seeking	topersuade	her	own	MPs	to	back	her	and	not	sack	her.	Like	those	leaders	she	became	locked	into	a	spiral	offactional	battles	that	further	trained	her	authority.	The	press	speculated	almost	daily	on	her	demise.Her	party	problems	were	then	worsened	by	personal	skills.	As	a	number	of	people	have	pointed	out,	May’s	path	topower,	like	Gordon	Brown’s,	neatly	side-stepped	difficult	leadership	campaigns,	so	her	electoral	skills	went‘untested’	until	the	snap	election	campaign.	She	was	pushed	centre	stage	too	late,	and	May’s	style	andcommunication	were	found	to	be	lacking.	From	her	U-turn	on	social	care	funding	during	the	2017	election	campaignto	poor	media	performances,	when	she	floundered	answering	simple	questions,	like	confessing	that	the	naughtiestthing	she	had	done	was	to	run	through	wheat	fields	as	a	child,	nothing	went	right.	Even	her	life-long	commitment	towomen’s	equality	was	undermined	with	her	pact	with	the	DUP	and	her	closeness	to	Trump.Hidden	amongst	this	was	another	weakness,	not	of	May’s	making:	her	gender.	Women	leaders	are	judgeddifferently	from	male	ones,	held	to	different	standards,	and	are	more	precarious	than	their	male	counterparts.	Thedeep	crisis	of	Brexit	was	caused,	as	Hozic	and	True	remind	us,	‘quite	literally	by	men	who	happen	to	have	gone	tothe	same	elite	schools	and	have	been	competing	with	each	other	since	adolescence’,	who	then	promptly	ran	awaywhen	things	got	tough.	Faced	with	a	horrendously	complex	task,	nevertheless,	she	persisted.	Seen	from	the	otherside	of	Johnson’s	double	victory	of	general	election	and	withdrawal	from	the	EU	her	failure	seems	complete.	Yet	itwas	May’s	deal,	with	the	complex	backstop	cut	out,	and	May’s	election	strategy,	involving	breaching	the	fragile/non-existent	red	wall,	that	won	it.	2019	was	as	much	May’s	victory	as	Johnson’s.3.	Beware	underestimationAfter	the	snap	2017	election,	May	couldn’t	do	much	that	a	Prime	Minister	should	be	able	to	do.	She	had	no	stableCommons	majority,	a	leaky	Cabinet,	a	polarised	party	and	a	pathologically	disloyal	Foreign	Secretary.	Few	wouldimagine	in	June	2017	that	May	would	still	be	in	office	almost	two	years	later.	May’s	survival	can	be	seen	as	moreluck	than	skill,	based	on	Corbyn’s	failure	to	maintain	a	polling	bounce	post	2017	and	the	uncertainty	of	Brexit.Democratic Audit: The art of political survival: three lessons from Theresa May Page 2 of 3		Date originally posted: 2020-04-03Permalink: https://www.democraticaudit.com/2020/04/03/the-art-of-political-survival-three-lessons-from-theresa-may/Blog homepage: https://www.democraticaudit.com/Nevertheless,	May	used	what	dwindling	capital	she	had	with	care.	She	deployed	what	patronage,	persuasion	andpolitical	skills	she	could	to	stay	in	Downing	Street.	May,	working	ironically	as	a	rhetorical	premier,	used	a	series	ofset-piece	speeches	to	cajole,	manoeuvre	and	persuade	her	party	and	the	public.	She	had	enough	authority	survivethe	resignation	of	both	her	Brexit	Secretary	and	her	Foreign	Secretary	and	then	later	to	fight	off	a	vote	of	noconfidence.	Her	party	and	even	her	own	personal	ratings	held	unexpectedly	high,	or	at	least	didn’t	stay	as	low	asyou	would	perhaps	expect.	Her	government	made	itself	a	small	target	in	Westminster,	under-legislating	anddepriving	the	opposition	of	influence,	while	the	DUP	held	firm.Even	Brexit,	the	issue	that	destroyed	her	premiership,	protected	her	from	removal	and	replacement,	and	at	times	lether	portray	herself	as	the	embattled	Prime	Minister	valiantly	trying,	so	to	speak,	‘to	get	Brexit	done’.	In	a	YouGovpoll	taken	when	she	stepped	down,	65%	of	respondents	had	‘sympathy	for	a	PM	who	was	faced	with	what	manysee	as	an	impossible	task’.May’s	endurance	reminds	us	of	the	power	of	just	being	there.	Even	a	poorly	positioned	Prime	Minister	can	do	agreat	deal,	and	can	survive	because	they	are	Prime	Minister	and	no	one	else	is.	This	article	represents	the	views	of	the	authors	and	not	those	of	Democratic	Audit.	It	draws	on	their	article:‘“Dominance,	defence	and	diminishing	returns”?	Theresa	May’s	leadership	capital	July	2016	to	July	2018’	(2020),British	Politics,	which	you	can	read	here.About	the	authorsBen	Worthy	is	Senior	Lecturer	in	Politics	at	Birkbeck	College,	University	of	London.	He	isthe	author	of	The	Politics	of	Freedom	of	Information:	How	and	why	governments	pass	lawsthat	threaten	their	power.Mark	Bennister	is	Senior	Lecturer	in	Politics	at	the	University	of	Lincoln.Similar	PostsA	tale	of	two	failures:	poor	choices	and	bad	judgements	on	the	road	to	BrexitTheresa	May	and	Boris	Johnson:	secrecy	as	statecraft?Theresa	May	and	the	curse	of	the	takeover	Prime	MinisterWhat	makes	a	Prime	Minister	great?What	does	Boris	Johnson’s	political	record	tell	us	about	his	prospects	as	Prime	Minister?Democratic Audit: The art of political survival: three lessons from Theresa May Page 3 of 3		Date originally posted: 2020-04-03Permalink: https://www.democraticaudit.com/2020/04/03/the-art-of-political-survival-three-lessons-from-theresa-may/Blog homepage: https://www.democraticaudit.com/

The art of political survival: three lessons from theresa may

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/107874/1/dit_com_2020_04_03_the_art_of_political_survival_three_lessons_from.pdf

The art of political survival: three lessons from theresa may

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online