Skirting the obvious and sizable discussion that can arise from questioning whether it’s democratic for a nation to have an unelected Prime Minister until 2020, one may optimistically presume that Theresa May has a chance of performing rather well in her premiership. Unfortunately, that notion is a fantasy based on ignorance and complete delusion. The evidence is in her parliamentary voting to-date, and it would be naive to assume her psychotic notion of ideology will be any different now that she enjoys power:
- Pro Iraq War
- Against Proportional Representation
- Pro EU
- Pro fox hunting (minor you might argue, but indicative i’d counter)
- Pro Syria airstrikes
- Pro bedroom tax
- Pro raising tuition fees
- Pro academisation
Against aligning welfare with price increases
- Against tenant fee restrictions from letting agents
Against tax increases for £150k income bracket (in times of rising income inequality, and structural economic trouble, might I add).
Against job creation for youth in long term unemployment
Even in her short time as PM, all of her major policy areas are a dithering and clueless mess.
- Brexit – She has failed to conjure even the most basic aims and objectives for the project, let alone a strategy, let alone be able to begin to secure the required resources, let alone starting negiotiations. All the while, confidence in stock markets and investments remain at risk. As soon as the referndum result was announced, it took me ten minutes to devise a ten point plan for Brexit.
- Grammar Schools – All of the evidence available to assess whether grammar schools improve education standards, actually proves they are detrimental to both social mobility and academic achiement. Yet, she is pursuing this policy, because it adheres to her vague and redundant cultural assumptions, and her and distorted outlook of socio-economic reality.
- Constituency Boundary Reviews – Not only are the proposed measures being criticised as being little more than a subversive method to cull electoral opponents, the official justification regarding parliamentary cost-saving is utterly inconsistent.
- Hinckley – This is widely and consistently regarded as a vanity project. There are no monetary of fiscal benefits to be had from it, due to the nature of the foreign investment plan. The energy it produces will not be competitively priced, and by the time it comes online, it will be delivered massively over budget.
Finally, if there is one criminal law missing in the judicial system, it is that of negligence in political office, and Theresa May would share her cell with the likes of Blair and Cameron:
- She has done nothing about tax avoidance and tax protectees, and intends to do precisely nothing.
- She has continued the degradation of parliamentary debate during PMQ’s
- No acknowledgement of the glaring failure of Cameron’s legacy (instead she praises him)
- No acknowledgement for the increasingly signficiantly and dubious issues surrounding 9/11, or any learninigs from the Chilcot report, or for that fact anything relating to neo-imperialism.
- Not doing anything about rising wealth inequality
- Not doing anything to address the persisting housing shortages
- As Home Secretary, she failed in every way possible to even attempt to tackle the immigration levels outlined in the manifesto.