Tag: Ruth Davidson

A fair few political gamblers will be counting their losses after Ruth Davidson’s firm denial that she harbours any wish ever to become prime minister. The Scottish Conservative leader made clear in an interview at the weekend that her personal life, her burgeoning family and her mental health would all suffer were she to become a Tory MP, or enter national politics. The result of our culture is a cavalcade of politicians bearing no resemblance to those they claim to represent The Scottish Tory leader’s frankness has been applauded by campaigners for helping to combat the stigma surrounding mental illness. Self-harm in particular is rarely disclosed or understood in discussions about psychological wellbeing, although Davidson must surely see the tension inherent in seeking to end stigma about mental illness while the party she proudly represents tears down mental health provision. Riffling through biographies of senior politicians, it’s clear that seeing elected office as a career end in itself is hardly an anomaly: Theresa May spoke of her desire, while still at university, to be the first female prime minister, and was reportedly enraged when Margaret Thatcher beat her to it. A recent article by Charles Moore in the Daily Telegraph lamented the fact that for the first time in history, a Conservative cabinet has no Old Etonians, thanks to Boris Johnson’s departure. This lingering deference to the performatively posh, brashly arrogant and those convinced they have been groomed for power is not unusual. The admission by the Northern Ireland secretary, Karen Bradley, that she didn’t understand the politics of the province revealed how so many politicians see the pursuit of power as the main motivation, with deep knowledge viewed as passé. We need people with nonprofessional backgrounds, older people and candidates with children and interesting personal histories that inform their politics. But who would be a politician when you can, instead, have a life?

In findings that will offer some relief to the prime minister, an ICM survey for the Guardian found that voters believe the Tories would be more likely to lose the next election if May was replaced by Johnson or five other potential successors. The Guardian view on Tory party entryism: a real and present rightwing danger | Editorial Read more May’s leadership has been questioned since she called a snap election in 2017 that led to the loss of the Tories’ Commons majority. But, asked by ICM if the Conservatives would have a better chance of winning the next election under Johnson, only 27% of respondents agreed, while 45% disagreed, giving Johnson a net score of -18. Voters believe a young and unheralded leader would give the Tories a better chance of winning the next election than other contenders Standfirst ... * -30% -20 -10 0 'Someone quite young and able, not currently in government' Ruth Davidson Boris Johnson Sajid Javid Jacob Rees-Mogg Jeremy Hunt Michael Gove Guardian Graphic | Source: Guardian/ICM poll. Question asked if chances of victory better or worse with each candidate - net figure shown Two other leading candidates – Michael Gove, the environment secretary, and Jeremy Hunt, the new foreign secretary – are seen as even worse choices. Just 7% of people believe each man would help the party’s chances, and their respective net ratings are -38 and -34. But 20% disagreed, giving this unspecified candidate a net score of +5. Rees-Mogg is seen by Tories as the person next best placed to help the Tories, but his net score is -8. However, in a leadership contest Johnson would be challenged to show that he could win over Labour voters. Conservatives and Labour level in the polls after one percentage point increase in Tory support Voting intention (change from ICM poll two weeks ago) % 0 10 20 30 40 Conservatives 40% (+1) Labour 40 (-) Lib Dems 8 (-) Ukip 6 (-) Green 2 (-1) Guardian Graphic | Source: Guardian/ICM poll ICM Unlimited interviewed a representative online sample of 2,021 adults aged 18 or over, between 17 and 19 August 2018.

It is tempting to treat the news that Ruth Davidson, the leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party, is pregnant as a matter of equally trivial non-news news. To put it another way, it would be considered a surprise if a male politician felt the need to make such a statement and, of course, I do not recall David Cameron having to do so when he and Samantha had a child while, you may remember, Cameron was serving as prime minister. Still, to the extent politicians are “role models” there is something cheering about politicians, and I suppose especially female politicians, demonstrating that there is no necessary contradiction between maternity and their careers. Davidson has always told interviewers that she and her fiancee, Jen, would like a family. It must mean something, so it was assumed it must mean she is looking towards furthering her political career in London, not Edinburgh. That Davidson had said nothing new and that she frequently reiterated that made little impression. Well maybe, one day, she might. Speculation she finds amusing sometimes, but only because the alternative is to find it infuriating. The 2021 Holyrood elections will be a full-throttle, no-quarter asked or given, affair. In the meantime, joy and good luck to her and to Jen.