Theresa May and Brexit: Promises or Solutions?

United Kingdom Flag

Although many speakers give New Year's speeches that are more ceremony than substance, Conservative Party British Prime Minister Theresa May used the opportunity to lay out a plan of action for the year. Her main theme was Brexit: the controversial decision to withdraw the United Kingdom from the European Union. Lord Andrew Adonis, a member of the opposing Labour Party, described Brexit as "a populist and nationalist spasm worthy of Donald Trump."  Ouch.

May took an optimistic tone, but gave few details.  She began: "2017 has been a year of progress for the United Kingdom." Quite optimistic. She announced successful first-stage Brexit negotiations. She promised "to get on and deliver a good Brexit." She promised "an economy fit for the future," with (she hoped) reduced deficit spending and investing in "our schools, our police and our precious NHS [National Health Service]." Like many politicians, she promised to "build more good schools," to "build more homes," and to "protect and enhance our natural environment for the next generation." How? She didn't say.

On foreign policy, she promised that, "Together with our allies, we will continue the fight against all forms of extremism." She supported "constructive and courteous" debate and harassment-free workplaces--an issue for her party, as various Conservative officials were caught committing inappropriate sexual activities in the workplace.

Her presentation was brief--much shorter than the typical American State of the Union address. She advocated few policies, but mostly just expressed goals. The proof, of course, is in the results.

Her emphasis on Brexit was to be expected, but the lack of details for any actual policy made her speech too vague and general. How will she make Brexit go smoothly? How will she reduce spending and still build more schools? And so forth. When you are running for office, you can make wild promises with no actual plans. When you lead a great nation, however, you need solid content--real meat--which this speech simply did not present.

Still, she didn't complain about "fake news;" she addressed the controversial issues that Britain faced, and endorsed courtesy and moderation. In those respects, her speech set a good example for Western leaders. And her New Year's speech was much less disturbing than Kim Jong Un's.

Image from Wikipedia