‘Truth is a precious value. I see it in so many British politicians in all our major parties.’ Photo: Parker Johnson / Unsplash.
‘Freedom is not a Quaker value per se but it is the core of my Conservatism.’
Vote for any of the parties, says Tania Mathias, but as a former Conservative MP she recommends one
When I was a Conservative member of parliament my Quaker faith was part of every decision I made, and every constituent case I dealt with. But it was probably only obvious to other people at the start of my term in the House of Commons. At the beginning of parliament, and before taking my seat, I had to make a solemn affirmation when other members were choosing religious texts on which to swear an oath. I was very glad that I was not the only Quaker MP in that intake and happy to discover that the other Quaker MPs were in the opposition party. For me, that is how it should be: I hope all the British parliamentary parties are open to all faiths if those faiths are all embracing and seek a common good.
Thus I would hope that Quakers reading this article are already able to consider voting for any of the main British parties as I believe our main parties are all consistent with Quaker values (I am not familiar with the values of all of the smaller parties). Nevertheless, I am happy to highlight the reasons why I am a Conservative, why that matches my personal beliefs and my vision for a better society.
It’s difficult to give one over-arching definition of Conservatism. But the one that resonates for me has been relevant for nearly a century and it comes from the Conservative politician Quintin Hogg who stated that Conservatism is ‘not so much a philosophy but an attitude’, or a force, that is consistent with a human desire for freedom and is therefore part of human nature itself.
Freedom is not a Quaker value per se but it is the core of my Conservatism. Much of the Conservative Party’s manifesto at this election, and in previous manifestos, is focused on economic strength with lower taxes in order to help and never wittingly hinder aspiration. I would like to think that Quakers who are business leaders and those who have social enterprises would want competitive business rates, low personal taxation and especially lower taxes for those at the start of their careers. I support the Conservative policies of recent elections that have resulted in those on lower pay scales not having to pay any income tax. Those same policies have resulted in those on higher incomes paying proportionately more income tax under a Conservative government. The taxes under a Conservative government, however, are aimed not to be at a level that threatens ambition or the growth of business.
Equality of aspiration is also a core Conservative value and that is where my Quaker values find sympathy. For example, the Conservative wish for equality of opportunity includes the need to have a choice of types of schools – and that is a clear difference with other parties. When I was an MP, and previously when I was a school governor, I valued being able to visit schools when I could witness how different schools could flourish. Hence I support academies, free schools and, yes, grammar schools and private schools. As a Conservative politician I saw my role was to ensure standards in all schools were equally high so that parents might have the freedom to choose the appropriate school for their child’s personal needs. My favourite school in my constituency was a non-selective state school from which some pupils went on to Russell Group universities, while some pupils in the same school who had learning difficulties worked towards attaining life skills. That school’s awards evening was the best I ever attended because I saw the whole school community applauding the various students equally and enthusiastically. But my politics means I would only wish parents to send their children to that school if they had had the ability to choose from different types of schools.
As a Quaker and NHS medical doctor I see Conservative fiscal strength as the best way to support the NHS budget to maintain NHS services that will always be free for all at the point of need. In the next parliament the need to improve social care – so there is more equality of provision – will be a cross-party decision if we have a Conservative government.
Peace is what every government in this country seeks to maintain. I fully understand that most Quakers will vote against nuclear defence. I cannot pretend that any of the debates I have had on matters of arms has been easy: my background includes working for the United Nations in refugee work in a conflict area. The area of defence is where faith is very personal for me. I attended a Quaker Meeting soon after my Conservative government debated and decided to authorise bombing in Syria. All the speeches in the parliamentary debate from Conservative colleagues were about how to achieve long-lasting peace and I know that every member of parliament had the same desire to achieve peace – we only disagreed about how to effect the peace.
It is easy for me to support the Conservative policies on the environment as they have already brought about a change that will help sustainability. While fossil fuel dependence has decreased, and with air pollution recognised as a major health concern, there is still much more to do. But the Blue Belt that was brought in by the last Conservative government is an extraordinary gift to the planet – working towards protecting four million square kilometres of the ocean around the UK Overseas Territories by 2020 will help to conserve more numbers of flora and fauna than in all of the British Isles.
Truth is a precious value. I see it in so many British politicians I have met in all of our major parties. Sadly, it is not so evident in social media articles or newspaper interviews but I have confidence that a voter can recognise it when he or she sees it in their local candidate.
In summary, I believe Quakers should be open to giving their vote to any of the candidates of the major political parties listed on their ballot paper. Engaging with all political parties, and, critically, also after your local councillors and local parliamentary candidate have been elected, means that Quaker values can be part of our political life throughout all our lives in this precious democracy. Thank you for voting!
Comments
I am surprised to be reading a Party political article in The Friend. Especially from a representative of a party whose policies have resulted in dramatic increases in poverty and inequality. Food banks have grown exponentially and are attributed directly to punitive benefit policies. Is this the freedom referred to? Waiting times for medical treatment are increasing, are we to celebrate our freedom to pay privately whilst those without resources can wait? Medical staff vacancies are soaring. So many indicators of social well being are going the wrong way so rapidly. And when it comes to Truth one party is identified as having far and away the highest numbers of untruths and misrepresentations. Is this a freedom to choose one’s own ‘truth’? Look for example at the article in openDemocracy on targeted health service leaflets https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/tories-target-northern-voters-nhs-message-all-about-blaming-migrants/. Is the freedom to blame ‘others’.
I am cancelling my subscription.
By Fenwick on 13th December 2019 - 13:14
I’ve not been part of Quakerism long and read this with interest but am left baffled. You explain your Conservative values but any link to Quaker values is unconvincing. The value of “freedom” particular to Conservatism is not political or social liberty but specifically economic liberty. You recognise this is not a Quaker value ‘per se’, also that there is a tension, to put it mildly, with the Quaker value of pacifism. But equality of aspiration is not a Quaker value I have seen in any writings (perhaps there is a tradition of it somewhere but if so I’ve missed it). Social cohesion & social justice, including fair treatment and helping the poor, on the other hand, come thru strongly. Yet as an MP you were part of a government that increased austerity, worsening the conditions of poverty, and brought Brexit, the most divisive policy we’ve seen for years. You write “As a Quaker, I…” but I genuinely struggle to see anything of Quakerism in the values you articulate. My understanding of the Quaker movement is that it’s inherently political, more so than mainstream Christianity. Your article seems to propose that Quaker values are ambivalent, counting for little beyond giving one the freedom to follow one’s political inclinations. I agree with the comment posted by Fenwick and would be interested in others’ views too.
By Jonathan Gifford on 15th December 2019 - 22:24
The article refers to Quaker values in very vague terms. I have checked Tania’s HoC voting record in policy areas relating to generally understood Quaker testimony.
It would be interesting to read some more detailed reflections on how she was led to vote so consistently for welfare benefit cuts and military interventions and against laws to promote equality and human rights. She also voted 9 times against measures to prevent climate change and not once in favour of such measures; consistently for reducing funding of local government, reducing corporation tax and capital gains tax and for a stricter asylum system. (All data from ‘Theyworkforyou’ website)
Perhaps she could say more about how her Quakerism informed these specific decisions?
By Simon C on 17th December 2019 - 23:28
Anyone evaluating the performance of Dr. Tania Mathias in Parliament should note her motion, heard in Westminster Hall on 20 April 2016 and reported in Hansard Vol 608 column 402WH.
The title is “Small Weapons Trade” and her demand to limit the activities of Small Arms dealers was rather brusquely refused by HM Government Minister. No other MP spoke for her case . It must have been a lonely place.
In the debate, she pointed out that arms dealers were subject to less regulation and control than someone wishing to be a scout-master.
She referred to her experience of treating small arms injuries during her time in Africa. She also served as a doctor in Gaza, India and South China, according to Wikipedia. According to the same source, she now works as an Ophthalmologist in the UK, having lost her parliamentary seat in the 2017 general election.
It is a pity that the interesting comments on the Dr Mathias’s article in the electronic version of The Friend are not signalled in the print edition. I hope that a response from Dr Mathias will be published. I would like to know why she does not share most Quakers views on nuclear defence.
I hope that other Friends will take up the cause of limiting the sale of all weapons, large and small, and hope for the eventual failure of the arms industry, when, according to our faith, weapons will no longer be needed.
In Friendship
Vernon White
Cornwall Area Meeting
>>>
01326 341474
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
By Vernon White on 6th February 2020 - 15:37
update on small arms
un security council briefing 5/02/2020
Izumi Nakamitsu, the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, briefed the Security Council in its open debate today on small arms and light weapons, and she said that the destabilizing accumulation, illicit transfer and misuse of small arms and light weapons continue to initiate, sustain and exacerbate armed conflict and pervasive crime.
On a global scale, she said, small arms were used in nearly 50 per cent of all violent deaths between 2010 and 2015. This translates to more than 200,000 deaths each year. She added that diversion remains a major source of weapons and their ammunition for gangs, criminal organizations and terrorist groups.
Ms. Nakamitsu added that the negative impact of illicit small arms and light weapons flows is cross-cutting and multi-dimensional. Illicit small arms and light weapons have a multitude of implications for security, human rights, sustainable development, gender equality and conflict prevention.
By Vernon White on 6th February 2020 - 18:31
All other factors aside, I cannot accept that Tania Mathias’s voting for the renewal of Trident, with the continuous implicit threat of the use of such weapons of indiscriminate mass destruction, can be reconciled with membership of the Religious Society of Friends. In the words of Robert Barclay, Tania seems to have found her own way to “...reconcile God with the Devil, Christ with Antichrist, Light with Darkness, and good with evil (which are) absurd and impossible things.”
Tim Thompson
Hereford Meeting
By timgilfach on 4th March 2020 - 9:58
Please login to add a comment
