Same, difference: Rebecca Hardy catches Tania Mathias on the campaign trail

‘If you say it and share it, it has power.’

How do the Quaker testimonies and your Quaker faith inform your political work?
I’ve had a lot of good help. Kingston was the first Meeting I went to, and the elders were really helpful. If you have difficult decisions, there’s respect for that, because I have had difficult challenges in politics but I’ve always felt that I could go back to a Meeting. I’ve never been banished for thinking through things and trying to find the light within. I’ve felt held in difficult times.

Why should Quakers vote Conservative?
I don’t think its is religion-based, because the lovely thing is that, hopefully, [as Quakers] we’re all seeking the same objectives. So I wouldn’t be saying, ‘You are a Quaker, therefore you should vote one way or another’. If they are Quakers, I know their long term objectives, but we might disagree about the way we get there.

It’s not something either that comes up on the doorstep. Sometimes people ask me about faith in hustings, or in a meeting, but that’s just to understand me. Normally I am asking someone ‘What’s your work?’; ‘How’s your children’s school?’; ‘Is your business affected by certain taxes or employment rates?’ et cetera. I think your spirituality covers all parties.

But, in politics, when you do come across other Quakers, it’s quite nice. Even here in Maidenhead Meeting, there’s a person in an opposing party, and you kind of know it’s OK. And in the Meeting room, we are sharing what we have in common. Outside, I saw the person at another event, and it’s nice, you know, that you have something in common, whatever arguments you are saying.

What is the Quaker testimony that guides you the most in your politics?
It’s more that there is a light within each person, and if that’s not obvious for me, then it’s helped to remind myself that [the light’s] there, and it’s more about me not seeing it, rather than it not being present. In a world where things are heated, and there is no common ground, then [that Quaker idea] has made me search harder for it.

I do say on the doorstep that campaigning close to an election is more like a Punch and Judy show, but, in parliament, it’s very different. It’s very collaborative. That’s what I enjoy – the cross-party element. I tell kids in school that if I were to take them into parliament and show them a select committee, or an all-party meeting, they wouldn’t be able to tell who’s Conservative and who’s Labour. They would see people just talking about how best to progress something, by working together. That’s how things get done.

But in order to get voted in, you have to tell people where your differences are. Then, once you are in, you kind of do a one-hundred-and-eighty degree turn, and suddenly find out what your similarities are.

If there is one thing you would like to see change in, driven by your Quaker values, what would that be?
It’s not a change [as such], but I’m very much supporting the Jo Cox Foundation. I did some parliamentary stuff on refugees with Jo. I was at a husting on the anniversary of her death, and I had to remind the convenor, and some of my colleagues, please can we acknowledge this day. It’s an important thing. So I think it’s not about changing, but making [the foundation’s principles on the tone of debate] more mainstream. I think that it has had an effect already, with the civility pledge – marking it and bringing it to the fore. It’s like Quakers: if you say it and share it, it has power.

When have you felt most challenged in parliament by your adherence to your Quaker values?
In 2015, there was a debate on where British planes could travel in the Syrian conflict, and I found it very difficult. [In December 2015, a Conservative government motion was passed (by 397 votes to 223) for the UK to join US-led coalition air strikes against so-called Islamic State militants in Syria].

I was told by other MPs that this is the hardest vote you will ever do. This is what you step up to the plate for, they said. The good thing is that, even as a backbencher, you were not given all the information that the foreign secretary, prime minister and cabinet were, but we were given a briefing by the military, and I was able to ask questions on the limitations of civilian risk, and it was treated with great seriousness. The whips were very good to me too. They didn’t pressure me.
How did you vote?

I voted to… I voted with the government.

How did you manage to resolve the challenge?
I went to a Quaker Meeting house that week, and someone there was very sweet and said they could make a space for me. She didn’t realise that what I really needed was to be in a room with other Quakers (she was from another religion), but she was very sweet.

Is there a particular Quaker testimony, value or concern that you would like to see taken forward in the next parliament, no matter which party forms the government?
I won’t be pushing [anything explicitly Quaker] because it’s personal to me… maybe I see the faith of people as the umbrella, and we [MPs] are more on the ground level… Also, we’re seeking to unite people and bring people along, particularly people who haven’t voted for you.

That’s the post-campaign challenge: Making people feel comfortable who haven’t voted for you.

Tania previously worked for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in the Gaza Strip, and the NHS. She is an ophthalmologist by training. She was MP for Twickenham 2015-2017.

Rebecca is the journalist at the Friend. We intend to interview candidates from the other main partiers next week – though this of course necessitates their willingness to participate!

---

Comments

Please login to add a comment