Bronwen Maddox
Good evening, everyone. Are you sitting comfortably? A very warm welcome to Chatham House, and to those of you, the many of you, joining us online. I’m Bronwen Maddox, the Director, and I’m really delighted to be having this conversation here today on behalf of Chatham House, with The Right Honourable Theresa May. As you know, she has, last year, written a book, and that is one of the things we’re going to be talking about, “The Abuse of Power: Confronting Injustice in Public Life.” I was saying to her before that I couldn’t ask her to sign it because it is very firmly the Chatham House Library copy, very prominent in the library if you go there, if you’re one of our members.
And she needs very little introduction, not least because she has, indeed, spoken at Chatham House before, but not perhaps at – quite such a febrile time as this. She was Prime Minister for three years, not in quiet years, beginning in 2016 after the Brexit referendum vote, and had been Home Secretary from 2010 to 2016. And she has said that she will step down at this general election as MP for Maidenhead, which she has been, or will have been at that point, for 27 years, which is, by the standards of politics at any point, never mind now, a very good innings.
In this book, she has set out some of the instances she has come across in government and public life which have had harsh consequences for individuals, or for publics, or for countries and led, I think we can say, to loss of public trust in government. And that is, I think, going to be the general theme of our conversation tonight, and it’s in three parts.
There is one first part that starts close to home in parliamentary and institutional abuses of power, where she covers Brexit, and then goes on to social injustice in the UK, where she touches on Windrush, Grenfell and Rotherham, the child sex trafficking. You have not shied away from the difficult things that came up in your time, as well as modern slavery, the subject that you have devoted an increasing amount of time to. And then the final bit, where, being Chatham House, we will perhaps tilt, and that’s on international relations including, you’ve discussed, Salisbury, the Salisbury poisonings, meaning relations with Russia, Afghanistan, Ukraine, but many others come into that.
Well, I’m immensely pleased to be having this discussion. We are, at Chatham House, about to publish, on – in the middle of May, a report into the UK’s standing in the world, and with three foreign policy priorities for the next government, which I have written together with Olivia O’Sullivan, who heads up our UK and the World Programme. And so, it was particularly interesting for me to see some of your comments on government and how it works and how it doesn’t work. And before we plunge into some of the detail, I wanted to ask you about the UK’s standing in the world, and coming up to this general election, how do you think the UK’s standing compares to, say, in 2010?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I don’t think you can look at the question of the UK’s standing in the world without actually looking at the wider question of the different world that we live in today. And the situation in the past, where, if you like, the UK had a particular standing because of the role we had played over many years, many decades and following the Second World War, helping to establish some of the multilateral institutions, standing alongside the United States in a number of – in general, but obviously, also in work we’ve done around the world and in some conflict situations.
That world has changed, and it’s changed not just because of the UK, but because of the United States, because of geopolitics more generally. I do have a concern, I think the UK can continue to play the sort of role it’s played in the past. I would like to see it doing that. I think there’s been one or two decisions recently, which have affected that, and I’ve spoken publicly – you know, spoken in the House of Commons. I’m tempted to say speaking publicly and speaking in the House of Commons is not the same thing. As they all – lots of people say, “If you want to say – keep something secret, say it in the House of Commons.” But – so, about the one or two incidences we’ve had where I think, you know, the Government has looked to challenge its – our position as a country that upholds international law. And I think when we do that, we slightly diminish the respect that people has – have for us.
Bronwen Maddox
Do you think Brexit itself diminished that reputation?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I’m not sure Brexit itself did, in that sense. I think the – what happened, you know, I was in the middle of this, so the way in which Parliament dealt with that, the inability to be able to get the deal through Parliament and then all that has happened since, because the deal that was then signed by Boris Johnson, of course, was challenged because of the Northern Ireland Protocol, and what happened around the proroguing of Parliament and all of that. I think that may have made people look at the UK and wonder, you know, this stable UK that they’d been used to was having all this going on in its Parliament.
Bronwen Maddox
Do you think it has recovered from that, or do you still see signs that something has changed in the way the UK conducts itself and its view on international laws, for example?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I think it is recovering. I think that there is still some work to be done. I think the stance that the UK took on Ukraine was an important stance.
Bronwen Maddox
And that was upholding international rule of law saying, “You must not be able to move into another country.”
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Exactly, and saying – and critically, and I think this was – this goes to the point I was making earlier about the wider issues. I think what had happened in the West is that we’d got somewhat complacent about, sort of, thinking post the fall of the Berlin Wall and the democracies coming into those countries of Eastern Europe. I remem – I think everybody felt liberal democracy was obviously the way forward for everybody, and was going to be, sort of, a…
Bronwen Maddox
And I can remember senior Civil Servants, not the effusive kind, saying that…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes.
Bronwen Maddox
…“We’re on the right side of history” and…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Exactly, and almost we didn’t have to work at it, it was going to happen. And of course, it then didn’t in the way that everybody had expected it to. It’s been challenged, and the West – but the West appeared to have stood back and appeared not to be so keen on supporting its values and on defending its values, and I think the thing – and being more disparate in relation to that. And I think the – what has happened as a result of Putin’s further invasion of Ukraine is that the West came together, and the UK played an important part in, if you like, in initiating that sense that we had to respond.
Bronwen Maddox
So, we’ll come back to Russia, which is such an interesting question in itself and also, you’ve spent quite a bit of time in this book about it. But just on this question of the UK and international law, can you tell us where you ended up on the Rwanda Immigration Bill of this government, where you made really quite a lot of interventions over the years, in which this has been debated by Parliament, nobly in 2022 and 2023. What was your view of the final bill and its effect on Britain’s standing?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, the Rwanda Bill, of course, is effectively – it’s a response to the Supreme Court, but it’s the Illegal Migration Act and the Nationality and Borders Act that have set the different – that’s set the Rwanda policy, if you like. The Rwanda Bill is about Rwanda itself and the ability – and responding to the Supreme Court decision. And, yes, I did, I raised issues about those. I have a particular concern of the impact of both NABA and the Illegal Migration Act on modern slavery and human trafficking. I think it will make it much harder to identify, to encourage victims to come forward, such that perpetrators can be caught. I think that’s problematic. I do have a – an issue around the concept of asylum, because I think the important concept is that somebody genuinely fleeing persecution should be able to come to a country and by definition, very often they will be coming illegally, and be able to claim asylum. And, of course, what we’re now saying is that, “You have to go elsewhere to claim asylum.”
Bronwen Maddox
And you referred at the beginning to the US changing its role in the world. Do you think the UK is, in doing that kind of – making that, kind of, step, changing the role its prepared to play in the world?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I think – I mean, there’s no doubt that there has been, in a number of parts of the country, significant concern about levels of migration. Of course, if you look at the figures, the part of migration that has gone up particularly significantly, in numerical terms, is legal migration, as opposed to the illegal migration. But this is not an issue that the UK is facing alone. Countries around the world are dealing with this issue and finding different solutions to it. Of course, the EU has just agreed a new, I’d say, sort of, pact amongst themselves as to how they’re going to deal with this when there are particular pressures on individual countries.
So, it is a challenge that we’re all trying to deal with. I think longer term, you have to say, how can we ensure that those countries where people feel – I mean, there – some people will be fleeing from persecution, from difficult political circumstances. Some will be moving because of economic circumstances, and the question is, how do you ensure in the longer term that those countries people are moving from for economic reasons actually have the ability to develop their own economies in a way that that – there will still always be people who want to move to different places around the world to – but that necessity of moving because of the lack of economic opportunity, how can we ensure that that’s no longer there?
Bronwen Maddox
And what is your answer to that, if you were advising the Government?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I mean, it’s why I have supported the 0.7 of GNI on international development. It’s – I think that was – that’s part of it. I think also, we have to look to see how we can, as a country, in a sense, help to leverage some of the advantages that we’ve got in support of countries in – around the world. I did a trip, I think it was in 2018, to Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa, and did a speech there where I was talking about, “This isn’t – we’ve got – this isn’t a relationship of the UK that’s just giving money to countries, because they need” – they – we need to ensure that we’re providing the support and helping to leverage the expertise and experience we have, for example, in the City of London, to help work with countries to enable them to have the tools that they need.
Bronwen Maddox
And what about Windrush? This came up during your time at the Home Office, partly, and it is one of the things that people repeatedly raise about that period in the Home Office, about the culture in the Home Office itself, about the phrase, ‘Hostile Environment’. It’s something you’ve set out to deal with headon in this book, but I still came away wondering who or what you thought was responsible for the things that came together to give this group of people, the Windrush generation, such an extraordinarily hard time at the hands of the British State.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
A number of things came together, but fun – the fundamental issue was what had happened when a generation arrived in the United Kingdom and were not given anything, if you like, any paper, any document that said, “I am here legally.” And the United Kingdom had asked many of them to come, it had encouraged people to come, particularly from the Caribbean, to work in our public services, particularly. There was a sense for a lot of them that they were helping what was perceived as, in many senses, the ‘mother country’, and yet…
Bronwen Maddox
Which was short of labour at that point and it…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Short, exactly.
Bronwen Maddox
…wanted people to come.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
It wanted people to come.
Bronwen Maddox
They were invited.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
They were invited. They were – obviously, quite a lot of them had quite difficult experiences when they came, but the – they made their homes here, brought up children here. But what did not happen was that they were given that document that said, “You are here legally.” Now, for some, they acquired documentation through their time as perha – for example, when they applied for passports. But alongside the fact that there were still people who didn’t have those docu – that proof of legality, was that government after government, governments of all political persuasions, were tightening up the immigration rules, generally in response to public opinion on these matters, and so the definitions became more complicated.
There was a time in the – I mean the – in, I think – I forget which year it was, but I think it was in the 1980s, where there was a – an opportunity given to people to, if you like, apply for documents to show their legality, but the Home Office almost, kind of, dissuaded people. It was sort of, “Well, you can do this, but you don’t really need to,” sort of, message came from it.
Bronwen Maddox
And what do you attribute that to in the Home Office, because, obviously, if you roll on the years, you suddenly get to the point where these people are told, “Yeah, you have no right to be here unless you can show four bits of documentation for every you’ve been here.” And it’s sudden extraordinarily high bureaucratic hurdles that the Home Office generated.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes, and the – obviously, there’s the Wendy Williams’s Report of what she says about the culture in the Home Office at the time. I think the – what you saw from the Home Office was over time, as immigration rules were being tightened up, a sense from people working in the Home Office that they were having to be much more careful, in a sense, about who they were giving permission to stay to. And the sad fact is that if you’re somebody working in immigration in the Home Office, you will see people who are trying to get round the system, and so, there’s that – it’s about getting a balance. Four pieces of paper for every year that you’ve lived in the UK is not the balance.
Bronwen Maddox
I think it’s fair to say, and not that controversially, that national confidence doesn’t feel very high at the moment, and people – British people are reading the papers, they look at this list everyday of things that don’t work. It might be deep cultural failings, which we’ve been touching on, one, it might be Trident tests that land in the water, it might be rail, it might be whatever. A lot of stuff doesn’t seem to work very well. Is it – is that your sense of what British Government, at the moment, produces? And I’d be interested, if so, where you think the cause of this is.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I’m not sure it’s what British Government today produces. I think it is – in some instances, it is the result of a number of years of things – problems that have been building up over a number of years. So, let me give you a very good example. Anybody who lives in my constituency of Maidenhead who travels on the GWR or Elizabeth Lines, knows that in recent months, and around Christmas and following, we’ve had – there have been some considerable issues. Set the strikes to one side, but separately, there have been con – significant issues, largely because of Network Rail infrastructure. And that’s about investment over a period of time that has not taken place in that infrastructure. So, there are a number of problems that have built up over time. The state of the sewers and Thames Water, for example, as well, would be a similar example.
So, for some of these issues, you can’t say, “Ah, it’s a decision that’s been taken today that actually has led to this.” What government today is challenged with is having to find solutions to some of the problems that have built up over time. And to do that against a background where government spent significant amounts of money supporting people during the Pandemic, has also provided support as a result of the energy crisis of energy prices going up, and so, the public finances are not flush with funds that can suddenly be used to rectify all of these problems.
Bronwen Maddox
The country does not have as much money as the people in it would like it to have. I think that is also uncontroversial. But what I’m probing is whether, and some of the examples you go into, whether it is Grenfell or Hillsborough or so on, in your book, whether these stem from something in British Government or people not taking responsibility in the way that you encourage them to do in this book. And by Government, I guess, I’m using it in most wi –public institutions, public service, the public sector, whether you feel that people are not somehow carrying out that – do not have that sense of service and obligation, are doing it out of self-interest.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I think there’s certainly – and obviously, I draw this out in the book, I think in a number of the examples I show, what we see is the abuse of power in selfinterest. So, if you look at Hillsborough, if you look at the fact that back in that time, post that terrible sporting tragedy in 1989, over 100 witness statements were altered by South Yorkshire Police to be more favourable for the Police. That was a defensive mechanism of the reputation of the Police, rather than recognising that what they needed to be doing was actually getting to the truth of what had happened. And the other examples I show, you see exactly that theme coming through, as well.
And I think it’s a number of things. So, I think there is a sense in some of these organisations, some of the parts of the public sector, there’s a natural inclination to defend themselves rather than to be really searching for the truth on behalf of the citizens they are there to serve, and that’s why I call it the “Abuse of Power.”
Bronwen Maddox
I’ll come on to some of the international questions at the moment, but because we’re dealing with, if you like, people who you can identify now or institutions you can identify, I’m wondering what you think should be done. Because you call it a ‘defensive mechanism’, and yet, there’s an astonishing record of falsification by the Police in their own interest in that particular case. What is the kind of accountability you think that there should be for these things?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
The – you can put whatever systems you like in place, and some of it is about systems, but ultimately, it’s about people, and it’s about people’s attitudes, and it’s about people’s willingness to challenge. I think that’s one of the critical factors that you need at every level in an organisation, people who are willing to challenge the accepted wisdom of the organisation. So, I think there are issues around whistleblowing, for example, and in giving, you know, much more ability for people to whistle blow. You have to – again, you know, lots of politics is about balance. You have to balance that with – against the, you know, not wanting just mischievous claims to be being made and generated, but enabling people, giving people a sense that if they see something wrong in the organisation, they are – they should not jus – it’s not just they should speak up about it, but they will be provided – enabled to speak up about it in a way that they don’t have to worry about their, you know, their position and what’s going to happen to them as a result of that.
Bronwen Maddox
Alright, so that’s protection of whistleblowers, but what about the accountability for the people who may have done something wrong? At the moment, we live in very unforgiving times. There are a lot of people who want immediate punitive accountability for all kinds of things with no possible redemption. But on the other hand, you know, there is a clan, where you can absolutely see where it comes from, to say that if people or companies are held responsible for Grenfell, or for Hillsborough, or indeed, for – Police for falsifying records, that they should be held to account. Do you think public life at the moment has an answer to that?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I think that the – in some of the instances that you mentioned, of course, there have been attempts to hold people to account, but they have failed. So, in Hillsborough, the only successful case through the courts was a very minor one on health and safety regulations. For example, nobody who was taking decisions on the day of the tragedy that led to that number of people dying have been – they’ve been taken to court, some of them have been taken to court, but nobody has been finally prosecuted. So, you have had attempts to be able to do that within the justice system on a number of occasions. Something like Grenfell, of course, we’re still waiting for Justice Moore-Bick’s final report and, of course, the Police investigations alongside that. So, one can’t say what is going to happen in relation to that.
Bronwen Maddox
Let’s go back to Russia and the world stage, though some of the same themes. Oh, I think you were an early hawk, we were – and you say in the book, and we were discussing upstairs, on Russia, saying, “This is a problem.” Did that start with Crimea in 2014, Russia’s invasion of that, or when did you feel that Russia – you were Home Secretary at the time, when did you feel that Russia, which many companies and governments had – in Europe had been exploring relations with, when did you feel that it was becoming a problem that Britian needed to protect itself against?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I mean, Crimea was a stark example, if you like, but I think even prior to that, I’d probably been more hawkish about Russia generally. And I think – and we had had, if you look back, you know, our response to Litvinenko…
Bronwen Maddox
Which was 2006.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Which was 2006.
Bronwen Maddox
And it was the…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes.
Bronwen Maddox
…murder of – in – then – all kinds of other things at the same time. BP, the poor British Council getting targeted by Putin. So, these things building up, and yet, if my memory is right, you, at first, turned down some requests for an official inquiry into the Litvinenko murder because of, perhaps, of concern about relations with Russia?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
There was a lot of debate about the nature of any, if I say, ‘Investigation’, obviously, I’m not talking in a Police sense, but investigation of what had happened through the inquiry. I mean, arguably, that decision should have been taken – could have been taken a lot earlier, in fact. We were then a few years beyond it, beyond – obviously, beyond the actual incident, the actual killing of Alexander Litvinenko. But you have to do – I set up, when I was Home Secretary, quite a number of inquiries. I initiated quite a number of inquiries when I was Prime Minister. You have to always say, what is the most appropriate way in which we can deal with this issue?
Bronwen Maddox
And, how long is it going to take? These really can take years and years of people’s lives, including those who’ve suffered from it. So, just still staying on Russia, how important do you think it is that Ukraine wins, in some sense, or that Russia loses?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I think it’s very important and – because Putin is an opportunist, and I think he saw – my own reading is that – and – or Chatham House, you may wish to tell me that this is incorrect and there are other factors and so forth, but…
Bronwen Maddox
I think our team agrees with what you were about to say. I know exactly what our team says and I think I know what you’re about to say, but…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, certainly, my view is that Putin saw a West that, as I said earlies, was less willing to defend its values, was less cohesive, was more disparate, was turning its eyes to China, had not responded, initially on Georgia and then on Crimea, and the opportunity was there. As a Russian – as the Russian leader – Russian leaders always look to that external threat as a thing they can use to bolster themselves internally, regardless of the circumstances internally. And the Russian people, over the years, of course, are used to significant hardship.
I noticed that, I think, it was Harriett Baldwin, actually, that made a comment the other day, the Chairman of the Finance Select Committee in the House of Commons, about sanctions against Russia failing to have the economic impact that the West had hoped they would have when they were put in place. But even sanctions that have an impact, the Russian people are used to significant hardship and used to significant losses in defence of Mother Russia, and if you put all that together with a leader who can bolster his position by external action.
Bronwen Maddox
You mentioned at the beginning of this conversation the US, sort of, changing its position in the world, and you’ve talked about it in this book about it having a special place as the “Defender of the Free World.” Do you think it still wants to hold that special place?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I think there are many Ameri – in America who do. I think that, actually, President Biden has seen the importance of America in a different sense from his predecessor, and – but in a country where, as we know, a significant number of people don’t even have passports, don’t travel outside the United States, at a time of greater uncertainty in the world, economically and geopolitically, I think that that sense – there is that sense that has grown in America and among the American – certain elements of the American population of, “Why should we?” You know, “We should look after ourselves. Why should we be thinking about the greater interests of the rest of the world? Why should we be spending all this money on this thing?”
It is that – you know, I have to say this, President Trump was right to say in NATO that people should be paying their 2%. We say it as – said it as well. We’ve now set another potential bar for people to – threshold for people to get to.
Bronwen Maddox
Do you think we, the UK, are spending enough on defence? Yes, the target’s gone up to 2.5% by 2030. On the other hand, the economy is not, at the moment, growing.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I – what I think about our defence expenditure is that actually, we need to spend rather more time thinking about how to spend our money to the greatest effect. I think procurement in defence has never been a golden example.
Bronwen Maddox
I mean, it’s difficult in many countries, and they’re trying to work out what they’re going to need to be fighting in ten years. All the same, would you say that Britian has been unusually bad at it?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I don’t know the intricate details of the defence procurement, but if you just look at some of the examples where defence procurement has taken longer than is expected, it ends up costing more, and then sometimes you’ll end up with something that doesn’t work in the way that everybody thought it was going to work.
Bronwen Maddox
There are many examples that’s driven the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament to distraction for decades.
Just – still staying on Russia, but the – what I have in mind is the charge, which we’ve been talking a lot about at Chatham House, the charge of double standards against the West. That has been there for many, many years, saying, “You care about things that suit yourselves, but you don’t care about our problems as much.” And since October the 7th and Hamas’s attack on Israel and then what has followed in Gaza from Israel’s military action, that chorus has got much louder of, “Look, the West is self-interested, it is trying to uphold standards written after the Second World War that suit itself, but isn’t as interested in other people’s victims, other people’s refugees and so on.” What would be your answer to this?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, first of all, the attack that took place on October 7th was absolutely horrendous. It was appalling, so, you know…
Bronwen Maddox
Beyond any possible dispute.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes, and Israel does have the right to self-defence, but it should act that – in that way within international law. I think we have been doing, acting as the United Kingdom and as the United States – you know, the Foreign Secretary very recently was talking and urging Israel to accept the – urging that the latest proposals for ceasefire and release of hostages should be accepted. So, we have been doing our best to work behind the scenes to – and sometimes publicly, in order to enable that to happen. There have been issues over the years, of course. We’ve been very clear about the settlements and…
Bronwen Maddox
These are the settlements on the West Bank…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
The settlements on the West Bank…
Bronwen Maddox
…that Israel…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yeah, the illegality.
Bronwen Maddox
…has been building on…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes.
Bronwen Maddox
…land earmarked for a future Palestinian State.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
But you were asking me earlier about the role of the UK, and I have said that – I have said this before and I think, in a sense, this is unfinished business for the UK. Because the Balfour Declaration wasn’t just about the creation of a homeland for the Jewish people, it actually had a second element to it, which was about the Palestinian people.
Bronwen Maddox
What do you think Britain can then do? We’re Britain now, not Britain of 1917. We have the influence, or lack of influence, we described it at the beginning. What actually can we do, and this comes back to this point about accountability?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, it’s – and it’s a harder world in which to do it because there are more players, if you like, on the geopolitical scene today and…
Bronwen Maddox
And not tidily within blocs…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
No, and…
Bronwen Maddox
…as they were.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes, so it is a different environment in which we operate. And the reality is, as we’ve seen in past discussions and attempts to achieve a two-state solution, that actually, the United Nat – the United States plays an incredibly significant role here in relation to Israel. I think we should be doing what we can in support of that, and in doing everything we can to encourage that concept of the two-state solution to remain. Sadly, in recent years, it has, in some senses, for some, fallen out of favour. And I think we should be very clear that this is – this can – the final – if we are going to see that two-state solution, this is not going to be a military solution. It has to be political, and I think that’s one of the most significant messages that has to be got across and put consistently.
Bronwen Maddox
That is certainly the line that many of our Writers at Chatham House have taken in arguing for that possibly to be one of the things that comes out of this terrible situation. Although we also note that the populations who seem least keen on a two-state solution at the moment include the Israelis and quite a lot of the Palestinians, which is an impediment, but we’re not going to solve the Middle East here.
It would be wrong of me not to touch on China within this. Do you think we, the UK, have got the balance right?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I’m not sure any of us have absolutely got the balance right. I think we’ve probably moved to a better balance, but the reality is that you can’t ignore China. It’s a significant player on the world stage, economically and as we know, has been spreading its tentacles across the rest of the world in other ways, too. So, we have to be able to continue to search, I think, for that greater balance between the calling out of human rights abuses in China, the recognition of what China has done in terms of its influence, increasing influence, around certain countries around the world, and – but on the other hand, ensuring that that economic role that China plays, and the role that it can play for the world economy as a whole, is recognised. And if we look at some of the things that China has – places China has been able to go, the reality is that we and other countries in the West, left a bit of a vacuum in some parts of Africa, for example.
Bronwen Maddox
And now should do what?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
And now, should be more willing to be working with those countries and in those countries, as I was talking about earlier, but in a smarter way. Not in that, sort of – because we have the colonial history to think about, as well, and recognise, and to – but to be working alongside people. Rather than saying, you know, “We’re the Global North, you’re the Global South,” we have to work together.
Bronwen Maddox
You’ve been talking in many ways through this about accountability for abuses of power. As you’ve said, we’re coming up, in the UK, to real accountability for the Government in the form of a general election. I’m skipping over the local elections. But do you think our elections still work well in the sense of giving the people of this country a government that reflects the complexity of this country and all its people?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes, I do and I’m a great, great supporter of the first-past-the-post system, on which our democracy’s based. I think it is absolutely – I think it’s a, sort of, jewel in the crown of our democracy. And if I may, one story to give an example, because it means that those at the top level of government are actually representing constituencies, have a direct link to people who elected them into those positions. And, you know, I was – when I was Home Secretary, I was sitting in – I think it was in Spain. We had a meeting of Ministers from a number of European countries and the United States, and the Homeland Security from the US – the Homeland Security Secretary from the US said to me, “What’s it like,” because obviously their system’s different, “What’s it like being Home Secretary and a Member of Parliament?” And I said, “Well, I’m sitting with you here today discussing counterterrorism. Tomorrow morning, I will open a community vegetable garden.” Absolutely true and – but that is the link back in to the people who elected you and who you represent, and I think that is very important in our system.
Bronwen Maddox
Hmmm, I remember ages ago, Jack Straw, when Foreign Secretary, tried to explain to his French counterpart, who was visiting his constituency, why a woman was following him round with a picture of a pothole as they were trying to discuss the Iran nuclear deal and so on. So, such is British…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
So, you see, potholes aren’t just a new, recent issue.
Bronwen Maddox
They’re not, but no, I – that one may even have been filled in by now. But what would you say the Conservative Party stands for now?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Oh, I – well, the…
Bronwen Maddox
You’re not running for election on this, but the Conservative Party is being tormented in the polls, and people are obviously questioning what people who stand for the Conservative Party say that they are upholding.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, the three words that I use when I talk about the values underpinning the Conservative Party is “security, freedom and opportunity.” ‘Security’, not just in a defence and law-and-order sense, but the security is knowing the NHS is there when you need it, the security of knowing your pension is there when you need it, the security of a government that ensures the environment is there for an economy that can prosper. Where people can get good jobs and, you know, see a better life for themselves and their families in the future. ‘Freedom’ because we believe people make better decisions for themselves and their families than government does. It’s why we are, in principle, a low-tax party, I hope. You know, it’s been hard to lower taxes in recent years.
And ‘opportunity’ because I believe, as a Conservative, and Conservatives believe, that actually, how far you get in this life is not about where you were born or who your parents were, or what your background is, but it’s about you, your abilities and your willingness to work hard. And that sense of opportunity and hope for the future is what I think drives – and wanting to see a new generation that can see a better life than its parents.
Bronwen Maddox
I’m going to stop there, but I might follow that one up when we get to the end, but there are tonnes of questions. I was listening to your answers and seeing them streaming in and also, there’s going to be lots here. I’m not without more questions myself, but I want to include everyone here. So, I will get round as many as I can. So, let me go – so, I’m going to take them in pairs. We’ll start just a bit forward, yes, one there and – do you want to ask your question and I will pick, please?
Chengkai Xie
Great, Mrs May, what…?
Bronwen Maddox
And please say who you are.
Chengkai Xie
Chengkai Xie, Chatham House. Mrs May, one of your legacies, which in my opinion should be celebrated more, is making the UK the first major world economy to sign Net Zero into law. Yet the current government is slowly drifting off course and there is a growing voice of Net Zero scepticism within the Conservative Party. The Energy Secretary warned us against a “Net Zero leviathan of central planning.” What has changed and how concerned are you?
Bronwen Maddox
A great question, thank you, and let’s take one more, right here in the front. Right here.
Nishan Chilkuri
Evening, my name’s Nishan. I’m a Chatham House member and Senior Video Editor at Mail Online. Lady May, you’ve held a snap election before. What is your advice to the current Prime Minister in that regard? And a quick follow-up.
Bronwen Maddox
I’m…
Nishan Chilkuri
Would you consider making a David Cameron style return if there was a Conservative Government?
Bronwen Maddox
Alright, that was a really good follow-up. I’m going to impose my only one question at a time, though, rule. So, okay, we have Net Zero, your final act and a snap election and doing a Cameron.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
On Net Zero, it is – I think if you look at what the Government is actually doing and what is happening underneath the statements that have been made, you will see that there’s been very little change, and actually, things are moving along pretty well, as they were. And – but I think there is an issue about the message. And the problem with the message that appears to suggest a rowing back from the Government, is that it actually puts off investors. And if you look at the Chris Skidmore report he – that Net Zero was the – you know, “The greatest economic opportunity of the 21st Century,” I want to see the UK taking more of that economic opportunity. But if the message appears to be a slowing down or a rowing back, then sadly, it puts investors off. So, in practice, I don’t think there has been, but I think there’s a message there that perhaps will have a slightly longer-term impact.
Advice in relation – don’t go walking in Wales. And on the second part, what has triggered my decision to stepdown at the next election is that I set up a Global Commission on Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking last October. I’ve just spent a day in New York at the United Nations talking about that Global Commission with some of my fellow Commissioners, and it is taking more time than I expected. That’s why I’m stepping down from Parliament. So, I think I’m going to have plenty to do, thank you.
Bronwen Maddox
Thanks very much, indeed. Okay, let me go right to the back and then right here on the front. Behind you, yeah and then, here in the front.
Olivia O’Sullivan
Thank you. Hi, I’m Olivia O’Sullivan, I direct the Care in the World Programme at Chatham House. You very famously said at the first post-Brexit Conservative Party Conference, “If you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere.” I’m very curious how you feel about the various ways that statement was interpreted. You’re clearly a person with all kinds of global interests, including the one you just referenced. Would you say something differently now, and do you think you were misin – misunderstood?
Bronwen Maddox
Thank you very much, and here in the front.
Latika Bourke
[Pause] Thanks. Theresa May, Latika Bourke, a Journalist with The Nightly. Who of your successors has been the best for Britain abroad? Was it Boris Johnson and his campaign for Ukraine? Was it Lettuce Liz and her “quest to save the West,” or is it Responsible Rishi? Who do you think’s been the best for Brand Britain?
Bronwen Maddox
So, you’re being – I was going to pick you up on that, ‘best’ in the sense of Brand Britain?
Latika Bourke
“Best” for the…
Bronwen Maddox
For…
Latika Bourke
…reputation of Britain abroad.
Bronwen Maddox
Okay, right. Alright, “Citizen of Nowhere,” what do you think…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, can…?
Bronwen Maddox
…now about…?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I’m actually going to…
Bronwen Maddox
Yeah.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
…I’m afraid, challenge the premise of – well, one of the facts – the fact in your question. Because I think I’m right in saying that the “Citizen of Nowhere” statement was one I gave in the first spay – speech I gave in the leadership election back in 2016. It then grew to be the only speech in the leadership election because, of course, that very morning Andrea Leadsom dropped out. What did I mean? What I meant was, and it was a speech actually about business, and what I meant was that we want to see business and people who have some roots somewhere and an understanding of the place in which they are.
It was misinterpreted because it was, sort of, interpreted as a, sort of, “If you’re,” you know, “an American who’s working in London, then somehow you’re a citizen of nowhere,” and etc, etc. It was never intended to mean that. It was about saying, particularly to corporations, “Don’t just think about where your headquarters are, but actually think about every place in which you operate.” And it feeds into the work we’re doing now – I’m doing now on modern slavery. You know, I want businesses to think about the circumstances in every place in which they operate. I also want them to think about the supply chains and what is happening in those circumstances, as well.
So, it was about that greater sense of place that the stakeholders for any business are actually more than just their shareholders – more than just the shareholders and the employees. Actually, there’s a wider set of stakeholders within the place in which they operate.
Bronwen Maddox
And the “Which of your successors has done the most for the reputation of the UK?”
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I would say – I mean, Boris, obviously, was the one who took the strong stance on Ukraine, but on the other hand, he was also the one who was willing to put through proposed legislation, which in my view, in relation to the Northern Ireland Protocol, was breaking an international treaty and breaking an international law. I think the critical thing that Rishi has done is to be able to stabilise things here in the United Kingdom and to genuinely, because I think our relations with our European allies and our geographically close – closest allies are important, I think he has been able to improve those relations significantly, and I think that’s important for our future.
Bronwen Maddox
Okay, thank you. Let me take one – sorry, there’s too many to choose from. Right in the front here and then, I’m going to take one online, and then I’m going to deal with a flood of questions on Israel. So, if you…
Samuel Gherson
My question is relating to Brexit.
Bronwen Maddox
Excuse me.
Samuel Gherson
What – Samuel Gherson, member of Chatham House.
Bronwen Maddox
Thank you.
Samuel Gherson
A question related to Brexit. In 2016, was it a bad decision as far as the United Kingdom is concerned, or Great Britain for that matter, is it regrettable now? If so, why?
Bronwen Maddox
Great, and that goes perfectly with one from John Peet online saying, “Keir Starmer seems to want a new closer relationship with the EU that has similarities,” he says, “to the deal you tried and failed to pass in 2019. Would you support him in this quest?”
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I think – and I gave a speech at the beginning of the Referendum Campaign in 2016 where I explained why I was voting remain, what I thought was important in our relationship with Europe. And particularly, as Home Secretary, some of that was based on our security and policing relationships with other members of the European Union – Member States of the European Union. But I said, “If we left, the sky would not fall in.” The sky has not fallen in. We have to adjust to a new relationship, though, with those member states of the European Union.
Which comes to that second question, which is that – I mean I’m bound to say that I thought the deal I’d negotiated was a better deal. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have negotiated it in those terms. I think it would have been – I think we would have been helped, for some, if we’d been able to negotiate the whole future framework of our relationship at the same time as renegotiating the withdrawal.
We got further than a lot of people in the EU wanted us to get in terms of the political declaration, which did have elements which then weren’t in the agreement that’s been brought about on things like defence and foreign affairs. Where that was in the interests of both the UK and the EU to have that closer relationship. I think, over time, actually, whoever is in government, the UK will be increasingly work – developing that relationship with its European Union allies, and if you just look at…
Bronwen Maddox
And so, your answer to this first question of should we regret Brexit?
Samuel Gherson
Yes, ma’am, should we regret it?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, I thought, in a sense, that I’d – I don’t think you should regret a decision that is taken by the majority of the British people. I think it’s very important, although it was close, it’s very important to actually deliver on tho – that vote. That’s why, as a remainer, I was willing to take on the premiership on the basis that I wanted to deliver Brexit because I thought it was the – it was what people had voted for and therefore, it was important. So, I think we’ve got some adjustments to make, and we’ve got some further adjustments to make and, you know, for some people, life is different under – in a Brexit scenario. But as I said, the sky hasn’t fallen in.
Bronwen Maddox
Let me take another one, second row here, and I’m – then I’m going to take some of the Israel questions here.
Bryan Ko
Thank you very much, Mrs May, and it’s a question…
Bronwen Maddox
Can I…?
Bryan Ko
I’m Brian Koh from SOAS. So, I wish…
Bronwen Maddox
Thank you.
Bryan Ko
…to ask about, like, given, like, what Macron has said about his, like, independent foreign policy, like, referring a bit about, like, Gaullism. Like, how would you say the UK would position itself in the current context, in terms of, like, its – how it would shape its foreign policy?
Bronwen Maddox
Okay, thanks very much. Actually, let me take one more and then, I will just do the Israel separately. Right over here, in the front.
Michael
Hi, my name’s Michael, I’m a graduate student at LSE and a Canadian Public Servant. My question is with the impending introduction of Trump back in the political sphere, there’s been a lot of questions within the EU and the UK, both in an EU and NATO context, of what a resurrection of the Trump presidency looks like for NATO relations and several NATO and EU members that have – that co-exist changing the way that they interact with the organisation. What do you think that that relationship would look like under a new Trump presidency, and is that fear validated?
Bronwen Maddox
Great, Macron and Trump.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes, well, I mean, I think the question was all about exactly how the UK positions itself in when it is looking at its foreign policy. And what I would say is, I would hope and expect that we see a UK that is willing to see its foreign policy beyond just its own immediate interests. And if I can explain about that. I think that one of the problems in the world in geopolitics today is we live in a world that is too polarised, too absolutist, where compromise is become, for many people, a dirty word.
And I think what is important, if you look at our membership of something like NATO, and I’ll come onto NATO, is that what countries are saying is that there is a greater good beyond that which is just about themselves. And if you like, that’s the sort of sense of service that feeds through my book, this sense that there are occasions where you need to ensure that the policy you’re following is one that, of course, you don’t want to do something that is going to damage your own country, but you have to look beyond just those interests and see the role that you can play for the greater good in various groupings and various – in various ways.
NATO, first of all, I think the – it’s interesting to look at the American presidential elections. I think that we won’t know who’s won until the – all the votes are counted. The – but the one thing I would say about a Trump presidency is it’s likely to be unpredictable. One of the reasons that I went to the United States very shortly after President Trump’s inauguration previously was that I wanted to encourage him to commit to NATO. He did. As I said earlier, he was right that we want all NATO members to be paying their share, but he did commit to NATO. He’s now made some anti-NATO statements. He’s reported as making some pro-NATO statements. So, I think if he were back in the presidency, it – we – I’m not sure where – that we absolutely know which way that would go.
What I do think, though, is that NATO does have to give some consideration to how it operates in future. And that’s not because of whoever might become President in the November election, but it’s because of what happened in Afghanistan and our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Obviously, we were there, and at the end, we were reliant on certain elements of the United States’ presence in terms of certain capabilities that they had.
But the fact that we all had – do know President Trump did a – signed a deal with the Taliban. President Biden abided by that deal and withdrew, despite the fact that the Taliban had not met their part of the deal. So, he had a grounds for not doing it. We see what has happened to Afghanistan since. We saw the terrible scenes of people desperate to leave Afghanistan at the time of our withdrawal, but we all had to withdrawal. NATO is, “You’re all in, you’re all out.” I think Jens Stoltenberg put it a bit more elegantly than I’ve just done, but I think there is a question for NATO as to whether it continues on that premise or whether it actually looks to work more within groupings of those who wish to co-operate in certain areas.
Bronwen Maddox
Is NATO anything without that principle of mutual defence?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, it’s [pause] – the problem is, as we have seen in this very real example, that principle of mutual defence, which you’re absolutely right, is the underpinning of NATO, but if you consistently say, “NATO can only do something altogether,” then you potentially risk the possibility, if you’ve got significant players within NATO who don’t want to enter into whatever action that is, that NATO is going – is – ends up being emasculated.
Bronwen Maddox
Absolutely, but you’ve taken a very strong stand on Russia, in this conversation and past, and that what you’ve just described would seem to reduce the deterrent effect of NATO enormously.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I’m not suggesting that you – no, I’m sorry, I’m not suggesting that you suddenly make NATO an organisation where it’s, “Okay, let’s take a vote. Oh, six of you are going to do this and the rest of you don’t,” sort of thing. But I think there will be some circumstances – I mean, I would have – so, for example, in that Afghanistan example…
Bronwen Maddox
Yeah, which you call, “An abuse of US power,” explicitly, in this book, the exit.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I would have liked to have – the – it to have been possible, question would it actually have been able to have arranged this for other states who were still interested in maintaining a presence in Afghanistan to see if they could have been able to do that in some form?
Bronwen Maddox
Okay, thanks. Let me just stir in – I want to stir in the Israel questions, which are interesting, and I hope the authors will forgive me, I’m going to – Dina Mufti and others, but I’m going to bring them together. Michael Harvey asks why the British Government has not sought economic sanctions against Israel for the building of settlements, which you referred to, on the illegally-occupied West Bank. And then there are various ones about whether Britain should not be supplying arms to Israel to carry out, the questionnaires are asserting, illegal action in Gaza. And then, Evan Dayan says, rather sweetly, “This seems to be – the War in Gaza, seems to be one of the most divisive issues of our time, especially in universities and amongst students. How would you recommend young people,” and he adds, “and people in general, approach dialogue on this topic in a healthy way?”
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, if I can start, if you like, at the end there. I think this is – in some senses, this is an example of the absolutism that I was talking about earlier. That some of the dialogue is – appears to be being conducted in a, sort of, “You’re 100% on one side or 100% on the other.” And actually, this is a ver – as we know, this is a complicated situation. There is a lot of history that comes into this. It’s not just about Israel and the Palestinian people. It’s about Hamas and other players in the region.
So, my answer to – I suppose my answer to the question about young people and other people having the dialogue is it should be a respectful dialogue, which is able to recognise differences of opinion. But ultimately, we will only come to a situation where we can get to the ceasefire, the two-state solution that we were talking about earlier, by dialogue. By sitting down and talking and being willing – but being open to that dialogue. I think that’s the challenge of the absolutist world.
Bronwen Maddox
Alright, and all that sounds great, what about these charges, then, that Britain has not done enough about settlements, specifically not pushed for economic sanctions and is now still continuing to send arms to Israel, supporting action that the questioners here say they regard as ‘illegal’?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, the – as you know, the – I think it was a couple of weeks ago that the Foreign Secretary actually made the clear statement that they’d had a look at the latest consideration of the situation was such that arms could still be sent to Israel. We have – I have stood up on many on occasions in the House of Commons and defended our export licence regime on arms when I was being challenged in relation to arms going to other part – other places around the world. I think we do have a robust system and that system will continue to look at the – what is happening and take a decision accordingly.
Bronwen Maddox
So, it seems, given our earlier conversation, that this is one of the things people worry will undermine Britain’s reputation. That it looks like trying to have it in our own interest for our defence industry or whatever, and not Britain standing clear for a set of principles.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I think if you look at actually the – and I must confess, I’ve forgotten the exact figure, the exact percentage of what we’re talking about in terms of our arms, this is not about defending the British defence industry. This is about taking decisions on the basis of – on the same basis that they’ve been taken in a whole variety of circumstances that have occurred over the years.
Bronwen Maddox
Okay, thank you for that. Let me just squeeze in two more questions. Let me go here, yes, you.
Ibrahim Aziz
Thank you very much, Ibrahim Aziz from Salahaddin University. Thank you very much, we have you today. It is a great honour. My question about the Kurdish referendum. You came to power after the British referendum, leading the country in the difficult times. When you are in power in nine – seven – September 2017, there is a Kurdish referendum, as well. The UK took a side against this will of the Kurdish referendum. What was the reason behind this decision? Was that part of the Western value or not? Thank you.
Bronwen Maddox
Thank you very much. We go right to the door, a chap, yeah, with your hand up, right by the door.
Samuel Kofi
[Pause] Samuel Kofi, Chatham House. So, my question is, if you were to be Prime Minister again, what three things would you do differently?
Bronwen Maddox
Gosh, this is a pure Chatham House. Kurdish referendum, to relive your life as Prime Minister.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Yes, and I’m going to be absolutely honest with you, because I would have to go away and have a look at what it was that actually led to the stance that the – we took at the time. I’m sorry, but you know, I could sit here and, sort of, waffle for five minutes and, sort of, talk about this side and that side. I suspect it was wider cir – wide – consideration about wider circumstances, but I don’t have it on the top of my head, and that’s being absolutely 100% honest.
Bronwen Maddox
That is absolutely fair, and thank you for the question, again. And what would you have done differently as Prime Minister?
The Rt Hon Theresa May
Well, it was, sort of – I’m – was it, what would I have done differently?
Bronwen Maddox
Well, if you were Prime Minister…
The Rt Hon Theresa May
I think the answer is…
Bronwen Maddox
…again, yes.
The Rt Hon Theresa May
…I’d have tried to make – I would have tried to ensure that I could get my Brexit deal through, I think, is the first thing I would’ve done. And there are several things there. I mean part of that was about actually the way the EU insisted that we negotiated withdrawal before we negotiated the future relationship. I think it would’ve been a lot easier if we had the whole package together to put to people. And as I’ve – I think you made a comment earlier about spending more time talking to people.
We – quite a lot of conversations were held, but I perhaps hadn’t – I had assumed that those who’d voted in the party – in Parliament who’d voted for Brexit would vote for a Brexit deal. I hadn’t realised the extent to which they wanted a very specific Brexit deal. So, I think that’s one of the things that I would of – I would’ve tried to move more quickly on mental health. I commissioned a panel led by Simon Wessely to look at the Mental Health Act. We need a new Mental Health Act in the UK. We still haven’t got it on the Statute Book, and so it will be to the next government to bring in that new Mental Health Act.
And I – what was the other thing? I probably would have tried to push harder on our industrial strategy. I think that was really important for us as a country. It gave significant signs to investors of those areas of the economy that would be – not being – were supported in a sense by government, but were seen as key areas of the economy for the future for the United Kingdom. And actually, it was the industrial strategy that led to the vaccine manufacturing plant that was opened. So…
Bronwen Maddox
Yeah, well, thank you for the question. Thank you for those extraordinarily honest and warm answers on that and indeed, on all of them. You were just talking about more – spending more time talking to people, but unfortunately, we cannot now do that. We have to wrap up now. So, thank you all enormously for coming, thank you online, and please join me in thanking Theresa May [applause].
