When conscience perturbs politics, Andrea Leadsom abstains in her own particular way. Back in 2013, she was one just 7 Tory MPs who formally abstained from endorsing gay marriage, as the third reading of the bill passed in the Commons by a vote of 359 to 154. 127 Conservatives voted against.
Abstaining meant walking through the No Lobby then the Aye Lobby, or vice versa, a parliamentary merry dance. Leadsom explained her decision via her personal blog, writing:
‘I cannot vote against a measure that would mean so much to the minority of homosexual couples for whom marriage is the ultimate recognition for their genuine feelings for each other. Yet nor can I vote for a measure that risks centuries of faith based belief in marriage as between a man and a woman, that will upset so many of my constituents and which has not yet won public support.’
Criticising the Conservative leadership for the timing and the wording of the legislation, Leadsom avowed that she would ‘almost certainly’ walk through the Chamber twice because it simply wasn’t fair for her to have to make a firmer decision.
This goes some way to explaining why now, queried about her past, Leadsom has issued a dossier which simultaneously says something and nothing at all, a veritable yes and no of a document. Challenged on the specifics of her career before politics in the worlds of business and high finance, she has published the official version of her CV in an attempt to ‘comprehensively disprove’ allegations that she is making things muddy.
Yet the CV only makes everything more ambiguous. Previously claimed directorships, including of her family’s buy-to-let company, have been omitted and roles with big banks and funds downsized, while a former colleague has stated that despite billing herself as a senior investment officer over a 10-year stint, Leadsom actually only managed funds for a matter of months.
Of course – despite the key role investment banks played in the financial crash, overlooking the utter inanity of most British business leaders – the Tory faithful lust loudly after big business and throb and quiver in the light of big banks. So in all good conscience as she mounts her bid for the leadership of the party, Leadsom finds herself forced into issuing something which is not quite an unscrupulous lie, but not quite an unpalatable truth either.
Andrea Leadsom winds her way through doors, along corridors, and back from whence she came, hoping that people will remember the face but note little about what the body is doing.
After taking a leading role in the campaign to leave the EU – arguing that freedom of movement had only worked until 2002 and the accession of Eastern European countries, warning ‘We absolutely fabulously integrate as a society but not if you overwhelm us’, and suggesting that membership of the EU put Britain more at risk from terrorists – Leadsom now finds herself towing a softer line on everything from EU migration to the single market as she seeks to separate herself from Theresa May, the hawkish favourite to become next Prime Minister.
On the other hand gay marriage and fox hunting are back on the agenda, as she seeks to burnish a Christian image which she hopes will appeal to the right-minded small-c conservative voter. Her one conviction which cannot be shaken by faith or reason revolves around parental attachment. The Jesuits might have needed a child all the way up to the age of seven, but Leadsom only needs a couple of years to make a good citizen, provided the child isn’t then subject to gay adoption, of which Leadsom modestly disapproves.
