If elections are job interviews, as party leaders like to say, then this interview has so far failed to assess applicants on the one part of the job description that most have no experience in – foreign policy and security. This absence was at its most conspicuous this week when the TV debate didn’t spare even a cursory nod to global issues.
Maybe the lack of contention on foreign policy is an implicit tribute to the Conservatives’ steady hand on the tiller? If not, let’s hear why. If so, the Conservatives have been surprisingly, some might argue laudably, reluctant to invoke global insecurity as an issue. Security concerns, global instability, and terrorism are important themes that normally mesh well with a serious, strong-headed, incumbent government.
Looking at the seven leaders on Thursday, you would be hard-pressed to pick more than one or two who clearly have the credibility expected of a G7 leader.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/33b44/33b44f1966e79a8bbc533866eeb159e672891b43" alt=""
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in