By 
Is it truly surprising that some corners of the political landscape have burst forth, as predictably as daffodils in spring, to cluck their tongues and declare, ‘Oh, you shouldn’t have been rude to the Secretary of State!’? Frankly, no, it isn’t surprising. And my answer to their polite tutting remains: why on earth not?
For too long, the expectation has been that local government leaders should be meek, compliant, and ready to rubber-stamp whatever diktat flows down from Whitehall. Well, let me set the record straight: I am not, nor will I ever be, a mealy-mouthed yes-woman.
My mandate comes from the people of this community, not from some distant minister. When I stand up and speak truth to power, when I challenge decisions that I believe are detrimental to our residents, I am doing precisely what I was elected to do. Some might label it ‘rude’; I call it accountability. I call it leadership. I call it fighting for what’s right.
The idea that challenging a Secretary of State, particularly when their policies impact us directly and negatively, is somehow an act of egregious disrespect, is a notion I wholeheartedly reject. My priority is not to make friends in high places, but to advocate fiercely for the needs of our council and the wellbeing of our constituents. If that means being direct, challenging the status quo, and yes, sometimes even being impolitic in the pursuit of justice for our area, then so be it.
So, to those who are offended by my ‘direct form of leadership’ and my refusal to kowtow: I hear you. But understand this – my commitment is to delivering for our community, not to upholding outdated notions of deference. I will continue to speak my mind, to challenge where necessary, and to be the voice our residents deserve, even if it means ruffling a few feathers in Westminster. Because for me, ‘yes-woman’ is not just a label; it’s an insult to the very principles of strong, independent local government.
Source: Original Article
Comments