Angela Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, is currently favored by bookmakers to succeed Keir Starmer. Recently, she has also made headlines for abandoning vaping, a choice shared by government minister Steve Reed after their dinner over the weekend, as reported by Sky News. The connection between her aspirations for the prime ministership and her decision to quit vaping is likely significant.
Rayner has been known for her enthusiasm for vaping, exemplified by a memorable image of her vaping from a dinghy during last year’s tax controversy that led to her resignation. Middle-aged women often enjoy some leeway with such habits, thanks to societal perceptions. Personally, I have vaped in a variety of settings, even during discussions about the health implications of vaping; however, I wouldn’t consider doing so while out at sea.
It’s understandable why a potential prime minister would want to stop vaping. The habit could reflect negatively, suggesting a minor addiction and issues with impulse control, which are not traits associated with effective leadership. Public figures like primary school teachers or clergy, who are expected to model good behavior, could be judged harshly for such habits. The optics of a leader indulging in vaping might not only seem inappropriate but could also undermine their negotiating position on the world stage.
Leaders are often held to exceptionally high standards; they must embody integrity and self-discipline at all times. This creates a challenging dynamic, as society demands perfection from its leaders, even when such standards are unattainable. This is why watching Boris Johnson deal with parliamentary inquiries felt less stressful compared to observing Keir Starmer approach similar situations. Johnson’s antics appeared contrived and insincere, while Starmer’s demeanor lacks any hint of self-deprecation.
Interestingly, it might benefit a driven politician like Rayner to openly embrace a minor personal vice, such as vaping. This could present a new narrative: a prime minister who connects with the populace not through exceptionalism, but through relatable qualities. Such an approach could help bridge the gap between public morals and individual behaviors, which have diverged significantly over the years.
For many years, it was believed that a prime minister could never endure personal scandals, including divorce, let alone multiple divorces. Johnson may have upended this notion by demonstrating that personal life can pale in comparison to professional conduct. Alternatively, he may have shown that the public is less concerned about a prime minister’s marital status than previously thought. Rayner could similarly redefine expectations by being transparent about her habits, as long as they do not hinder her capabilities or negatively impact others.
However, Rayner faces considerable challenges in her pursuit of leadership. The tax scandal that marred her tenure as deputy may forever linger, compounded by her position as a woman in a predominantly male party advocating for equality.
Several interpretations could explain Reed’s comments about Rayner. As a once staunch supporter of Starmer, he may be attempting to diminish Rayner’s potential candidacy by highlighting her past vaping as a flaw that disqualifies her. Alternatively, he could be seeking to pivot to another faction, using Rayner’s experience to bolster his own position. It’s also possible that he has shifted his allegiance to support her, signaling his backing. This array of contradictory motives adds to the complexity of the situation, much like the ambiguity of smoke signals.
Zoe Williams is a columnist for The Guardian.
If you have thoughts on the issues discussed in this article, please consider submitting a response of up to 300 words via email for publication in our letters section.
