Blog

(a journey from reasoning to reckoning)

There was a time
when I believed in leadership development.

Not just believed…
I delivered it.
Designed it.
Defended it.

Reasoning was the compass;
Analysis, the path.
Models, frameworks, evidence, logic;
Clean lines of thought drawn across messy lives.

Sinek said “start with why”.
West said “lead with compassion”.
Britnell sketched the future in NHS blue.

And I followed.

But over time, the logic frayed.
The frameworks thinned.
The systems stopped making sense
in the face of what people were really carrying.

What looked whole on paper
felt hollow in practice.

So I began to turn
away from reasoning
and toward something deeper.

Something older.

A kind of reckoning.

Not with outcomes,
but with meaning.
Not with strategy,
but with soul.

Reckoning invited me
to bring back the parts I’d left behind:

Imagination.
Aesthetics.
Grief.
Longing.
Ethics, not as principle,
but as presence.

The moral weight of a moment.
The quiet shame of pretending.
The courage to ask:
“What does this ask of me?”
“Not just what works—but what’s right?”

It was no longer enough
to analyse complexity.
I had to feel it. To dance with it.
I had to let it change me.

To let a poem
teach me more about leadership
than a thousand keynote slides.

To let silence
become more illuminating
than any strategy session.

To let beauty
reawaken a part of me
that had gone numb from too much sense-making
and not enough wonder.

Now, I sit with people,
not to teach,
but to listen.

I ask them not what they know,
but what they’re carrying.
What they’ve lost.
What they can no longer ignore.

We don’t fix.
We reckon.

Together.

So no, I don’t do leadership development anymore.
Not as it’s usually done.

I walk with people
who are ready to leave the map behind.

Who are willing to ask:
“Who am I now?”
“What does love require of me here?”
“What if I led from my aliveness, not my CV?”

It’s not fast.
Not neat.
Not scalable.

But it’s true.
And sometimes, that’s enough.

Are you ready to Follow the Thread?

(A Contemporary Adaptation of Joseph Malins’ Poem, 1895)

Twas a town where the people with generous grace,
Would rush to a valley—a perilous place—
For there, from the cliffs that loomed cruelly steep,
The broken and battered were cast in a heap.
And always, the question arose with a thrill:
Why not build a strong fence at the top of the hill?

But voices of power, both hardened and grand,
Scoffed at such schemes with a wave of the hand.
“A fence? What folly! Why burden the cost?
When fine, shining ambulances handle the lost?
Let fate do its work, let the careless be warned,
We’ll mend up the broken and send them reformed.”

And so, down the valley, the wailing was heard,
While up on the heights, no action occurred.
For those who had power saw naught but their own,
And left the great cliff as a hazard well-known.
And daily, the rescue teams laboured in vain,
Gathering bodies, patching up pain.

Then one day, the people, their patience now thin,
Called for a council to put an end in.
A fence, they demanded, to guard young and old,
To keep all from falling, from stories retold.
But before they could build it, there came in a horde—
A circle of scholars the leaders adored.

“Your fence is a folly!” the economists cried,
“It hampers the markets and turns back the tide!
A fence means less rescue, less medicine sold,
Less labour from workers who heal from the cold.
Consider the loss to the wealth we create—
If people stay healthy, the growth will stagnate!”

“Think of the doctors, the sellers of pills,
The builders of ambulances down in the hills!
If no one lies broken, what jobs will remain?
A fence is disaster—a drag on the gain!
For sickness and suffering fuel the machine,
And progress is measured in all that we glean!”

Then came the ICB, cautious and prim,
With a ledger of figures, their outlook was grim.
“We see your concern, but let’s not be rash,
A fence is ambitious—it gobbles up cash!
Now ordered to halve both our budget and crew,
Our capacity’s strained; there’s little we can do.”

Then NHSE, with its targets and charts,
Declared that prevention was noble—in parts.
“But now, as we face our own dissolution,
Resources are scarce for any solution.
We’d love to support this—but must be precise,
Could you show that the fence would come in on price?”

Then Parliament rose with a thunderous tone,
Debating the fence from its leather and stone.
One faction declared it a liberal disgrace,
While another saw votes in a well-guarded place.
A fence was proposed—but at what, they implored?
Should it be owned or be privately stored?

Then up stood the Ministers, stern and severe,
“We sympathise, truly, but let’s make this clear:
There’s Putin to watch, and the East is in flames,
Trump stokes the fire with chaos and games.
With Gaza, Sudan, and Ukraine in the fight,
Our spending must focus on military might!

The Congo is bleeding, the world is a mess,
So now’s not the time for domestic excess!
Warfare, not welfare, is where we must be—
The fences can wait for democracy’s fee!”

A silence then fell, so heavy, so stark,
As the people beheld the world in the dark.
Was this how they lived? Was this what they’d built?
A kingdom of commerce, indifferent to guilt?
Where suffering served as the gears of the trade,
And care was a burden when profits were weighed?

Then rose an old sage with a staff in her hand,
Who spoke of the earth and the fate of the land.
“This cliff is no mere thing of rock and of stone,
It is forged by the greed that has ruled from the throne.
It is fuelled by the wealth that is hoarded and kept,
While the rivers run foul, and the forests have wept.”

And slowly, the people, their minds opened wide,
Saw how the valley was made by their pride.
The wounds of the fallen, the storms and the flood,
Were one in the same—born from power and blood.
And so, in a tide that could not be restrained,
The people arose and their thinking was changed.

No longer they trusted in hands that delay,
Nor waited for leaders to lead them astray.
They built not just fences, but ladders and schools,
They questioned the laws, they challenged the rules.
They tended the rivers, they planted the trees,
They wove social justice like roots in the breeze.

And up on the cliff where the careless once fell,
Now flourished a village where fairness could dwell.
For no longer they laboured just treating the pain,
They tackled the causes—again and again.
And far down the valley, where ambulances rolled,
Now silence and peace spoke a tale to be told.

For those once forgotten, once cast to the dust,
Had risen together in hope and in trust.
And the town, once resigned to the wounds of the steep,
Had learned that prevention runs broader—and deep.

So remember this tale when the crisis is great,
When leaders still pander and action comes late.
For fences alone will not justice fulfil—
You must tear down the scaffold that stands on the hill.

One of the most notable examples of a national civilian population being trained in effective nonviolent resistance to deter military aggression is the case of Denmark during World War II. While Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the Danish population engaged in widespread nonviolent resistance, including strikes, slowdowns, refusal to collaborate, and widespread acts of civil disobedience, particularly in protecting the Jewish population. This resistance played a role in frustrating Nazi efforts to impose full control over the country.

However, a more direct example of a pre-planned, strategic, and comprehensive approach to nonviolent national defence can be found in the Baltic states—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—after the Cold War.

The Baltic States: Civilian-Based Defence Against Russian Aggression

After regaining independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, recognising their vulnerability to Russian aggression, developed “total defence” or civilian-based defence strategies. These approaches explicitly included nonviolent resistance as part of their national security doctrine.

Key Aspects of Baltic Civilian-Based Defence

Public Education on Nonviolent Resistance

• Citizens were trained to resist occupation through mass protests, strikes, and refusal to cooperate with occupiers.
• Schools and civic groups were educated on historical nonviolent struggles, including lessons from the Baltic “Singing Revolution” (1987–1991).

Decentralised Governance & Communication

• Governments planned for continuity in case of occupation by ensuring alternative channels for political leadership and communication.
• Secure and redundant communication networks were developed to counter information warfare and disinformation.

Undermining the Legitimacy of Occupation

• If invaded, civil servants and local officials were instructed not to collaborate with the occupiers.
• Passive resistance strategies were formalised, such as slow work, refusals to comply with directives, and mass civil disobedience.

International Engagement & Support

• The Baltic states worked to strengthen their ties with NATO and the EU, ensuring that nonviolent resistance would be backed by diplomatic and economic pressure against aggressors.
• They coordinated with Western media to ensure that any invasion would be widely covered, increasing international solidarity.

Success & Impact

• Dissuasion of Russian Hybrid Warfare: While Russia has engaged in cyber attacks and disinformation campaigns against the Baltics, it has not launched a full-scale invasion, in part because of the strong social cohesion and readiness of the population to resist nonviolently as well as militarily.
• Model for Other Nations: The Baltic civilian-based defence model has been studied by other small states facing potential aggression, including Taiwan, which has integrated aspects of nonviolent resistance into its asymmetric defence strategy against China.

Other Examples of Nonviolent National Defence

Czechoslovakia (1968) – Resistance to Soviet Invasion
During the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, civilians used nonviolent resistance tactics such as:

• Removing road signs to confuse invaders.
• Engaging Soviet soldiers in dialogue to undermine their morale.
• Organising mass protests and strikes to delegitimise the occupation.
  Although ultimately unsuccessful in preventing occupation, these tactics demonstrated the effectiveness of nonviolent resistance in slowing military advances.

Norway (1940–1945) – Nonviolent Resistance Against Nazi Rule

• Norwegian teachers and clergy refused to implement Nazi policies, leading to mass non-compliance.
• The public engaged in civil disobedience, strikes, and symbolic acts of resistance.
• This helped maintain a sense of national unity and undermined Nazi control.

The most structured, modern example of national civilian-based nonviolent defence is the Baltic states’ strategy after 1991. Their approach integrates strategic nonviolent resistance with conventional military deterrence to make occupation difficult and costly for any aggressor. This model continues to influence defence policies in other small states facing powerful adversaries.

Developing a Nonviolent National Defence Strategy for the UK

Given the UK’s historical reliance on conventional military defence and intelligence-led security, the idea of integrating nonviolent national resistance into a broader security framework may seem unconventional. However, in an era of hybrid threats—including cyber warfare, political interference, economic coercion, and potential military aggression—such a strategy could strengthen national resilience, dissuade aggression, and empower citizens.

Drawing on the Baltic states’ example and historical precedents, a UK civilian-based defence strategy could involve the following core elements:

National Education & Public Preparedness

Embedding Nonviolent Resistance in Civil Defence

• Introduce public education campaigns to train citizens in strategic nonviolent resistance, drawing on successful examples from other nations.
• Ensure widespread knowledge of civil disobedience tactics, such as strikes, slow work, refusal to cooperate with occupiers, and ways to undermine military or political control.
• Expand “Community Resilience” programmes (currently focused on disasters) to include training on civil resistance against external threats.

Educational Institutions as Resistance Centres

• Universities and schools could integrate courses on nonviolent resistance, teaching historical and contemporary examples.
• Research funding for non-military defence strategies could be expanded to understand how British society could best resist occupation or authoritarian control.

Civil Service & Public Sector Training

• Public sector workers, including local government employees, could be trained to resist coercion in the event of an invasion or foreign-backed regime.
• The NHS, postal service, and local councils could develop contingency plans to operate independently and deny legitimacy to an occupying power.

Decentralised Governance & Secure Communication

Strengthening Local Governance Autonomy

• Local councils should have contingency plans to continue governing even if national institutions are compromised.
• Decision-making processes should be decentralised to prevent a single point of failure in governance.

Resilient Communication Systems

• Secure, independent media platforms (e.g. radio stations, encrypted messaging networks) should be in place to counter occupation propaganda.
• Civilian networks, such as amateur radio operators and underground publishing, should be prepared to function in case of media control by hostile actors.

Undermining Potential Occupiers

Refusal to Collaborate

• Civilian populations should be encouraged to withdraw cooperation from any imposed foreign authority.
• Strategies could include widespread refusal to follow new laws, mass resignations, and acts of passive noncompliance.

Economic Noncooperation

• Key industries (finance, infrastructure, transport) should have contingency plans for deliberate disruption to prevent economic exploitation by occupiers.
• Citizens should be prepared for strategic strikes, making it unprofitable for an invading force to sustain control.

Psychological Resistance & Narrative Warfare

• Establish national campaigns to counter propaganda, maintaining morale even under duress.
• Encourage efforts to demoralise occupying forces, such as nonviolent confrontation, humour, and social pressure.

Digital & Cyber Resistance

Cybersecurity Training for Citizens

• A widespread digital literacy programme should be developed to protect against disinformation, cyberattacks, and electronic surveillance.
• Open-source intelligence (OSINT) training could be offered to civilians to track and expose occupation forces’ movements.

Secure Digital Networks

• The UK should develop an independent, encrypted communication infrastructure that could be used to resist occupation or authoritarian overreach.
• “Digital resilience squads” could be established within communities to maintain access to independent information.

Strategic International Alliances

Building External Support for Resistance

• The UK should establish agreements with allied nations to recognise and support any nonviolent resistance movement in the event of occupation.
• Develop rapid response mechanisms to coordinate global media, economic, and diplomatic responses to an attempted invasion.

Learning from Other Nations

• The UK could adapt strategies used by the Baltic states, Taiwan, and Ukraine to strengthen national resilience.
• Establish exchange programmes where British civil society groups learn from communities with active nonviolent resistance traditions.

Would This Work in the UK?

Unlike the Baltic states, the UK has a strong military tradition and is geographically less vulnerable to conventional invasion. However, in an age of hybrid warfare, political destabilisation, and cyber-aggression, integrating civilian-based defence into national security planning could provide an additional layer of resilience.

Possible Challenges:

• Public perception: The idea of nonviolent resistance might be met with scepticism, given the UK’s reliance on military solutions.
• Government resistance: Security agencies may resist nonviolent strategies, viewing them as secondary to traditional defence.
• Implementation: Widespread education and decentralisation require political will and long-term commitment.

A UK nonviolent national defence strategy would not replace traditional defence forces but complement them by making occupation or coercion prohibitively difficult. By integrating elements of nonviolent resistance into public policy, education, and infrastructure, the UK could strengthen its resilience not only against military threats but also against authoritarian creep, cyber-attacks, and political destabilisation.

In addition to the policies already included in various party manifestos for the 2024 General Election here are a range of further policy areas for consideration.

Early Years Development and Childcare

Investing in early years development is crucial for reducing long-term inequalities. High-quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) can have significant positive effects on children’s cognitive and social development, particularly for those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

1. Universal Childcare: Implementing universally accessible, high-quality childcare services can provide children with a strong start in life and enable parents, especially mothers, to participate in the workforce, thereby reducing gender inequality (Moss, 2014).
2. Early Intervention Programs: Programs such as the Sure Start initiative in the UK, which provide health, parenting, and educational support to young children and their families, can help mitigate the adverse effects of socio-economic disadvantage (Melhuish et al., 2008).

Opportunities to Play, Socialise, and Connect

Providing children and young people with ample opportunities to play, socialise, and connect can foster better social cohesion and reduce inequalities.

1. Community Spaces and Youth Centres: Investing in safe, accessible community spaces where children and young people can play and engage in recreational activities can promote social inclusion and physical and mental well-being (Gill, 2007).
2. Extracurricular Activities: Ensuring that schools and communities offer a wide range of extracurricular activities, including sports, arts, and cultural programs, can help level the playing field for children from all backgrounds (Covay & Carbonaro, 2010).

Universal Basic Income (UBI)

A Universal Basic Income (UBI) can address income inequality directly by providing a guaranteed income to all citizens, helping to reduce poverty and economic insecurity.

1. Pilot Programs and Evidence: Pilot UBI programs, such as those in Finland and Stockton, California, have shown that UBI can reduce financial stress, improve mental health, and increase economic stability for recipients (Baird et al., 2019; Marinescu, 2018).

Housing Policies

Ensuring access to affordable, quality housing is fundamental to reducing inequalities and improving quality of life.

1. Social Housing: Expanding the availability of social housing can provide stable, affordable homes for low-income families and reduce housing insecurity (Scanlon, Whitehead & Fernández Arrigoitia, 2014).
2. Rent Control and Assistance: Implementing rent control measures and providing rental assistance can help ensure that low-income families are not disproportionately burdened by housing costs (Diamond, McQuade & Qian, 2019).

Education and Skills Development

Providing equitable access to education and skills development is crucial for reducing long-term socio-economic inequalities.

1. Equal Funding for Schools: Ensuring that schools in deprived areas receive equal or greater funding than those in affluent areas can help close the educational attainment gap (Baker et al., 2018).
2. Lifelong Learning and Adult Education: Promoting lifelong learning opportunities and adult education can help individuals adapt to changing job markets and reduce income inequality (Schleicher, 2019).

Health and Wellbeing

Addressing health inequalities is essential for reducing overall socio-economic disparities.

1. Universal Healthcare: Ensuring access to high-quality healthcare for all can reduce health inequalities and improve overall social welfare (Marmot, 2010).
2. Mental Health Services: Investing in accessible mental health services, particularly in deprived areas, can help address the disproportionate impact of mental health issues on low-income populations (Patel et al., 2018).

Economic Policies

Economic policies that promote fair wages and job security are critical for reducing inequalities.

1. Living Wage: Implementing a living wage policy ensures that all workers earn enough to meet their basic needs, reducing in-work poverty (Lynn & Farnsworth, 2011).
2. Job Guarantee Programs: Establishing job guarantee programs can provide employment opportunities for all who are willing and able to work, thus reducing unemployment and underemployment (Mitchell, 1998).

Conclusion

To effectively reduce inequalities and prevent social unrest, politicians should consider a broad range of policies that address various dimensions of socio-economic disparity. These include investing in early childhood education, creating opportunities for children and young people to engage and connect, implementing UBI, ensuring access to affordable housing, providing equitable education, promoting health and wellbeing, and adopting fair economic policies. By focusing on these areas, policymakers can create a more inclusive and equitable society.

References

Baird, S., McIntosh, C., & Özler, B. (2019). “When the Money Runs Out: Do Cash Transfers Have Sustained Effects on Human Capital Accumulation?” Journal of Development Economics.

Baker, B. D., Farrie, D., & Sciarra, D. G. (2018). “Is School Funding Fair? A National Report Card”. Education Law Center.

Covay, E., & Carbonaro, W. (2010). “After the Bell: Participation in Extracurricular Activities, Classroom Behavior, and Academic Achievement”. Sociology of Education.

Diamond, R., McQuade, T., & Qian, F. (2019). “The Effects of Rent Control Expansion on Tenants, Landlords, and Inequality: Evidence from San Francisco”. American Economic Review.

Gill, T. (2007). No Fear: Growing Up in a Risk Averse Society. London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.

Lynn, M., & Farnsworth, K. (2011). “The State of the Nation: Poverty, Worklessness and Welfare Dependency in the UK”. Social Policy and Society.

Marmot, M. (2010). Fair Society, Healthy Lives. London: The Marmot Review.

Marinescu, I. (2018). “No Strings Attached: The Behavioral Effects of U.S. Unconditional Cash Transfer Programs”. NBER Working Paper.

Melhuish, E., Belsky, J., & Leyland, A. H. (2008). “Effects of Fully-Established Sure Start Local Programmes on 3-Year-Old Children and Their Families Living in England: A Quasi-Experimental Observational Study”. Lancet.

Mitchell, W. (1998). “The Buffer Stock Employment Model and the Path to Full Employment”. Journal of Economic Issues.

Moss, P. (2014). Transformative Change and Real Utopias in Early Childhood Education: A Story of Democracy, Experimentation and Potentiality. London: Routledge.

Patel, V., Saxena, S., Lund, C., et al. (2018). “The Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development”. Lancet.

Scanlon, K., Whitehead, C., & Fernández Arrigoitia, M. (2014). Social Housing in Europe. London: Wiley Blackwell.

Schleicher, A. (2019). “Educating for the 21st Century”. International Journal of Educational Research.

Introduction

Leeds, West Yorkshire, has been a focal point for political efforts to balance economic growth with social equity. The city’s main political parties—Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, and Green Party—each propose distinct policies aimed at addressing these challenges. This essay analyses the extent to which these policies are likely to affect socio-economic inequalities and the risks of unrest in Leeds.

Labour Party

The Labour Party’s manifesto emphasizes a commitment to reducing inequality through substantial public investment and social programmes. Key policies include:

1. Green Economy: Labour aims to transition to a zero-carbon electricity system by 2030, creating GB Energy, a publicly owned clean energy company. This policy could generate jobs and reduce energy costs, benefiting lower-income households (Greenpeace UK, 2024).
2. Housing and Transport: Labour plans to insulate 19 million homes and nationalize railways and bus services, making transport more affordable and reducing energy costs for households. However, the commitment to tight fiscal policies may limit the extent of these benefits (Evening Standard, 2024).

While these policies are designed to support inclusive growth, there are concerns about their sufficiency and execution. Critics argue that without additional funding and stronger measures, Labour’s policies may fall short in addressing deep-rooted inequalities (Friends of the Earth, 2024).

Conservative Party

The Conservative Party’s policies focus on economic growth through deregulation and investment in traditional energy sectors:

1. North Sea Oil and Gas: The Conservatives have pledged to issue new licenses for North Sea oil and gas extraction, arguing that this supports jobs and energy security. However, this policy faces criticism for prioritizing short-term economic gains over long-term environmental and social sustainability (Evening Standard, 2024).
2. Housing and Transport: The Conservatives propose minimal intervention in housing markets and limited support for public transport improvements. Their focus on car dependency and reluctance to invest in energy efficiency measures for homes are seen as inadequate for addressing the needs of low-income communities (Friends of the Earth, 2024).

Overall, the Conservative Party’s policies are likely to perpetuate existing inequalities by failing to provide substantial support for disadvantaged communities. The emphasis on traditional energy and minimal social investment could exacerbate socio-economic divides in Leeds.

Liberal Democrat Party

The Liberal Democrats advocate for significant investment in green infrastructure and social equality:

1. Green Recovery Plan: The Lib Dems propose extensive investments in green infrastructure, including £20 billion for clean air initiatives and £40 billion for public transport. These measures aim to create jobs and improve living conditions, particularly in deprived areas (Evening Standard, 2024).
2. Housing: Their plan to retrofit all homes by 2030 and provide free heat pumps for low-income households addresses both environmental and economic concerns, potentially reducing energy costs and improving living standards (Friends of the Earth, 2024).

The Liberal Democrats’ policies, with their strong focus on sustainability and social equity, are likely to mitigate inequalities and support inclusive growth. By targeting both economic and environmental issues, they aim to create a more balanced and resilient society.

Green Party

The Green Party’s manifesto presents the most ambitious plans for tackling inequality through environmental and social policies:

1. Wealth Taxes and Green Investment: The Greens propose funding the green transition through wealth taxes, ensuring that the financial burden falls on the wealthiest. This policy aims to reduce inequality while financing substantial green investments (Friends of the Earth, 2024).
2. Holistic Environmental Policies: Their comprehensive approach includes extensive tree planting, sustainable farming practices, and strong protections for natural environments. These initiatives are designed to create jobs, enhance public health, and reduce living costs for all residents (Evening Standard, 2024).

The Green Party’s policies are likely to significantly reduce inequalities and promote social cohesion. By integrating environmental sustainability with social justice, they offer a pathway to more equitable and stable communities.

Impact on Inequality and Risks of Unrest

Recent social unrest in Harehills, Leeds, underscores the critical need for policies that address underlying socio-economic issues. The disturbances, triggered by a family matter, escalated due to long-standing frustrations over deprivation and inequality (West Yorkshire Police, 2024; The Independent, 2024). These events highlight how entrenched inequalities can create volatile conditions, making it imperative for political strategies to focus on inclusive growth.

Labour’s policies, though well-intentioned, may require stronger financial backing to effectively reduce inequalities. The Conservatives’ approach is likely to exacerbate socio-economic divides by prioritizing short-term economic gains over social equity. The Liberal Democrats and Green Party offer more robust frameworks for addressing inequalities, with comprehensive plans that integrate economic, social, and environmental objectives.

Conclusion

The policies of the main political parties in Leeds present varied approaches to tackling inequality and the risks of unrest. The Liberal Democrats and Green Party offer the most promising strategies for fostering inclusive growth and reducing socio-economic disparities. Labour’s policies have potential but need stronger commitments and funding. In contrast, the Conservative Party’s focus on deregulation and traditional energy sectors is likely to widen the inequality gap. Addressing the deep-rooted inequalities in Leeds requires comprehensive, well-funded policies that prioritize both social justice and environmental sustainability.

References

Evening Standard. (2024). UK political parties’ green policies: what Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems have pledged.

Friends of the Earth. (2024). General election 2024 manifestos: final scores.

Greenpeace UK. (2024). Manifesto rankings: Labour’s green plans score four times higher than Tories’, but fall short on funding.

West Yorkshire Police. (2024). Statement: Large Police Presence in Harehills, Leeds.

The Independent. (2024). Leeds riots live: Arrests made over Harehills disorder as council urgently reviews ‘family matter’ case.