I’ll be watching Andrew Neil’s BBC 2 programme this evening, Posh and Posher: Why Public School Boys Run Britain. The focus will naturally be on David Cameron and Nick Clegg who both had a privileged education.
Let’s separate the words “public school” and “boys” and examine these two issues separately. The education these two political leaders had – and others who were privately educated – was largely decided by their families and they perhaps had little say about it. Many MPs go on to breed young MPs who follow the same career path; for example John Gummer (now Lord Deben) and his son Ben Gummer who is MP for Ipswich. In my view it is in the home where children get their political aspirations, and that their background is a greater influence than their public school education.
It’s not just an issue for the coalition as a third of Labour’s frontbench spokesmen went to Oxford, including alll five runners in last year’s party leadership; even Ed Balls was privately educated before going to Oxford.
I would also be interested to know how many of our MPs – and particularly those in the coalition – send their children to state schools to demonstrate confidence in the education system they are providing for the rest of the country.
Regarding the word “boys”, I hope Andrew Neil refers to the Speaker’s Conference recommendations published last year which suggested many ways of attracting more women and candidates from minority backgrounds which I have written about extensively. There are ways the shortfall of women parliamentarians can be remedied and I would like to know what Neil’s thoughts are on this.
I will be interested to see if any positive soundbites come out of this programme, or whether it is intended to alienate the public from politicians even more. Is it just Neil’s fascination about different classes? I wonder if it is a personal pilgrimage for Neil whose Wikipedia page states: “Opposition to perceived public school and Oxbridge attitudes were a hallmark of Neil’s Sunday Times editorship.”
It’s notable that all sides of the house are packed with those of a privileged education. Doubtless from similar social strata too. This helps confirm my belief that we are only offered identikit political leaders (cultivated from birth) and selected to continue doing broadly the same thing regardless of political hue or what the people want.
I would expect Tories to be enthusiastically supportive of grammar schools but they aren’t; this despite the fact that they themselves benefit from an education system which is far less fair and open. That’s because they don’t really believe in meritocracy and they don’t really like having people able to compete with them despite competition being their panacea for all economic ills; from outsourcing jobs, importing cheap labour, running the railways and now the NHS.
Because of this Britain is not getting the best people at the top. Because of this Britain will continue to slide down international league tables.
The programme isn’t intended to alienate anyone. It’s just telling it how it is.
Electro-Kevin is bang on regarding their attitude to competition – it’s alright for everyone except themselves and their friends (see bankers, failed chief execs ad nauseum) when the old boys network comes in.
John Gummer cried when Thatcher departed and put in some seriously dodgy expense claims:
John Gummer, the former environment secretary, used the parliamentary expenses system to claim more than £9,000 a year for gardening.
Mr Gummer also received hundreds of pounds to meet the costs of “treating” moles, removing jackdaw nests, tackling insect infestations and an annual “rodent service” contract. He claimed more than £100 a year for the mole treatment alone.
Only costs essential for an MP to carry out his or her parliamentary duties are supposed to be recouped. It is not clear why Mr Gummer’s claims were authorised by House of Commons officials.
The former Cabinet minister, who famously allowed his daughter to be pictured with a hamburger during the BSE crisis in 1990, lives in a grange in Suffolk. He has a £60,000 mortgage on the property and initially claimed around £200 a month towards the interest on the loan.
However, he still claimed close to the maximum allowance of more than £20,000 annually during most years once his other expenses were added.
BTW I heard Andrew Neil on Radio 4 state that the BBC didn’t allow him to come to any firm conclusions as to what is causing this. That the BBC is approving of David Cameron is telling – particularly in light of the revelations from Peter Sissons about their institutional leftism.
Nice new site btw, Ellee.
He didn’t mention Boris!