This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/20/politics-mavericks-same-old-chumocracy-groupthink

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Politics needs mavericks, not just the same old chumocracy and groupthink Politics needs mavericks, not just the same old chumocracy and groupthink
(4 months later)
Suddenly there are new faces on our television screens, and new, agitated, indignant voices on the airwaves. Some are old or plummy-toned, some have grey hair, some are young and working class, some are anxious suburban commuters. Many of them are women. It is the raging rows over Ukip, gay marriage, Europe and swivel-eyed loons that have given these people a political presence.Suddenly there are new faces on our television screens, and new, agitated, indignant voices on the airwaves. Some are old or plummy-toned, some have grey hair, some are young and working class, some are anxious suburban commuters. Many of them are women. It is the raging rows over Ukip, gay marriage, Europe and swivel-eyed loons that have given these people a political presence.
They are noticeable because their presence at the centre of political debate is a novelty. We have grown accustomed to seeing almost all the important issues facing the country debated between groups of urbane, Westminster-based, fortysomething men. This month's eruption of anger over how politics is run has highlighted just how narrow, insulated and unrepresentative our political discussions and our political representation are. It's no wonder that so many people are feeling angry.They are noticeable because their presence at the centre of political debate is a novelty. We have grown accustomed to seeing almost all the important issues facing the country debated between groups of urbane, Westminster-based, fortysomething men. This month's eruption of anger over how politics is run has highlighted just how narrow, insulated and unrepresentative our political discussions and our political representation are. It's no wonder that so many people are feeling angry.
Nigel Farage's full-page advertisement in the Daily Telegraph today , accusing the Tories of being run by a "bunch of college kids who've never had a proper job in their lives", tapped cleverly into a vein of Conservative anger. This isn't solely a Tory problem. Its activists and defectors are feeling overlooked, but it's a Labour issue too. "In my time, the Commons has been taken over by the professional political classes," one long-serving MP said to me. "Where are the working classes? Where are the trade unionists? Where are the George Browns or the Ernie Bevins or the people who've had years of experience in other jobs? How does an outsider break in? "Nigel Farage's full-page advertisement in the Daily Telegraph today , accusing the Tories of being run by a "bunch of college kids who've never had a proper job in their lives", tapped cleverly into a vein of Conservative anger. This isn't solely a Tory problem. Its activists and defectors are feeling overlooked, but it's a Labour issue too. "In my time, the Commons has been taken over by the professional political classes," one long-serving MP said to me. "Where are the working classes? Where are the trade unionists? Where are the George Browns or the Ernie Bevins or the people who've had years of experience in other jobs? How does an outsider break in? "
The figures remind us of how startlingly different MPs' backgrounds are to the rest of the country. Fewer than a third of Labour MPs are women, and the Tories only manage a sixth. The Lib Dems, those famously earnest egalitarians, have a disgracefully tiny proportion: one in eight.The figures remind us of how startlingly different MPs' backgrounds are to the rest of the country. Fewer than a third of Labour MPs are women, and the Tories only manage a sixth. The Lib Dems, those famously earnest egalitarians, have a disgracefully tiny proportion: one in eight.
MPs do no better on privilege and class. Seven per cent of the nation attends private school. More than half of all Tory MPs did so, as did 40% of the Lib Dems, and 15% of the Labour party. A third of all Tories are or were company directors or executives, an occupation shared with just 0.2% of the population. And whereas 30% of the population are in blue-collar manual jobs, only 5% of MPs come from such a background, down from 15% when Thatcher came to power.MPs do no better on privilege and class. Seven per cent of the nation attends private school. More than half of all Tory MPs did so, as did 40% of the Lib Dems, and 15% of the Labour party. A third of all Tories are or were company directors or executives, an occupation shared with just 0.2% of the population. And whereas 30% of the population are in blue-collar manual jobs, only 5% of MPs come from such a background, down from 15% when Thatcher came to power.
After sex and class, age is the third discriminator. Politics used to be a profession that valued long memories and varied life experience. American politics still does, with almost half its legislators aged over 60. In Britain, where more than a fifth of the population are of pension age, just 17% of MPs are in the same category.After sex and class, age is the third discriminator. Politics used to be a profession that valued long memories and varied life experience. American politics still does, with almost half its legislators aged over 60. In Britain, where more than a fifth of the population are of pension age, just 17% of MPs are in the same category.
The trouble with the way the Commons operates now is that once MPs arrive, every single one of those existing differences is amplified. The people chosen by party leaders to sit on the frontbenches are, as a group, male, privileged, and relatively young. A high proportion of them, from the party leaders downwards, have worked in political posts for almost their entire careers. On both sides of the house, having an Oxbridge education is a huge advantage. A third of coalition MPs are Oxbridge graduates, but two thirds of the cabinet went there. In just the same way, a sixth of Labour MPs but more than a third of the shadow cabinet went to those two universities.The trouble with the way the Commons operates now is that once MPs arrive, every single one of those existing differences is amplified. The people chosen by party leaders to sit on the frontbenches are, as a group, male, privileged, and relatively young. A high proportion of them, from the party leaders downwards, have worked in political posts for almost their entire careers. On both sides of the house, having an Oxbridge education is a huge advantage. A third of coalition MPs are Oxbridge graduates, but two thirds of the cabinet went there. In just the same way, a sixth of Labour MPs but more than a third of the shadow cabinet went to those two universities.
The stranglehold that a single demographic has over our politics might have looked defensible if the electorate were confident that this group knew what they were doing. That's not so now. The polls show support for all three main parties falling sharply as a general, fearful pessimism settles in. Meanwhile, the rise of a couple of unconventional, overlooked political figures demonstrates just what a mistake it is for party leaders to keep assuming that talent, potential and popular appeal can only be found in a narrow group.The stranglehold that a single demographic has over our politics might have looked defensible if the electorate were confident that this group knew what they were doing. That's not so now. The polls show support for all three main parties falling sharply as a general, fearful pessimism settles in. Meanwhile, the rise of a couple of unconventional, overlooked political figures demonstrates just what a mistake it is for party leaders to keep assuming that talent, potential and popular appeal can only be found in a narrow group.
The two politicians who are currently doing most to drive the political agenda, create change and arouse passions are Nigel Farage on the right and Margaret Hodge on the left. They couldn't be more different from the careful, smooth-skinned, smooth-talking male political elite. They are both spirited, fearless, occasionally indiscreet, and engaging. Farage drinks, smokes and charms the Britain that thinks it's been abandoned; Hodge is almost single-handedly using her ruthless intelligence, curiosity and determination to expose the cosy arrangements that have allowed a great swath of giant companies to escape paying tax.The two politicians who are currently doing most to drive the political agenda, create change and arouse passions are Nigel Farage on the right and Margaret Hodge on the left. They couldn't be more different from the careful, smooth-skinned, smooth-talking male political elite. They are both spirited, fearless, occasionally indiscreet, and engaging. Farage drinks, smokes and charms the Britain that thinks it's been abandoned; Hodge is almost single-handedly using her ruthless intelligence, curiosity and determination to expose the cosy arrangements that have allowed a great swath of giant companies to escape paying tax.
Characters like these aren't rated by either of their respective sides. They're too original, or too old, or the wrong class, or the wrong sex. Margaret Hodge spent the 13 years of Labour government only ever being given junior jobs, because she didn't fit the younger male mould. It was only when she chose her own path by standing for the chairmanship of the public accounts committee that she had the freedom to shine.Characters like these aren't rated by either of their respective sides. They're too original, or too old, or the wrong class, or the wrong sex. Margaret Hodge spent the 13 years of Labour government only ever being given junior jobs, because she didn't fit the younger male mould. It was only when she chose her own path by standing for the chairmanship of the public accounts committee that she had the freedom to shine.
Party leaders don't want irreverent, troublesome, freethinking mavericks. Otherwise, why have the very able MPs Gisela Stuart and Andrea Leadsom not been given jobs? They prefer, as do bosses the world over, the chumocracy; people who will defer to and think like them. But the world's too complex and uncomfortable a place for that. Groupthink isn't working, and the electorate can see it. Too many of us look at parliament and feel that people like us are excluded. It's time the bright, the difficult, the grey-haired and the underprivileged were given a voice, not just on the airwaves or on the net, but at the centre of power.Party leaders don't want irreverent, troublesome, freethinking mavericks. Otherwise, why have the very able MPs Gisela Stuart and Andrea Leadsom not been given jobs? They prefer, as do bosses the world over, the chumocracy; people who will defer to and think like them. But the world's too complex and uncomfortable a place for that. Groupthink isn't working, and the electorate can see it. Too many of us look at parliament and feel that people like us are excluded. It's time the bright, the difficult, the grey-haired and the underprivileged were given a voice, not just on the airwaves or on the net, but at the centre of power.
Twitter: @jennirslTwitter: @jennirsl
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.