Peter Oborne's 'Triumph of the Political Class' is definitely on my Christmas list and although I don't always agree with him his observations on politics (particularly the process aspects rather than policy) are usually spot on. His book 'The Rise of Political Lying' is a must read for anyone interested in politics, whatever your party. In the video box there's a fascinating clip of him talking to Iain Dale on Doughty Street about aspects of the book - well worth a look.One thing that comes up in that discussion that always troubles me though is the debate around 'career politicians' and the focus on what MPs did before taking their seat. Iain refers to it in the clip and uses the normal angle when this comes up:
"before the last election, of the 379 Labour MPs at the time only 4 had ever ran a business"
It's this 'ever ran a business' line that I always find confusing for a couple of reasons. I've never ran a business. For that matter I don't know anyone who has. I won't go through all the degrees of separation but you'd need to go a few out before you'd find someone who did. So the vast majority of people who's interests are represented in Parliament have absolutely no such experience and the impact business regulations have on their lives is probably peripheral as well.
I don't want to distort Iain's point here - of course we need legislators capable of understanding the consequences of the laws they make but why is 'running a business' always the 'go to' litmus test of suitability for our MPs? And at the risk of coming across all Marxist here, given the relative power businesses already have in our country (sheer financial weight, lobbying, access to legal advice etc.) there's a very strong argument that says of all the groups who might need better representation, business is somewhere near the back of the queue. I do accept the general thrust of Oborne's book - we do seem to have a 'political class' across all parties whose interest in power and the process of politics far outweighs any deeply held convictions or desire to change society and that has to be a bad thing. I just wonder whether the absence of conviction isn't really the problem here.
It's interesting given his own political persuasions that the two examples Oborne cites of people for whom politics wasn't a career but a means to an end were both Labour figures very much on the left - Keir Hardie and Nye Bevan. Neither man had any significant non-political experience prior to joining Parliament - they may have spent time in the pits or administrative posts in the union but both were committed 'union men' in the political sense - their interest in politics wasn't some mid-life conversion but a real passion they developed early on in adulthood. Likewise with figures on the right - Margaret Thatcher was contesting elections at 24 years old, a few years before she qualified as a barrister. She was elected to Parliament in her mid-thirties. So the common thread there isn't an abundance of non-political experience outside the house but a deeply held sense of conviction and a strength of character which, to my mind, can exist in the parliamentarian who takes his seat at 21 or 71.
Footnote: None of this should be considered an endorsement of Douglas Alexander or Ed Balls - both men are still utter.....
Labels: Politics
12 Comments:
Liam, I don't disagree with you. The point I should have made, and mean to make, was that there are two few ex military people, too few academics and too many career politicians. I should not just talked about businesspeople.
Thanks Iain - I know it was just a discussion so I shouldn't have been quite so literal about it. I just find it strange that commercial experience is always the one people latch on to first.
...And at the risk of coming across all Marxist here...
Good that you concede this is a risk, Liam.
I know lots of people who have run a business and I have myself .I don`t know what giant copration you are tucked into Casslis but the vast majority of people in this coutry work for SME`s where they are directly effected by the legilative frame work around them.
The point is that people who como=pete on these terms have to deliver and are not judged ( as much ) on sounding fluffy and warm. The people we want running the country are the best people not those who can`t hack it and hide in the army or academia or public services.
( Not that I`m much good at it myseklf )
Sure these people 'have to deliver' but it's against a fairly basic bottom line where profit is often the only motive - I don't want the country run by people whose reasoning has been forged in that environment.
Government isn't about commerical success or trumping the competition - it's a more collective thing based on the greater good. Business experience has something to contribute to that but it's not a fundamental requirement.
Liam, e-mail me if you would.
My criticism of the book so far-I'm about a third of the way through it- is that the term 'Political Class' is not sufficiently tightly defined: some are described as definitely in it while others, whom, I'd have placed in it, are not. But he's very good value so far.
6JNW79 Very good blog! Thanks!
zMigVG Nice Article.
actually, that's brilliant. Thank you. I'm going to pass that on to a couple of people.
Please write anything else!
Wonderful blog.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home