The General Election Thread

[Schoolmarm]

Is it just a random coincidence that the PM, Chancellor of Exchequer, mayor of London and possibly Education Secretary happened to belong to a club for rich hooligans? Call me cynical if you like, but maybe there was more than just a consideration of who was best for the job when positions were being handed out. I imagine that there are probably other institutions 'churning out' successful people, but that they just don't seem to make it to the top as often.

I don't quite understand your point, are you saying that they are out of touch because they came from well off families ? or are you saying that they are hooligans ? I would have thought getting drunk and behaving badly showed that they had a great deal in common with lads and lasses from less rarified levels of society.

I think Dave was saying they are all choosing each other for the best jobs due to previous friendships.

 

[Moo]

Isn't PPUK wonderful? One learns something new every day.
For years I've laboured under the misapprehension that all those grandees were chosen by ordinary people in something called an Election. And I'd no idea that Boris's precedessor had been a member of Bullingdon. Well, well.

 

[Moo]

Browsing through the Archive section just now, I was reminded of the ghastly Pathfinder scheme that laid waste to so much period property.
Please correct me if I'm wrong*, but wasn't it the brainchild of a Cabinet Minister who, untainted by a private education and Oxbridge, was truly in touch with the people?





* See, Penners? Anyone can do it if they try hard enough.

 

[FamilyWiggs]

This toff-bashing is so boring; particularly as there is not a massive distinction between the parties. With the exception of the postman, the last Labour cabinet was hardly a model of earthy, working class types. They had their fair share of publically-schooled, aristocratically-related WASPs.

I wish people wouldn't conflate a representative-democracy with one that has to reflect the electorate. I am very happy that our parliamentarians are drawn from amongst the best educated in the country. It seems to me that this is a more important quality in those who we choose to govern us, than that there is the correct quota of of left-handed albino working class divorcee single mums.

I would rather see a mix of well educated people, with strong mix of historians, statisticians, scientists, artists and sociologists, making my laws than a full slice of the country - red in tooth and claw.

Penners, Nigel, Pford and Joce upthread - well said sirs and madam!

 

[Flyfisher]

What a shame that some people instinctively denigrate anyone from a public school/Oxbridge background

Which people are you referring to?

Bigots, I suppose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigot_%28disambiguation%29

I think anyone with such foul and wicked beliefs should be named and shamed. Any child suffering endless opprobrium should be defended; it's bad enough having to wear a black tail-coat without being opprobriated before lessons.

However, back to the earlier issue of cabinet members and their backgrounds. A government must surely need to reflect, or at least have experience of the wide society it serves. Obviously it can't reflect all of society; it would be difficult to include the homeless, prisoners, the terminally ill etc. Regardless of their politics I want a government that is chosen on ability, and has some knowledge or experience of the aspects of the country which they seek to change. The absence of women in parliament used to be acceptable; it is less so now but there is still nothing like equal representation and no-one can justify this. There was a time when there were no non-white MP's; now it is generally accepted that for a government to legitimately serve an ethnically diverse population, that diversity should be seen in parliament too. Mention class and privilege however, and the hysterics break out.

Nineteen Prime Ministers went to Eton.
At the moment, approx 0.014% of the school population go to Eton. Annual fees are nearly £29000, £5000 more than the UK average wage before tax.
The Bullingdon Club is rather shy, but may be limited to 30 members. This would make its members representative of 0.15% of Oxford students, and 0.0016% of UK students as a whole. Membership is by invitation, and only to those who can afford the £3000 cost of fancy dress, the cost of repairing their trashed room and the cost of eating at, and damaging, expensive restaurants. Andrew Gimson, biographer of Boris Johnson, reported about the club in the 1980s: "I don't think an evening would have ended without a restaurant being trashed and being paid for in full, very often in cash. [...] A night in the cells would be regarded as being par for a Buller man and so would debagging anyone who really attracted the irritation of the Buller men."

Is it just a random coincidence that the PM, Chancellor of Exchequer, mayor of London and possibly Education Secretary happened to belong to a club for rich hooligans? Call me cynical if you like, but maybe there was more than just a consideration of who was best for the job when positions were being handed out. I imagine that there are probably other institutions 'churning out' successful people, but that they just don't seem to make it to the top as often.

"Mention class and privilege however, and the hysterics break out."
So it seems.

I'd bet there isn't a student alive that didn't get up to a few things they'd rather forget all about. Fortunately, only a very few have their lives tainted by continual reminders and most seem to be able to grow up and move on.

 

[biffvernon]

Apologies for introducing something relevant to period properties into this thread but it seems that HIPs are to be dropped but Energy Ratings are to stay.

The third Heathrow runway will not be built, so that's a few listed buildings saved.

Trading and possession of illegally imported timber will be a criminal offence. Take care if you buy something labelled 'hardwood'.

 

[Flyfisher]

Good news about HIPS. I can imagine it might have been politically difficult to drop the energy ratings (in the green sense, not because of Lib-Con wrangling) but I still reckon it's an awful lot of mis-targeted bureaucracy when a few pence on fossil fuels would have more impact - although, of course, that would be politically difficult as well.

I'm surprised that trading in illegally imported timber isn't already a criminal offence. Is illegally importing only a civil offence?

I can imagine loads of problems in making 'possession' illegal though. Easy enough to police, perhaps, if you're caught with a shipload of the stuff, or a lorry load driving away from a port, but surely that pile of teak in the corner of a woodyard could have been there since before the new law - honest guv. And once it's turned into windows or other furniture, how will anyone be able to tell? More paperwork and certification by 'competent persons' perhaps? STill, at least they are looking at the problem, which has to be a good thing.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

I'm surprised the toff-bashers haven't spotted this:

University attended by each of our elected Prime Ministers since the War:

1945 Clement Attlee University of Oxford
1950 Clement Attlee University of Oxford
1951 Winston Churchill Non graduate
1955 Anthony Eden University of Oxford
1959 Harold Macmillan University of Oxford
1964 Harold Wilson University of Oxford
1966 Harold Wilson University of Oxford
1970 Edward Heath University of Oxford
1974 Feb Harold Wilson University of Oxford
1974 Oct Harold Wilson University of Oxford
1979 Margaret Thatcher University of Oxford
1983 Margaret Thatcher University of Oxford
1987 Margaret Thatcher University of Oxford
1992 John Major Non graduate
1997 Tony Blair University of Oxford
2001 Tony Blair University of Oxford
2005 Tony Blair University of Oxford
2010 David Cameron University of Oxford

Of course we've had other PMs, but these are the ones who faced an election and by popular verdict were victorious.

It's clearly a stitch up and we should abhor the fact that our elected leaders come from such an elitist educational background. Heaven knows how they could run the country?

Yes - where are the Cambridge boys and girls?
(no East Anglian bias, you understand)

 

[Gareth Hughes]

David Dimbleby and Ludovic Kennedy - what do they have in common with Osborne and Cameron?

yes, both Bullingdon members - I know, it's not many, but it was, perhaps, a start

 

[Feltwell]

I love the Bullingdon Club, and especially how it is the catalyst for Pennyfeather's adventures in Decline and Fall, which might be my favourite novel ever.

"Without trousers indeed! And at that time of night!"

:lol:

It's one of the wonderful old traditions of Oxford, without which the country (and literature) would be the poorer.

Joce, I really do fail to see why you think so highly of it. If - and it's a very big If - they do act as the media portray and it is not grossly exaggeratted - then I see nothing admirable in what they do.

If you see a crowd of youths from your local run-down estate chucking bricks at the local community centre windows, or if they go into your local pub, get drunk and trash it, I would imagine you would quite rightly denounce that as mindless vandalism.

What's the difference between that and the "antics" of the Bullingdon? You could argue they are worse - they are intelligent and articulate individuals who should know better, and is it not incedibly arrogant that they believe such behaviour can be excused by throwing money at the restaurant owner at the end of the night?

I bet we've all done things we'd rather forget in our younger days - I certainly have - but trashing someone elses business certainly wasn't one of them.

I do agree on the point someone made later about most of us not being reminded about our past. It is a hard one to call though - if you are a politician you have to expect scrutiny of your character - more so than in almost any other job - and that includes anything that you've got up to in the past.

 

[Feltwell]

The Conservatives fell 16,000 votes short of an overall majority (which considering the starting point was pretty impressive).

How is this worked out Pford? If, as I suspect, it's worked out by looking at the exact number of votes in only those seats that are the most marginal that would have needed to have been won to get an overall majority, then whilst mathematically correct it is obviously fundamentally flawed.

Surely the calculation should be to look at those same seats - find the one where the greatest additonal percentage swing would have been required - and then apply that "extra swing" percentage across the entire country to get the number of extra votes that woud have been likely to have been required. Of course that is also a gross simplifciation, but not as bad!

It's certainly not the stunning victory for the Tories that many predicted - and frankly, I think many Tories assumed would happen - but who knows, we may even have found something that appeals to many at this time. Tory voters happy to see their man in No.10, Lib Dems overjoyed to be in No.10, and a lot of Labour voters - myself included - just thankful that we're not getting a Conservative majority government so what we perceive as the "worst" of the Tory policies are likely to be tempered until the next election.

Or, of course, it could all fall apart within 12 months and destroy the Lib Dems for good as their supporters defect to the 2 big parties.

It's been the most interesting election I've ever seen, that's for sure!

 

[DaveBrigg]

To clarify:
The relevant extract from my earlier post "There was a promise of fox hunting, ...and a government stuffed full of old Etonian Bullingdon club members"
Daily Mail Dec 2008 "Seventeen members of Mr Cameron’s Shadow Cabinet were privately educated and 14 of his frontbench team went to Eton."
This promise has not been fulfilled, hence my delight.

However:
Proportion of national population taught at Eton - 0.014%
Proportion of the recent Tory negotiation team who went to Eton - 80% (William Hague let the side down)
Proportion of the national population who attend a comprehensive school - 87%
Proportion of either teams who attended a comprehensive school - 10% (Danny Alexander)

This is not a criticism of any particular school. It just raises a question over whether these posts were obtained on merit or not, and whether such a group can accurately represent a country where most of population could not afford to send their son to Eton even for a term. Imagine the outcry if Tony Blair's cabinet included 14 members who had been to Fettes. However, Cameron has made an effort to encourage diversity in his party in other ways, with openly gay front-benchers, a clamp-down on racism within the party and now the first Muslim woman in cabinet.

I had a search for people in politics denigrating the education of others; I wouldn't necessarily have called them bigots, but I'll bow to the wisdom of Flyfisher.
"Jacob Rees-Mogg When told 52% of his party's A-list were privately educated, he said: "When it's elected the Tory party has to be able to form a government, and it's not going to be able to form a government if it has potted plants as candidates … to make up quotas."
David Cameron, denigrating his Chancellor who attended a 'cheap' school - 'oik'

Yes, many people do things at university which with hindsight they regret, and Cameron is certainly keen to put that aspect of his past behind him. My excesses extended to getting drunk, wearing police cones and ill advised indoor climbing forays. I also helped a Scout group in a poor area of Sheffield where families in a city hit by Thatcherism couldn't even afford the uniform shirts. We didn't all have £3000 to blow on a fancy jacket and waistcoat.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

The Conservatives fell 16,000 votes short of an overall majority (which considering the starting point was pretty impressive).

How is this worked out Pford? If, as I suspect, it's worked out by looking at the exact number of votes in only those seats that are the most marginal that would have needed to have been won to get an overall majority, then whilst mathematically correct it is obviously fundamentally flawed.

I hate to sound like a stuck record (actually, no I don't :? ) but that is not fundamentally flawed, but is exactly the problem with the current voting system. Like the few hundred votes that kept Major limping on with a majority he couldn't control in 1992.

 

[Feltwell]

Gareth, I am in favour of electoral reform. My point was though that if that has been worked out as requiring exactly X votes in Seat 1, which is a 3% swing, and Y votes in seat 2, which is an 8% swing, etc etc then in reality if you take the (admittedly gross) assumption that you have to persuade the same percentage of voters to switch across the country to gain all those seats, then you would need considerably more votes - most of which, based on the current system, would be "wasted" as they would not affect that seat's result.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

Yes, many people do things at university which with hindsight they regret, and Cameron is certainly keen to put that aspect of his past behind him. My excesses extended to getting drunk, wearing police cones and ill advised indoor climbing forays.

Indoor? Lightweight!
President of our Uni climbing club found the rustication at the side of this arch an irresistable challenge at our Ball in 1993, and got to the top and back before being escorted off the premises by the security firm we had (all too) wisely employed...

 

[biffvernon]

Cameron has made an effort to encourage diversity in his party in other ways, with openly gay front-benchers, a clamp-down on racism within the party and now the first Muslim woman in cabinet.

Yes, Baroness Warsi has been trying to put her homophobic 2005 election leaflet behind her. I've no idea what her views on period properties are.

 

[JoceAndChris]

I love the Bullingdon Club, and especially how it is the catalyst for Pennyfeather's adventures in Decline and Fall, which might be my favourite novel ever.

"Without trousers indeed! And at that time of night!"

:lol:

It's one of the wonderful old traditions of Oxford, without which the country (and literature) would be the poorer.

Joce, I really do fail to see why you think so highly of it. If - and it's a very big If - they do act as the media portray and it is not grossly exaggeratted - then I see nothing admirable in what they do.

If you see a crowd of youths from your local run-down estate chucking bricks at the local community centre windows, or if they go into your local pub, get drunk and trash it, I would imagine you would quite rightly denounce that as mindless vandalism.

What's the difference between that and the "antics" of the Bullingdon? You could argue they are worse - they are intelligent and articulate individuals who should know better, and is it not incedibly arrogant that they believe such behaviour can be excused by throwing money at the restaurant owner at the end of the night?

I bet we've all done things we'd rather forget in our younger days - I certainly have - but trashing someone elses business certainly wasn't one of them.

I do agree on the point someone made later about most of us not being reminded about our past. It is a hard one to call though - if you are a politician you have to expect scrutiny of your character - more so than in almost any other job - and that includes anything that you've got up to in the past.

I admire your generosity to the restauranter Feltwell but forgive for saying I think you're only looking at one side. If you must be such a champion of the working man why not consider the tailor who has stitched the beautiful costume, or the workers who tend the vine in rural France, or the painter who must redecorate what has been destroyed? No doubt the club would have to meet the expense of the redeccy, and perhaps the manager was delighted at the sudden freshening up. The crowds of youths from your local run-down estate chucking bricks don't put much wealth into society, and nor have they much beauty or charm about them, and so I see no comparison in the two scenarios.

As Blake so wisely commented "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom" - I wouldn't want someone ruling over me who hadn't felt the darker side of human nature - what softness, what sympathy is there in a paragon of virtue? How could one relate to such an impossible figure?

 

[JoceAndChris]

Yes - where are the Cambridge boys and girls?
(no East Anglian bias, you understand)

Pah- Cambridge. A dull, scientific lot, with little capacity for charismatic and rousing speeches. (with apologies to Nigel, who is of course untypical)

 

[Nigel Watts]

Yes - where are the Cambridge boys and girls?
(no East Anglian bias, you understand)

Pah- Cambridge. A dull, scientific lot, with little capacity for charismatic and rousing speeches. (with apologies to Nigel, who is of course untypical)

Andrew Marvell, Dryden, Byron, Tennyson, AA Milne (all at my college), Milton, Wordsworth, Donne (who also attended Oxford), EM Forster, Salman Rushdie. I'm sure I could find more but I have to get back to clearing out my office. My successor is expected to arrive in June.

 

[Moo]

...clearing out my office. My successor is expected to arrive in June.

Nigel, will you please put us out of our misery. We need to kno,w soon, if things are going to be so desperate that we'll have to organise a PPUK whip-round. Even with the wonders of the interweb these things take time to organise.




Anyone up for a sponsored lime-rendering marathon?