Someone of ‘that’ kind …
Lucie Morris writing in the Mail On-Line today, made some very interesting comments on the election of “The Peoples Peers”, noting in particular that despite these being ‘Peers for the People’ they are not ‘of’ the people.
We are informed in the article that 3,000 Peers who could be described as being ‘from’ the people none were elected. Sure there are the usual mix of Chief Execs, Diplomats, Police Chiefs but as Ms Morris noted, no hairdressers, school crossing assistants, teachers and so on.
What is perhaps the most offensive part of this are the comments made by Lord Stevenson, Chair of the Lords Appointment Committee, who suggested that ‘ordinary’ people may be ‘out of their depth’ in the House of Lords’.
He went on to say “‘I don’t rule out the possibility that someone of that kind will be appointed, but it would be a great responsibility on our part appointing them; we would have to do it very carefully.”
Of THAT KIND!!!!
What upper-class tosh and balderdash!
It’s the kind of limited, arrogant thinking that is keeping us from exploring new solutions to old-guard created problems.
I mean in view of Rosemary Carrolls recent racist accident, and the antediluvian attitudes of some of the DUP, I can categorically state that as, an ordinary person, I do not want people of THAT KIND representing me or this wonderfully diverse Country.
I, and perhaps many like me, are fed-up with self-serving politicians who are so far removed from the realities of the world we live in and the aspirational qualities of humanity as a whole, who continue to use of narrow-minded-fear-based-rhetoric they use to sway the emotions rather than the minds and souls of the masses.
As one follower of my Facebook page continues to remind me, that Mrs May was elected by a majority and the she wouldn’t get as much grief as she does if she were a man!
Playing the sexist card is neither required nor valid. People are judged by their behaviours; their attitudes and values summised by their actions.
As for a working majority?
Well that is only maintained by created deals with another political party who, it could be suggested, had the power to negotiate (hold to ransom?) a struggling administration to the tune of £1 billion (and most analysts suggest that the cost of this allegiance will increase)
Back to the House of Lords, who it would seem, hold the notion of some kind of meritocracy.
“‘Before we were to nominate someone from that kind of background, with an outstanding achievement in his or her chosen way of life, we would have to be very, very confident that they would feel comfortable standing up in debates and talking and cutting it,‘ said Lord Stevenson.
Which suggests that either, the House of Lords lack flexibility in their own communication skills or that they preside over a Country which has an education system that fails to equip people with the ability to think for themselves and communicate effectively.
Sadly I think both statements are true.
Some of our leaders are so cosseted and simply cannot communicate honestly without recourse to ad hominem attacks.
Some of our young people have been failed by an education system that, like much of the Public Sector, has become a political football.
On a final note, I have witnessed more effective communication; more care taken with how what is being said is said, by the young people I have worked with than so many of our politicians and leaders.