Does a narrow social elite run the country?

 
Eton pupil

After a turbulent week in Westminster, it seems that British politicians from all parties are being drawn from an ever smaller social pool, says broadcaster Andrew Neil. It wasn't always thus, so what's changed?

The resignations of shadow chancellor Alan Johnson and Tory communications director Andy Coulson spell bad news for an already endangered species - political high-flyers from ordinary backgrounds.

Johnson and Coulson are council-house boys who never went to university, but dragged themselves to the top by sheer hard work, ability and ambition. Look at today's top politicians - both on the right and the left - and you won't find many of their kind remaining.

I too was brought up in a council house but was luckier than Johnson or Coulson. I made it to an elite 16th Century grammar school in Paisley and then Glasgow University, a world-class 15th Century institution.

Start Quote

Andrew Neil in a top hat

I was part of the post-World War II meritocracy that slowly began to infiltrate the citadels of power”

End Quote Andrew Neil

I was part of the post-World War II meritocracy that slowly began to infiltrate the citadels of power, compete head-to-head against those with the "right" background and connections and - more often than not - win. Britain's class system seemed to be changing, a presumption tested in the BBC's new class test.

Of course, the public schoolboys still held on to a disproportionate share of the top jobs. But the meritocrats were making great inroads, nowhere more so than in politics - even at the very top.

The change was a social revolution. In the 50s and early 60s, Britain had one prime minister after another - Eden, Macmillan, Douglas-Home - who hadn't just gone to public school, they went to the same public school - Eton, naturally.

Then along came Labour's Harold Wilson in 1964, a Yorkshire grammar schoolboy and it looked as if things would never be the same again. For the next 33 years, every prime minister - Labour or Tory - was educated at a state school.

Find out more

  • Posh and Posher: Why Public School Boys Run Britain is on BBC Two, Wednesday 26 January at 2100 GMT

Nobody thought there would never be another public school prime minister, just that a privileged background would no longer matter so much in climbing the greasy pole of politics.

I was pretty sure the meritocracy was here to stay. It never dawned on me that by the start of the 21st Century, it would come to a grinding halt.

Tony Blair, educated at Fettes - Scotland's poshest private school, broke the run of state-educated PMs when he won the 1997 general election.

Which class are you?

Acacia Ave street sign, symbol of middle class life
  • Lab UK's class test takes about 25 minutes
  • Covers wealth and job type, as well as interests and social circle
  • Aims to find out if traditional divisions of working, middle and upper still apply

On the face of it, that was not necessarily significant, Blair presided over the most state-educated, least Oxbridge cabinet in British history. But behind the scenes, the meritocracy was in trouble.

With the demise of the grammar schools, a new, largely public school educated generation was taking over the Tories once more. And Labour was becoming much more middle-class and Oxbridge again.

Just a glance at today's political elite and it is clear the meritocracy is in trouble. Nobody can deny that our current crop of political leaders is bright. But the pipeline which produces them has become narrower and more privileged.

Cameron, Clegg and Osborne all went to private schools with fees now higher than the average annual wage. Half the cabinet went to fee-paying schools - versus only 7% of the country - as did a third of all MPs.

Loneliness and social mobility

Woman alone in a bar
  • Kantian philosophy says social mobility enables us not to be weighed down by cultural constraints
  • But it can lead to dislocation from one's community, as people leave to seek a better life

After falling steadily for decades, the number of public school MPs is on the rise once more, 20 of them from Eton alone - five more MPs than the previous Parliament.

Top Labour politicians are less posh than the Tories or the Lib Dems but they are increasingly middle-class, Oxbridge-educated and have done nothing but politics.

Labour Leader Ed Miliband graduated in philosophy, politics and economics (PPE) from Oxford and was pretty quickly working for Gordon Brown. His brother David also did PPE at Oxford and was soon advising Tony Blair.

New shadow chancellor Ed Balls also went to Oxford after private school to do - you guessed it - PPE. It was there that he met his wife, the new shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper, who also happened to be doing PPE as well.

So why has politics become the preserve of the privileged once more?

'Widening gap'

The decline of the unions has clearly cut off one working-class route to Westminster. So has the decline of an affluent, aspiring working class, which seemed to disappear with the end of the Industrial Age.

Where were they educated?

Public or private schools

  • Clement Attlee (Haileybury)
  • Winston Churchill (Harrow and Royal Military)
  • Tony Blair (Fettes)
  • David Cameron (Eton)
  • Nick Clegg (Westminster)
  • Harriet Harman (St Paul's Girls)

State schools

  • Margaret Thatcher (Kesteven and Grantham Girls)
  • Vince Cable (Nunthorpe Grammar)
  • Edward Heath (Chatham House)
  • Ed Miliband (Haverstock Comprehensive)
  • John Major (Rutlish Grammar)
  • James Callaghan (Portsmouth Northern Secondary)

But our education system must have something to do with it as well. Almost uniquely, Britain has developed a largely egalitarian non-selective state school system alongside an aggressive highly-selective private system. Perhaps it should be no surprise that the top jobs are once again falling into the lap of the latter.

The gap between state and private schools is wide and possibly getting wider. Almost one third of private school pupils get at least three A-grade A-levels versus 7.5% of comprehensive pupils. It is a gap that has doubled since 1998, even though Labour doubled spending on schools.

Some think a return to selection by ability would give bright kids from ordinary backgrounds a leg up. But the 11-plus gave selection a bad name and neither Tory nor Labour politicians want to talk about it.

Maybe they're right but in the 21st Century, could it not be possible to come up with more sophisticated, more flexible forms of selection by ability which consign nobody to the educational dustbin? Could we not create, like the Germans, high quality vocational and technology schools every bit as good as academic hothouses?

Perhaps that's a pipedream, in which case prepare for our politics - already posh again - to become even posher.

 

More on This Story

In today's Magazine

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 34.

    Social change is never a gradual thing it is always sudden and explosive. The more and more these ruling elite exploit the country and its people in this way the more the resentment and hatred will build until it explodes in massive social unrest forcing social changes. The French did it so take heed.

  • Comment number 33.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • rate this
    -2

    Comment number 32.

    During a BBC program the same globally organised, quasi religious, very tightly banded group of people are called ++++
    ( self censored) were described thus
    " When (they) entered the country ( Britain ) they were so well educated, literate, articulate, and organised they might as well have come from another planet"
    Imagine the BBC talking about White people entering Africa that way ! NO

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 31.

    markus_uk - you touch on something that is fundamental just like Americans are always afraid of who's coming after them & so the Bush Administration played on their sense of security/insecurity. Why are voters apathetic (perhaps, leaders are untrustworthy, not very good role models etc). Why are Americans always afraid? What is the root cause/psychology? That's the question that needs an answer.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 30.

    Problem is that our current political system has stagnated; Labour, Tories, Lib Dems are all the same, each knowing that no matter what they do, one/two of them will be elected & another in opposition. That means they can build their policies to suit the rich with impunity.
    It's one of the reasons the SNP have become so popular in Scotland, England really could do with an alternative to the big 3.

  • rate this
    -2

    Comment number 29.

    Does a narrow social elite run the country?
    NO
    A globally organised, quasi religious, very tightly banded group of people are called ++++
    ( self censored) run things, and are truly convinced what they force on us is only good, we are just cattle, so why not make some money along the way as well ? Better still USE the wealth they have clawed from us to fund further brainwashing of the masses

  • rate this
    -4

    Comment number 28.

    Does a narrow social elite run the country?
    NO
    If only they DID.
    The BBC hints at Oxford & Cambridge types, those with `privileges'
    This country, Europe .... the WORLD is run ... hmm ....well influenced to the point of control by a certain very tightly organised of quasi religious group of people called ++++ ( self censored)
    There `seems' to be freedom, but no it doesn't exist

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 27.

    The article suprisingly (given reference to Andrew Neal) doesn't mention how nationality seems to be affecting class and achievement. The cost of education and lack of opportunity in England seems to be causing many more Scots and Welsh in prominent positions, and also more Scots and Welsh in professional occupations. The English seem to be becoming underdogs due to the cost and lack of education.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 26.

    The class-test here I'm afraid didn't properly address class issues I'm afraid! I'm a bit of a culture vulture fond of museums, galleries music and theatre, but scored 50/100 of cultural capital. been on incap. benefit for 20yrs, but live with my wealthyish mum, so scored 66/100! Other odd stuff as well. I know it's difficult to decide class (I'm aware of this stuff) but I thought test inaccurate

  • Comment number 25.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 24.

    It's who you know and not what you know, without any shadow of a doubt.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 23.

    Somebody is actually running the country?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 22.

    Of course we do!

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 21.

    Yes, as well as the BBC.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 20.

    Lots of people can't pass an opinion because they don't actually understand or identify the class system. The most obvious sign of this is the difference between upper-class, and upper middle class. Most people don't understand anymore than posh. The upper-classes don't work unless they choose full stop. The upper-middle classes (the professions) are often misdescribed by many as "the upper-class"

  • Comment number 19.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 18.

    Having attended primary, prep, public and comprehensive schools, I've now worked for 25+ years for a company which over time has changed from being an old school tie and oxbridge run bastion to an American-owned meritocracy. People think and act differently. They have good points, they have failings. One is not better than the other, you need all types to succeed, as a country or as a business.

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 17.

    Their is of course always this business of how they see themselves. Most (only most I have to say) are only interested in conserving predatory animals. this is due to a rather conceited view that they are at the top of the food chain (goes with that idiotic beleif amongst many that doing things for yourself is demeaning!). A few can see through this, and are stunning, many don't and are puke to me

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 16.

    We've just had a four day Jubilee celebrating a Monarchy.

    And we are due two weeks celebrating Sporting prowess.

    That's the problem with this Country too many Happy Clappers.

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 15.

    What I find shocking is the sheer antipathy much of the upper-class seems to have for the rest of the country, and how they feign patriotism, but have none at all. The glimpses I have caught of them and the sheer contempt and dislike they have for anybody but their own is breathtaking. A famous filmaker made a film about the officer class in different countries loyalty together, against ordinary

 

Page 1 of 2

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.