"Professional" politicians or professional parasites?

This post came from reading Martin Kettle's article Hain's departure epitomises the eclipse of 60s idealism in the Guardian. In Kettle's eulogy for Hain, he makes the following criticism of Hain's replacements. "a high proportion of the more youthful cabinet ministers went straight into politics from college. In Labour's case they also know little about politics except government."

I thought ... this is true, as far as it goes ... but there's more.

So many MPs (mostly Labour, but all too many from the other parties) of all ages follow the following career paths University-Education-Politics & University-Law-Politics. These career paths may well produce people who can produce sound bites for complaisant media reporters, but they are unlikely to produce people who are qualified to run a whelk stall, let alone a country. Politicians who understand politics, but understand nothing else.

Which MPs have ever done any productive work in their life? Which MPs have ever tried following the red tape they delight in demanding from others? Which MPs have even read a balance sheet? Which MPs have experienced what any commercial company does (even from the second-hand perspective of a professional union organiser)? Which MPs have lived in a fantasy land, isolated from anything productive that *adds* value, for their entire life?

Well, Martin, it isn't limited to "youthful cabinet ministers". Take for example the following biography for an MP in his late fifties.

1) Born 1951
2) In "education" until 1982, BA in history, then lectures in politics. Complete his PhD thesis (titled "titled The Labour Party and Political Change in Scotland 1918-29") in 1982. To paraphrase Clausewitz his education appears to have been "a continuation of politics by other means".
3) Enters parliament in 1983
4) Becomes Cabinet minister in 1997.

Isn't this MP the model of the professional politician? Does his biography suggest that the MP would be suitable to run any of the offices of state? Has he any knowledge of the life outside the political circus? Any experience suggesting knowledge or experience relevant to any government department?

Who is this paragon of politics? This parasite on the productive part of this country? This one-man disaster?

.
.
.
.
.
.

The member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath,
The Rt Hon Gordon Brown MP

In case people doubt my mini-biography of this individual, they can verify it using his self-published biography:
http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/page12037.asp and google can be used to verify the points he omits from his bio.

I invite the submission of biographies for other professional parasites.

Cynosarges

Free speech is necessary for a free society

.... and censorship is the beginning of tyranny.

Since the Guardian appears to find little details like the text of an Act of Parliament or the second jobs of their journalists so objectionable that they must remove them, I thought I'd create a blog where they can't censor them.

I don't guarantee frequent postings. Indeed, I don't guarantee any postings, but when the mood takes me, I'll add an entry or two.

Personal house rules - draft 0.1 - I will not censor comments, except:

A believable, legal request may be honoured.

Spammers are not welcome. Repeatedly posting near-identical postings will result in the deletion of such postings.

I reserve the right to remove any postings that contain numerous misspellings. I understand that this may appear to discriminate against people whose native language isn't English, but even if you are unable to spell, you are able to use a spell-checker. I consider this a minimal courtesy to others.

I may arbitrarily remove insulting language. This is not an absolute rule. Swearwords are most likely to be removed, but clever, or literate, insults are more likely to be left.

Please make comments on these house rules, or anything else that takes your fancy.


Cynosarges