It is not just the young who are fresh ...

This valet first posted here to decry the jejune and superficial way in which the press discusses the merits of political leaders. It has been a constant theme of this disappointed and saddened animal ever since. And it looks likely to continue to be a preoccupation, almost an obsession, in this simian's pantry.

Andrew Rawnsley, writing in this week's Observer makes the link between the freshness of the Brown cabinet and the youth of its members:

[Brown] also talks about his premiership being a moment for 'moving the country' into its 'new generation'. He cannot really personify generational change himself since he is actually older than the man he will replace as Prime Minister. The way to compensate for that will be to surround himself with younger and fresher faces.

It's an unexceptional sounding argument; the sort of line that glides glibely past. And yet, am I alone in thinking that one of the most surprising features of recent reshuffles was Margret Beckett's promotion to foreign secretary? No one predicted it. She was a genuinely fresh choice - and rewarded for being one of the very few politicans who can speak to a difficult brief without being defensive and who sounds distinctively like herself. She is, of course, a professional politican, with little carrer outside politics. So what I am about to say is not a hard and fast rule. But isn't anyone a little depressed by the idea of a whole generation of politicans entirely made up of former special advisors - on both sides of the House?

What is necessarily fresh about a slate of people in their late thirties who have been working for politicans for the last 15 years? Many are talented, many will deservedly go far. But is entry to the cabinet decided entirely a generation in advance? Where, among the MPs outside government, or in its junior ranks, are those who are come into parliament from other jobs, other sectors, other interests and other experiences? They needn't be young to be fresh. What about people getting into politics in their forties, fifties and sixties? Of course such people have the disadvantage of not inheriting a lunch rota with journalists... But I dream of the day when someone who was a nurse five years ago is in cabinet today.

The thing to keep an eye on here is the overall balance of the parliamentary party. The risk of having boundary changes shrinking Labour seats, aspiring special advisors and former MPs looking for the route back is that the balance of the parliamentary party moves too far towards the lifetime career politican. The door must always be ajar.

Comments

[Claire]

Monkey Butler, I think you make some good points, for a monkey...However, I do think that is the failure of political parties to reach out to a diverse and rich mix of people that has led to the current problem. That leads to only a small pool of people to promote. I also think its wrong to punish people who have been comitted to the party for a lifetime. They may be sad, but they also show dedication. Of course, some MPs are all about self enhancement, but others work really hard for their community and it would be wrong to tar all ex special advisors with the same brush.

You are right though about the age issue. Why should fresh equal young? Fresh should mean people with new ideas and ways of looking at the world. However, is this something any leader wants in their Cabinet?