On changing one's mind (and removing beams from one's eyes)...

***

I’ve changed my mind on a great deal of things over the years – I’m not going to list them but they are many. Yet, somehow people seem rather unwilling to accept that, when somebody says they’ve changed their mind, generally speaking it does actually mean that they have done just that!

Which rather brings us to the matter of politics and the game of using past statements, whipped votes under an old regime and guilt by association as the basis for accusation – even when the person stands there and says, “I’ve changed my mind on that.” And sadly the equalities lobby is among the worst offenders in this respect.

Now it seems to me that a matter such as gay rights is one area where more folk than average have changed their opinions. I’m not saying that the new views accord with the further flung boundaries of the equalities agenda but that people have changed – folk accept gay people in a way that would be a great surprise to the majority back in, say, 1980. There are still areas –sport and especially football, for example – where being gay is a real barrier but attacking someone for their views 10, 20 or even 30 years ago is not a helpful contribution. Particularly where that person has said they’ve changed their mind.

Indeed, I would go as far as to say that those who attack a person on the basis of past actions where they say clearly they would act differently today are guilty of bigotry and prejudice. And behaving so reprehensibly while clutching hypocritically to the moral high ground on an issue is, to this humble sinner, an act of monumental offence.

So to all those people attacking Theresa May for what she did in 1998 I say this:

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye

...

What exactly is the necessary qualification to hold a cabinet post?

****

I was struck by the implied theme of a recent post from the Laser Cat Party on the subject of cabinet diversity. And it wasn’t diversity but qualification – with the argument being that George Osborne isn’t “qualified” to be chancellor or rather as Charlotte puts it – “monumental overachievement”.

You see the problem is that George has never had a “proper” job (although it remains unclear as to what constitutes such a job) something he appears to share with most of our current crop of leaders:

After graduating from Oxford University, Miliband became a Labour Party researcher and rose to become one of then-Chancellor Gordon Brown's confidants, being appointed Chairman of HM Treasury's Council of Economic Advisers. Miliband was elected Labour Member of Parliament for the South Yorkshire constituency of Doncaster North.

Born in London, Miliband studied at Oxford University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and started his career at the Institute for Public Policy Research. At 29, Miliband became Tony Blair's Head of Policy whilst the Labour Party was then in opposition and was a major contributor to Labour's manifesto for the 1997 general election which brought the party to power. Blair made him head of the Prime Minister's Policy Unit from 1997 to 2001

Pretty close to George’s career – and the same could go for shiny politician after shiny politician. Posh school, Oxbridge, policy or research job, suck up to existing leaders, safe seat, cabinet…..

But this is to stray from my point, which was to ask a simple question: what exactly is the necessary qualification to hold a cabinet post? Do you have to be an economist or financier to be chancellor? And a social policy wonk or former top copper to run the Home Office? An ex-teacher to be in charge at education?

Surely this isn’t the case – we want top MPs to have experience, to be clever, decisive and able to lead. But we don’t want a government of policy wonks and statistics geeks! Which is why Charlotte worried me a little with her comment on Theresa May:

“As an aside, I looked at Theresa May’s Wikipedia page and found this:

From 1977 to 1983 she worked at the Bank of England, and from 1985 to 1997, as a financial consultant and senior advisor in International Affairs at the Association for Payment Clearing Services.

A natural fit for the Home Office, I’m sure you’ll agree.”

And why not? Clearly, clever and connected and with more pre-politics experience than all the Balls, Milibands, Osbornes, Blairs and Camerons put together!

....