Scotland
in the
heat
Quintin Jardine
For me, the Daily Telegraph lost its soul as a newspaper a few years ago, when its custodians seemed to decide that it had to compete with the Guardian. Since then it has gone to hell, not, it seems, in the usual vehicle, a hand-cart, but in a coach and pair.
Such a policy is, of course, nonsense. The late and very great Bill Deedes, and his chum Denis, must be muttering into their celestial gins and tonic, even as I write. Telegraph readers are Telegraph readers and Guardian readers are Guardian readers, by instinct, up-bringing and inclination, and never the twain shall meet. They are sorted into their respective groups at birth.
The Torygraph’s decline into terminal silliness has never been demonstrated more clearly than by its obsession with ‘Raisa-gate’ and its interest in whether the prime minister ever mounted a retired Metropolitan police horse that had been loaned to Rebecca Brooks.
I don’t get it, as Ed Miliband might say. If Mrs Brooks, whose husband is a racehorse trainer, volunteered to feed and care for a nag that had been put out to pasture, so what? If their friend Mr Cameron happened to trot it round the paddock, so what? I flat-out do not believe the claim that there is a long queue of people waiting for the privilege of re-homing elderly police nags, but even if there is, why should Mrs Brooks have been barred from joining it?
I, for one, don’t care, and I doubt that too many sensible people do. What I do care about is the decline in journalistic standards that has accompanied the once-great newspaper’s decline into darkness. When Christopher Hope, its senior political correspondent, can write: ‘He apologised for allowing a "confusing picture" to emerge about his personal connection to the horse, which he had rode before the election with Mrs Brooks’ husband Charlie, a friend from their Eton school days’, without having his bottom smacked for appalling grammar by Tony Gallagher, his editor, there is no hope.
I do wish, though that Dave would stop being sorry for things. Who is advising him, so badly? Make me 30 years younger and put me in Downing Street as his spokesman. If Mr Hope had approached me and asked me whether the PM had ever ridden Raisa, I would have been inclined to reply: ‘Yes, and why not? The animal needed exercising and he volunteered. Now go away, stop wasting everyone’s time, and let the man get on with running the country, and plotting secretly to ensure Scottish independence simply by opposing it’.
The Edinburgh elite
keeps Goodwin, but
fails to explain why
Walter Humes
This disparity leaves an open goal for critics who are disposed to conclude that, in some cases at least, RSE membership depends more on elite social networking than on genuine merit.
Fellows are listed under various disciplinary groupings and I decided to look at the one with which I am most familiar – ‘education and public understanding’. There are 35 members listed and, unlike other disciplinary groupings, most of these are not currently at the forefront of their fields. There are three professors of education, two of whom are retired. I know all three and have a high regard for their work. A fourth person, whom I do not know, is listed as a visiting professor and educational consultant. No less than 15 people are current or former university principals, whose original discipline was not in educational studies, but who could claim to have a good knowledge of past and/or present higher education policy. There are also a number of people who have achieved senior positions in public bodies: in some cases, it would not be unfair to say that their achievements might be described as more managerial than intellectual.
But for me the most striking feature of the list is that, whereas only one former headteacher of a state school in Scotland appears, there are no fewer than four former heads of independent schools (one in England). Given that less than 5% of pupils attend independent schools in Scotland (though the figure approaches 25% in Edinburgh), I wonder how the difference is to be explained and, in particular, how it sits with another claim that RSE makes: ‘RSE contributes to the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of Scotland in the 21st century’. This disparity leaves an open goal for critics who are disposed to conclude that, in some cases at least, RSE membership depends more on elite social networking than on genuine merit.
I can think of several headteachers of primary, secondary and special schools in Scotland, often working in very challenging circumstances, whose contribution to the social and cultural wellbeing of Scotland inspires admiration and respect. With regard to economic wellbeing, the lack of representation from any of Scotland’s further education colleges, which provide many vocational courses, is also significant.
No doubt the Goodwin episode will represent a minor blip in the history of the RSE and it will continue to engage in a wide range of worthwhile activities. But although the Scottish press has been remarkably timid in its reporting of the decision, the same cannot be said for some internet postings. One alleged that it was symptomatic of a ‘corrupt’ Scotland in which privileged cronyism holds sway. Another mischievously suggested that Mr Goodwin should have been downgraded to an ‘associate’ rather than a ‘fellow’ – a change that would have led to the letters after his name better reflecting public attitudes towards his conduct. I doubt, however, if those fellows who enter the portals of the RSE’s premises in George Street will be much bothered by such abuse. It is regrettable, however, that the RSE council did not feel a sufficient sense of public responsibility to offer an explanation for their decision.
Walter Humes held professorships at the universities of Aberdeen, Strathclyde and West of Scotland and is now a visiting professor of education at the University of Stirling
