Options
'Deeply elitist UK locks out diversity at top'
The UK is "deeply elitist" according to new analysis of the backgrounds of more than 4,000 business, political, media and public sector leaders.
Small elites, educated at independent schools and Oxbridge, still dominate top roles, suggests the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission study.
It says key institutions do not represent the public they serve.
"The institutions that matter appear to be a cosy club."
It found that those who had attended fee-paying schools included:
71% of senior judges
62% of senior armed forces officers
55% of permanent secretaries (the most senior civil servants)
53% of senior diplomats.
Also privately educated were 45% of chairmen and women of public bodies, 44% of the Sunday Times Rich List, 43% of newspaper columnists.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28953881
No surprise really. It's one big cosy club at the top.
Small elites, educated at independent schools and Oxbridge, still dominate top roles, suggests the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission study.
It says key institutions do not represent the public they serve.
"The institutions that matter appear to be a cosy club."
It found that those who had attended fee-paying schools included:
71% of senior judges
62% of senior armed forces officers
55% of permanent secretaries (the most senior civil servants)
53% of senior diplomats.
Also privately educated were 45% of chairmen and women of public bodies, 44% of the Sunday Times Rich List, 43% of newspaper columnists.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28953881
No surprise really. It's one big cosy club at the top.
0
Comments
Of course it is no surprise. Relationships made in school last a lifetime. Private education also fosters self-belief and the confidence to succeed. This then goes on when these people lead they go back to those relationships made in school and university and they get like minded people.
Every month I go to a meeting where people from all walks of life are wanting to start a business but the one thing they have in common is that they are composed of people who had a life together before they joined to create a company.
Such changes only tend to occur when there is a disruptive change - and that goes back in history - so the Agricultural Revolution and subsequent Industrial Revolution changed Britain from a Feudal to Urban society. Even the Big Bang in 1984 saw the old regime in Banking replaced by a new one.
Even now we are seeing changes due to things like the Web where Crowd Funding is opening up Business to an ever larger group, ease of communications makes size no barrier to market size and the cost of starting is getting less.
But changes such as this do not take place overnight - (although the speed of change is getting faster).
That said you would expect a High Court Judge to be knowledgeable of the law, probably History and how our law was created. That pre-supposes a University.
By the way according to Forbes 8 out of 10 of this countries ultra-high worth individuals are self-made - that makes no comment about their education. That said schools like Eton are actually trying to become needs blind so that as long as someone has the aptitude to join - it makes no difference their income.
But then according to some they are now 'Privately' educated and will be discounted even though they were relatively poor.
Given that state education in Britain has been destroyed by the PC left, it's not surprising that the 10% who still get a decent education do well.
It's less than 10% and the elitism used to be even worse.
Odd how the majority of Tory MPs are privately educated, aye?
Do you honestly believe it's because these people are all brighter, or better educated even?
I don't think anyone seriously does.
They may not be brighter, but they are certainly better educated. Britain was far more open and meritocratic 50 years ago, before the state educational system was destroyed. The irony is that the people who destroyed state education were themselves largely privately educated. You might almost believe that for the last 60 years the political left has been a conspiracy organised to keep the lower orders in their place.
Very interesting Paul, but this doesn't address the obvious points of the findings - that we are still a society where positions of power and wealth are dominated by a small minority whose parents were rich enough to send them to private school.
Of course it's not surprising!
It is what the parents pay for!
Utter rubbish. The educational system was even more elitist then, with grammar schools still going strong and university places still the preserve of the children of the middle classes in the main.
Your final sentence is risible.
Which has been the case for the best part of 1000 years now, since the Norman Conquest.
But in the same way turkeys are hardly likely to vote for Christmas, the small minority of those who dominate positions of power and wealth in this country are hardly likely to wish for change.
This country has always been run by a small elite for the benefit of that elite.
Plus there are other less obvious "elitist" routes to power, take a look at the graphics showing background occupation, a rise in a political background, shows that starting within politics can lead to a full career. I bet as a result of using the "network" built from being first an intern and then a gofer, assistant, eventually a party apparatchik, then candidate, also helps who dad or mum is/was, or in a Union.
Well, I won't argue with that (except it goes back far longer than 1,000 years).
But are you saying the way man educates the children of the society he lives in cannot be changed?
The bigger issue is social mobility. In the entire article, there isn't even a statistic addressing the problem. Plus it felt like even Alan Milburn, who is raising the issue of elitism, doesn't even know what it really is. The problem is a majority of people are tied down to their home town, as they can't afford to move to places with greater opportunities. There's the issue of a majority of highly skilled jobs being centred around London. This is due to, there's not enough investment in other cities to draw businesses to startup there and most of the similar companies are in the same area. There needs to be more investment into cities besides London, to create more skilled opportunities and industries outside of London.
Isn't that the "other" argument? The report is surely about how the top jobs are procured and awarded not how the candidates are educated?
What is the real issue from the OP report?
Jobs awarded regardless of education or ability?
Eliminate private education and Oxbridge, and that will fix the system?
Use State finance to send all children to schools based on the Private school system regardless of their needs?
Perhaps some deliberate discrimination, i.e. ban all privately educated persons from top positions for two or three generations.
True, but virtually everything that was in place before 1066 was destroyed by the Normans.
Many of the "small elite" running the country today can trace their ancestory directly back to Norman times and their family's part in the invasion.
I'm not saying that at all, what I am saying is that for those at the top now are going to show little appetite to chance as they are the ones at the top.
What is a worry, though, is that there is far less social mobility today than there was even 50 years ago, with little sign of it improving.
You know I'm bound to disagree with you on this but irrespective of that, I think what you've focused on (parental wealth) is a side issue to this particular story.
The real question is why do people going to private schools end up in the top jobs? The undisputed evidence is that it's happening - but why? It's not something that happens overnight. In between leaving school they'll have university and then at least 10 years (probably 20) of working their way through the system to get to those jobs.
What hold over the system do private schools have that 20 years after their students have left, they're being put into the top jobs? Unless one believes in masonic-type conspiracies, the only logical answer is none.
So why is it happening?
Exactly. Grammar schools were the best ladder out of poverty the working classes ever had. Once they were shut down, the working classes were trapped.
Which is why Labour shut them down.
They did not want there core vote becoming middle class.
I also know a bunch of people who were put through private schools and are now working class, they are running a takeway business.
Agreed and not only that, even the almost undisputed top school in the UK, Eton, does have full fee scholarships so it's not even about buying your way in.
Eton does offer scholarships to those who cannot afford the fees (around 25% of the boys receive some sort of assistance)
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/nov/13/eton-old-boys-network-flourishes
I do think that wealth and powerful networking can very much come into play later after school and University. For example, getting a Legal Training contract is much harder for a "Joe Average" than someone with connections and wealth. but not impossible.
Such a multi faceted subject.
You could argue that whilst an education is an education, as in if you do well, it shouldn't matter where you gleaned your education from. On the flip side, people being people (take into account subconcious tribal leftovers, sticking together or with like minded people) will always look out for their brethren (to coin a masonic term). If your parents have money, they send you to a school that costs considerable money to attend, by default your peers will be in a similar position. You make friends the same way anyone else does. Couple that with the prestige of the high cost institution you've attended and the history of your 'past peers', the cycle will keep repeating as you come across bosses in you chosen profession who probably went to the same school.
To end up in those plum jobs, which lets face it are pretty high stress, high workload positions that really do take half a brain, you need to have been well educated for it. You can't get away with simply winging it. Again, on the flip side, being part of that 'money set' will enable you with chances and opportunity that others wouldn't have. Even simple things like work experience. chances are you'll end up at JP Morgan or Deutche Bank over 'State School Devvo' who ends up down the laundrette.
The real 'elite' with true controlling power, I would argue, wouldn't care how well little Cecil did at Eton. He'll either have enough money in the family to enable him not to work, or he'll get shown the ropes of the family business (how to set the price of gold - Rothschilds i'm looking at you
...and that really is the crux of it all.
It just helps if all the people you know happen to be the offspring of multinational business owners, politicians, leading institutions...and so on.
Agree that there too many variables and lots of reason for a persons success or not reaching their full potential.
However the second point is arguable, as you see some top executives have no idea what they are doing, just look at Northern Rock and RBS.