Helen Grant MP: Judge her on merit

When my friend Michael Young, Lord Young, first termed the word ‘meritocracy’ back in 1958 he would later become bemused and somewhat saddened that it’s true meaning would be lost and even subverted. For him the term ‘meritocracy’ was pejorative, and used in a satirical way. Above all it was a warning about an emerging governing elite who would talk about merit and fairness, whilst benefiting from the privilege.

Young, one of the authors of the 1945 Labour manifesto, which is credited in forming the welfare state, was arguing back in the 50’s that the new political elite was in danger of deluding itself into believing that merit alone dictates ones social, political and economic standing.

In an article written for the Guardian back in 2001 Young compared the Cabinets of George Atlee’s Government in 1945 and Blair’ back in 2001. He argued that the two most influential members of the Cabinet in 1945 were Ernest Bevin and Herbet Morrison.

Beven, a farm boy left school at 11 to take a job as a farm boy, then van boy, tram conductor and a drayman. He went on to become an acclaimed Foreign secretary. Morrison was perhaps even more impressive than Bevan, he came through the unions and local government to be a key member of the Government. Young juxtaposes the Atlee Government with Tony Blair’s cabinet, which he argued was nearly full of members of the ‘meritocracy’ ; those who would argue that they got there though merit, but clearly benefited from privilege, particularly when it came to education.

It is argued that the Coalition Government-both Lib Dems and Conservatives- have taken the theme ‘meritocracy’ to the next stage: Whilst proclaiming that we’re all in this together the Coalition Cabinet consist of 80% men, 100% white and 70% Oxbridge educated.

A key element at viewing Young’s critical analysis of ‘meritocracy’ is around the language of merit which is both used to justify privilege and to undermine those who they feel don’t fit into their club.

The working class former front-line Conservative MP, David Davis, quickly found himself frozen out of Cameron’s Oxbridge and Etonian networks. But perhaps the most alarming onslaught as been reserved to BME female Conservative politicians.

Baroness Sayeeda Warsi has spent as much time challenging snipers within her own party as she is taking on the opposition. Cries of ‘incompetence’, ‘She’s not up for the job’ and or ‘elevated too quickly’ have been common place comments that have undermined her and sought to drag her down. Interesting though when these remarks are challenged for greater detail, none is forth coming.

And now it’s the turn of Helen Grant MP. Mixed heritage working class girl, who built a successful law practice and who has been a very successful Junior Minister for past 12 months. Although you wouldn’t think so listening to the growing chorus of Tory snipers. Barely a week goes by without some Tory MP- of course refusing to be named - inverting ‘merit' to insult, degrade and undermine Ms Grant.

Tory supporter Andrew Pierce has been the cheer leader for whispering campaign. A few months ago he wrote article in the Daily Mail, calling Ms Grant ‘Nice but dim’.

He went on to say that she had her Ministerial portfolio on the Gay marriage Bill taken away from her by Sports Minister Hugh Robertson. First, the ‘nice but dim’ comment is about as insulting as it could be. How dim must this working class girl be to set up a million pound law practice? But ignoring the gross insults for a second, let’s explore the detail. Andrew Pierces’ assertion was that Grant was removed from the Gay Marriage Bill because ‘she wasn’t up to it’, is patently untrue. We can only deduce that Pierce, either engages in a bald face lie or his intellect is somewhat dimmer that he thinks. The fact is that Grant started the Marriage Bill, finished it, and as Minister-in-charge has been engaged in implementing it.

Stonewall Chief Ben Summerskill said:

This was a tough Bill to get through and there was great opposition to it. Helen Grant’s role was invaluable; I cannot overstate how effective she was."

High praise from Summerskill, but her boss the Prime Minister David Cameron, also went on the record to heap high praise for Grant for her work specifically in the Bill and generally in her role as Minister.

So the question remains why is Helen Grant receiving exactly the same treatment that Warsi had before her?

We know politics can be a dirty business. Politicians are ambitious and look for ways to even undermine their own colleagues, often feeding their journalist friends to sow the seeds of doubt. Sadly that’s politics, What’s different about the attack on woman and particularly Black and Asian women is that their attackers do not use facts or details, just those debilitating insults that are almost impossible to answer. Sadly it seems that some men just cannot bear the fact that a Black or Asian woman who may not have gone to the same privilege school or college as them might be as good, or better than them.

It’s true Helen Grant may not be a ferocious bull in the debating chamber, -it’s not her style- but anyone that understands politics knows the real work of a Minister is done outside the Chamber, and this is where Grant has been most effective.

In the weeks ahead with a possible reshuffle looming, one can only hope that Helen Grant will be judged not by the jealous, pernicious insecure snipers, but on her merit as an effective Minster and a role model to others who believe that you can succeed without privilege.

Simon Woolley