Credit: Arthur Edwards - WPA Pool/Getty Images

There was a time when trade unions were routinely attacked for their defence of the closed shop. ‘A symbol of excessive sectional power’, its opponents would argue, ‘unions feathering their own nests at the expense of personal liberty’, ‘jobs for the boys’. The idea that working-class people should have any sort of exclusive agency through which they might exercise industrial or economic power was anathema to some.
Ultimately, the closed shop was outlawed by the Conservative government in the early 1990s – a move designed not only to tame the unions, but also to bring the UK into line with European legislation. (I wonder how many among today’s fanatically pro-EU labour movement know or even care about this.)
But there is one closed shop that wasn’t outlawed. In fact, it’s the most powerful that ever existed, and it remains alive and well. It members are not those fighting against the system, but those running it.
After years of talk by politicians about the value of meritocracy and the need to smash glass ceilings, progress at tackling the culture of elitism that infects the upper echelons of our public life and institutions has been utterly lamentable. And this failure is resulting in a nation increasingly atomised, and in which large numbers simmer with resentment at those who exercise power over them while seemingly being devoid of any desire to understand their lives.
Politics, business, the media and public services remain resolutely in the grip of those who (let’s be clear, through no fault of their own) were born into wealth and privilege. Class, parental income and geography remain key determinants in how far one might rise. Advancement in today’s Britain is still as much about who you know, not what you know; about where you came from, not what ability you might have.
In its most recent State of the Nation report, the Social Mobility Commission found a labour market highly polarised, with five million workers caught in a low-pay trap from which there is little chance of escape. Predictably, London, the Home Counties and East of England dominate when it comes to high-skilled, high-paid and knowledge-based jobs. 58% of internships – often a pathway to a plum job and career – were located in the Capital, placing them out-of-bounds to millions. That many were unpaid rendered them further inaccessible to the less advantaged. And it’s not only workers in the old industrial heartlands who are locked out of good-quality employment. Those in rural areas and coastal towns suffer the worst outcomes.
Earlier research by the Commission exposed the staggering degree to which the commanding heights of our society remain stubbornly under the control of the privileged few. Its study of 4,000 leaders in politics, business, the media and other areas of public life revealed that 71% of senior judges, 62% of senior armed forces officers, 50% of members of the House of Lords, 45% of public body chairs, 44% of individuals on the Sunday Times Rich List, 43% of newspaper columnists and 33% of MPs were educated at private schools – that compares to 7% of the population as a whole. Oxbridge, as you might expect, features heavily too.
The Commission also found that children’s future income was, in Britain more than in many other countries, determined by parental background.
”Twas ever thus,’ some might say. Indeed so. But today, those who run the establishment are united not merely by advantages of family affluence and education, but very often by opinion too. With many of them having been exposed to the radical nostrums of the cultural revolution that took hold in universities in the 1960s – and which were designed to supplant the traditional values held by millions of ordinary people – it is hardly a surprise that liberal tendencies tend to dominate among the modern elite.
This in turn has encouraged a rigid groupthink at the top, which can easily destroy the reputation and careers of those who violate it either innocently or through dissent. Witness, for example, the sacking of Nobel laureate Professor Tim Hunt for telling a silly joke about girls crying in the lab, or the forced resignation of Sarah Champion from the Labour front bench for offending the multiculturalists by drawing attention to the grooming exploits of British Pakistani men. Today’s establishment closed shop is filled with closed minds.
Almost comically, even our supposed anti-establishment protest groups – such as Momentum, whose co-founders Jon Lansman and James Schneider were educated at Highgate and Winchester respectively – are these days frequently led by the sons and daughters of the privileged.
All of this has led to a worsening social apartheid in the UK – an estrangement between the haves and have nots, the powerful and powerless, governors and governed. Across the piece, throughout politics, business and public institutions, our leaders have very little concept of (or affinity with) the lives of those over whom they rule, while those at the bottom look upwards and conclude that that way of life is ‘not for the likes of us’. The divide is profound, and widening.
And these working class communities feel abandoned by their own institutions of the Labour party and trade unions, which once fought their corner proudly but with their modern middle-class liberal inclinations now barely tolerate them. This divide has left the working classes unrepresented, and feeling there is no vehicle through which they might exercise any sort of political or economic clout in pursuance of their own interests.
We are expected to believe that Britain is more open, tolerant, meritocratic and inclusive than ever before. And for some, that is undoubtedly true. But for millions, the best opportunities in life remain beyond their reach, not through a lack of talent, but for reasons of wealth, privilege and geography. Britain is, for them, a closed shop – the shutters firmly down. And the privileged, ‘open’, few will not be extending an invitation to step inside any time soon.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSunak’s numerate money-man image will make him a plausible change from Boris when the latter steps down (or is pushed), which will look and feel like freshness and renewal without any need for a change of governing party.
Whether this is calculated or not I couldn’t say, but the issue for him in winning a leadership election is that he is not the only candidate who can deliver this trick for the Tories.
The latter will take equally great and malicious pleasure in electing someone like Liz Truss to become their third female leader, while Labour has never had one, or Kemi Badenoch as their first black and third female leader – and so on.
The Tories will do this because what better way to twit the party of identity politics than to rub its nose in diversity? By handing out seats expressly to people of negligible talent solely because they tick a sex or race quota box, Labour has ensured that all its own women and minorities are utterly gormless abject nobodies. So they’ve got David Lammy and Diane Abbott, who could not run a bath, while the Tories have Kwarteng and Badenoch and Sunak, who could. In its heart of hearts Labour knows this, and keeps electing selectively-educated middle-class white males to the leadership in consequence, whatever the election mechanism.
Like Hague in 1997 and IDS after 2001, but much worse, the problem Starmer has is not having enough MPs from whom to select a plausible team. The unemployable quota nonentities, anti-Semites and Marxist sociopaths who make up much of the PLP leave him with a desperately small front bench pool of credible and thoughtful people – a pool of roughly one, actually. The delicious irony is that Labour’s problem is as bad as it is not in spite of a lack of diversity, but exactly because of it. If you appoint people because they’re black or female, even though they are manifestly stupid, you end up with the PLP.
Kemi Badenoch, Sunak and co are stars and got where they are on merit. They’re smart, patriotic, aspirational and articulate. Only conservatives seem to recognise merit rather than the arbitrary things like race that Labour are obsessed by.
You’re not supposed to say articulate anymore.
I am all for a race free UK, which gives a finger to the new racists of critical race theory. This is in the direct line of the empire which was a multiracial empire.
I recognise there is irony sprinkled in this article, but this assertion seems genuine. On what evidence can this claim be made? We’ve seen £68 billion spent on paying people not to work; fraudsters have had field days with the various schemes Sunak hurriedly put in; national insurance has been increased to pay for the highly inefficient and largely ineffective NHS. When will those of us who have worked hard to generate the revenues Sunak is spending see our rewards? Judge a man by his actions, not his words (or carefully curated veneer).
If the state instructs people not to work, or compulsorily closes down businesses, it does kind of have an obligation to fund them!
So did Tony Blair. And look what he did to the country. Apart from gutting the constitution, starting a completely unnecessary war and filling the country up with foreigners, Blair was great.
I voted for Blair twice. And feel an eternal shame for my youthful blindness.
“£192bn disarms complaints present and future”?! Only those who think that there really is a magic money tree and are unworried by Sunak’s complete lack of a coherent plan to balance the books are disarmed by his profligacy. Most voters know that any fool can spend other people’s money and that they will be the ones who will have to repay it. Mr Lloyd seems to be in thrall to Sunak’s PR-generated image – to the detriment of his critical faculties.
Most voters are hypocrites, including the people on here who rage about government spending until it comes to protecting their inheritances! Perhaps ‘hypocrites’ is too strong a word, but it is very easy to say you support government making cuts, up until the point they affect you, then the cuts should be made somewhere else.
Agreed. In NZ 11 years ago voters were, in effect, asked to vote for policies that would narrow the gap between haves and have nots – and guess how that turned out ! you are correct- when push comes to shove financial improvement trumps most people’s ethical/moral motivations. So basically we have not moved past dog-eat-dog – and we also know that if have- nots make it into “have” land they will probably start voting for themselves as well. It is a paucity of genuine spirituality issue, not an economical issue cos there is plenty to go around. All the rest is just surface babble including much of what smart concerned people have to say about “it’. Another 1000 years of human development maybe things will be better – in the meantime I am going sailing !!
and you are burdened with the ghastly wide mouthed beaver…
Numerate people in Parliament are in very short supply. Numerate people who understand finance are in even shorter supply. Sunak does both. He is also polite which is another scarce commodity in public life. The sooner he is PM the better. Boris has been PM . He has got the T shirt . And he wants to go back to earning money . So there is not animus like there was between Brown and Blair.
And having a BAME PM will shut up the BLM mob and the Woke left.
It won’t shut them up, anymore than having two women PMs did.
They hate a BAME Tory far more than they would a white one.
No I think it won’t shut them up. He’s the “wrong sort of BAME”.
And even if it does take the wind out of their sails, they’ll just go and glue themselves to roads instead – because it never was about black people, or the environment – it’s all about left wing extremists disrupting the country.
He ain’t black!
He could always optimise the height perception by standing next to 5’4″ Sadiq Khan at every opportunity.
Reading this article I keep thinking of why the Conservatives picked Boris in the first place. Theresa May’s government was collapsing and the Tories were staring defeat to Jeremy Corbyn in the eye. Boris is not loved by the political class, but an 80 seat majority shows that he can win elections.
For Rishi Sunak he may be a very different character but it is also the case that being the number 2 is a very different job to leading. Theresa May, so effective as home secretary can attest to that. Not only that but as the article points out, he hasn’t really been put under pressure.
Sunak is also not the only potential Tory leader. Dominic Raab has fallen away but Liz Truss is able to point to her great success in building trade links post Brexit. She may very well be able to mount a campaign based around her foreign competence at a time when the country does need to build bridges.
Finally, Keir Starter is a very different Labour leader to Jeremy Corbyn. I suspect any candidate for the Tory leadership will have to bide their time. I fully expect the next election will be between Johnson and Starter. If Boris delivers another decent victory even after COVID and all the challenges it brings, I can see him leading the country for as long as he wishes.
A fun article, but ultimately I fail to see the point other than a Rishi puff piece, he really must have a good PR team!
‘Public opinion spurned her ( Mrs Thatcher ) it salutes him ‘
So how did Mrs Thatcher win three elections ? She was hugely popular .
And it’s far from being a ‘Rishi puff piece’ He clearly hates ‘Thatcherite’Rishi .
Says he wouldn’t hurt a fly unless it was dependent on social credit .
Maybe the strength of this Tory party is its diversity. Boris’s bombast and (I think) good political instincts, Sunak’s calm demeanour and eye for detail, Truss’s pragmatism, Gove’s intellectualism etc. Sunak, Badenoch, Kwarteng, Javid, Patel all there on merit and I feel with a distinct lack of the tokenism that Labour are so obsessed by. Plus some vocal backbenchers who challenge their own party which in my eyes is a strength not a weakness. Anyone who dissents in the Labour ranks like Rosie Duffield – well that’s the difference isn’t it. Boris doesn’t need to be everything, know everything, do everything, he has a team around him who can. In the world of L&D, which is my background, this would be considered a strong leadership behaviour!
I genuinely can’t tell if this is sarcasm or not?
The Civil Servants there liked her because she did as she was told to by them.
A Thatcherite? The man’s been spending like a drunken sailor ever since he came to office.
And whatever people say, most of that spending has been pretty conclusively shown to have been both unnecessary, and unhelpful for the country – by robbing our workforce of their backbone.
I’m actually convinced that it was the spending by Sunak that prevented mass disobedience by the population during Covid peak. He gave us bread, if not circuses.
I totally agree. Everyone i know, including Labour voters, thinks the furlough scheme saved the country from mass civil unrest and economic meltdown. It went against his small govt low spend instincts – and he did it anyway because it was the right thing to do. Boris the same – I consistently felt he absolutely did not want to lockdown. But he did because he took advice from the experts and the situation was unprecedented. I respect that.
“Sunak, comfortably warming his hands above the culture war inferno, will seem like a relief from it when he becomes Prime Minister.”
Good point. Can’t wait. Hope he gets in in time for 2024 so we can rebuild a shared sense of Britishness around breaking out the popcorn while we watch the Americans tear themselves apart over stuff we can tell ourselves we’ve fixed by pointing to him.
If everything in this article is true about his careful curation, political skills, social skills, communication skills, public appeal, lack of personal angst and his fanatical uxoriousness (I had to look that one up). Then fair play. He deserves to be PM and will probably be very good at it.
As the song says ‘if her daddy’s rich take her out for a meal , if her daddy’s poor …….’
But ‘fanatical uxoriousness’ here seems to mean having no known mistresses ??
Or, no mistresses. As we like to say round these parts when we aren’t implying something we have no evidence for.
Wasn’t implying anything of that kind . Not being with him 24 /7 I have no knowledge one way or the other . He seems a very ‘suitable boy’ , but it seems a bit much to describe him as fanatically uxorious on the available evidence.
Using the trope of fanaticism with regard to an Asian puts Will Lloyd at risk of being accused of unconscious racism anyway .
Not exactly difficult to make colleagues in the present cabinet look like political pygmies.
This is not sufficient to recommend Sunak as replacement for BJ when that day come.
“comfortably warming his hands above the culture war inferno”
Beautiful writing, very much appreciated.
Good to hear a positive article about a politician. Despite the barbs, it must be remembered that Boris promoted him from relative obscurity to No2. The eco-bluster is more than a little disconcerting, but I’m inclined to think Boris has shown as good judgement as you could hope for from a PM. I suspect Rishi Sunak is canny enough to see this and will maintain a hold at No11 for a long time while Boris takes the helm as long as things stay within striking distance of the track. Lordy I’m coming over all patriotic, better get stuck into my Frankfurter and Bordeaux before I sail my topper to Jersey to give those Frenchies what for.
Where Boris is witty, sophisticated, charming, educated, erudite and effing useless. Trump is coarse, crude, unfunny, a walking meme and utterly effective. Whilst Rishi is just a cardboard cutout who dreams of being the first politician to make MMT work or kill us all trying.
Boris has built a team around him that has true diversity, he won an 80 seat majority to get Brexit done and got it done despite the most outrageous shenanigans by Remainers and the EU winding down the clock and setting rules of the game designed to see it fail. He has good political instincts and knows how to connect with people – never underestimate the power of that. Covid and Brexit together are 2 unprecedented events, at the same time. I really don’t think he’s done that badly. My only wish was that he communicated intentions and reasons more clearly and wasn’t so desperate to be liked. That’s his real downfall I think.
Every event is unprecedented. Every leader has to deal with it. They might choose to deal with such events through cautious bravery, prioritising peoples ability to manage their own affairs, make their own decisions by properly understanding the issue at hand. Or they could bullshit their way through it, react to international and Twitter pressure, pretend that silver bullets exist and salvation is just around the corner, enrich their buddies and give themselves powers to whitewash over any issues and use the so-called ‘scientists’ to scare the bejeezus out of any fool who’ll listen.
Anybody can look back at the events and wonder if they are lah lah land. The handling of COVID has been absolutely extraordinary, and not in a good way.
If the spending goes against Sunak’s Thatcherite small govt low tax instincts I imagine he wouldn’t do it unless he felt he had to. To reject the language of victimhood and go against the grain of his fellow millennials by not embracing globalism, EU supranationalism and identity politics – to me these are the marks of a smart person.
I had to laugh when Boris Johnson was described as “necrotic” and “lardy”. Rishi Sunak has spent the last two years doling out the dosh, so of course he is going to be popular. However, it is a rule of politics that the natural successor never succeeds – at least as far as the Tory party is concerned.
Sunak on the whole has so far done popular things, like spending vast sums of money on a furlough scheme that was necessary but over extended. As far as I am concerned, he is much more impressive than Johnson, but that is quite a low bar!
Anyone that describes the public sector in the UK as “world class” and holds up a green briefcase for a photo op at COP 26 shouldn’t become prime minister IMHO.
If he’s that popular he’d better watch out for the knives being sharpened. He’s doomed.
“Why Rishi Sunak will Win” – I’m filing this with the James Kirkup piece “Why David Gauke is the future of the Conservative Party.”
In other word, a political Roger Federer.
Everything that Conservatives should admire – a self made man whose parents worked hard to give him a good education. Instead, the Shire Tories preferred Boris and voted for the walking disaster Truss.
Shire Tories? no… heome ceounties toylittories… never hunted the shires to hounds in their miserable, automaton, commuting, box ticking,out-tray filling, acetate clad, pointy shod, lodge attending golf club ruled pond lives…
Hear hear!!
Oh, dear.
But his rivals ARE pygmies… actually that is rather an insult to the tribe…
Sunak’s loyalty is not towards Britain or the British people but towards the Globalists
of the WEF and the UN.
The same is true of Boris Johnson and his
foolish, highly damaging and pointless
commitment to Net Zero.
The the current chancellor is an avid fan
of the Chinese Communist Party.
Why would anyone vote Conservative ?