The Norwood Verdict

Are you demographically represented in politics?

Is it a true generalization that men refuse to ask for directions? How long do senior moments last? Let’s play a game. Firstly, create an image of a current global politician. Think about that person’s gender, age, and appearance for about 10 seconds. Now do the same for a standing elected UK politician. Who did you imagine? Well let’s list the most likely to be imagined, based on exposure to UK media coverage in the last year, and see if your imagined figure appears.

World Politician (62) UK Politician (52) Donald Trump (74) Boris Johnson (56) Donald Tusk (63) Jeremy Corbyn (71) Joe Biden (78) Keir Starmer (58) (66) Matt Hancock (42) (43) Rishi Sunak (40) Jacinda Ardern (40) Priti Patel (48) Micheál Martin (60) Michael Gove (53) Xi Jinping (67) Nicola Sturgeon (50) Vladimir Putin (68) Arlene Foster (50)

Don’t worry if your politician isn’t listed as what is important is if your imagined politician has any physical or demographic similarities to those listed, even if your imagination ran riot with a non- existent politician. I suspect most will have imagined Trump or Johnson, which, given their character and media exposure, is only to be expected. To those that imagined Jacinda Ardern and Rishi Sunak, I suspect there was some commendable subconscious image-editing going on.

Now let’s try this; create an image of a politician being investigated for corruption. Same image? Okay finally, which world leader would you entrust to fight the COVID-19 epidemic? Different image yet?

Despite the statistically insignificant sample size above, we can infer that the average age (bracketed numbers) of politicians is around 62 for world leaders and 52 for the UK. Comparing that to the UK average population age of 40 and a world median age of under 30, it appears our leaders are generationally senior to the people they serve. The average age of the G20 leaders attending the Saudi Arabia-hosted summit in November 2020 is 62.5 years old. Is it any wonder there is disparity between political ideologies and the priorities of the public? As we get older, we tend to become “set in our ways” which is polite speak for stubborn and prejudice. We are less able to accept new methodologies, instead trusting in our experiences that have got us this far in life. To concede that new ideas are superior to tried-and-tested methods, is to concede that our time has passed. Men of power cannot reconcile this, so their natural defence is either to dismiss the new or revalidate the old. This behaviour can be linked back to our primal instinct of maintaining relevance in our tribe when challenged by a younger rival. Therein lies the issue: no young challengers ever seem to emerge.

It is important to note that men in power only desire validation from their peers, not inferiors or, for the all-too-ubiquitous misogynist, women. With both Trump and Johnson dumping their spouses for partners 24 years their junior, they gleefully encourage the question “what’s he got that I don’t” from the good-old-boys and “what’s he got that I’m missing” from never-worked-a-day women at the country club.

Finland’s 46th Prime Minister, Sanna Marin, turned 35 recently. In office six months less than Boris Johnson, Marin commands an PM approval rating of 85% versus 34% for her British counterpart, despite ruling over a coalition of five separate political parties. Marin’s government response has been prepared and considered, leading to the lowest death rate coupled with the least economic impact than any EU, Scandinavian or UK country. Like the US and UK, had a pandemic response plan. Unlike the US and UK, Finland implemented theirs.

Jacinda Ardern has risen to world prominence over the last couple of years, notably due to natural disasters and the terror attacks on mosques in New Zealand. Prime Minister Ardern (42) has received international praise for her government’s swift and decisive handling of the epidemic. Her approval rating of nearly 60% represents a record for a standing Prime Minister, culminating in a landslide victory in the general election in October 2020.

As at time of writing, Finland and New Zealand have recorded 655 and 25 deaths respectively from coronavirus during this pandemic. Contrast these with the performance of the G20 states which includes countries with disastrous COVID-19 figures: USA, UK, Brazil, Turkey, India, Italy and Spain. Whilst there are inevitable population, geographical and socio-economic variations between nations, the league table does not lie!

What is apparent in the differences in response between those in-control of the virus and those who create an illusion of control, is the execution of an in-place epidemic playbook versus the daddy- knows-best rhetoric of more seasoned leaders. Could it be that Marin and Ardern accepted that they did not have the experience and/or expertise to create their own plan; instead, trusting and dusting- off the tested emergency response plan (ERP) that all responsible governments have? Within regulated industries, companies must have a demonstrable ERP available for audit. Can you imagine the backlash if, following an emergency, it was revealed that the company’s CEO decided to create his own plan, responding to information as it comes in from the field? What is the point of appointing academic agencies, parliamentary sub-committees and nepotistic quangos to create readiness

2 plans, if, when the need arises, The UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy 2011 is completely ignored?

So, what is going on in world and British politics? Why do we continue to elect leaders who neither demographically representative nor have a plan? Where are the real people represented in politics?

Naturally race, gender and age have a significant bearing on the ideologies, experiences, and ambitions of each one of us; younger women can exude self-importance and some middle-aged men may demonstrate altruism, but that does not translate to the average characteristics of these demographics. If we compare the background, actions, and attitudes of Boris Johnson against those of Sanna Marin, we can quickly conclude which character the average person can identify with. Marin grew up in a financially struggling rainbow family, attending a state high school before studying Administrative Science at university; the first in her family to attain such an elevated academic accolade. High-born Johnson enjoyed a privileged childhood, being educated at Eton and Oxford, before landing plum jobs with the Times and Daily Telegraph that only Bullingdon Club alumni would be considered qualified for as a graduate of Classics. With only between 30-40% of Brits having a university degree, I’ll concede that we won’t all feel Marin represents Joe and Jane Average, but like every chasm in life, bridging the divide helps.

As there are over 800,000 more women in the UK than men, randomly selecting a citizen of the UK is most likely to yield a sub-40-year-old woman having not attended university. Yet, UK politics is dominated by mis-qualified, middle-aged men of privileged upbringing. So, what is happening in our society that we elect middle-aged men whose agenda appears to be out of kilter with the needs of the public they serve? The answer to this question is complex, multi-faceted, and poorly understood, however the solution is relatively simple; what type of person is most qualified to represent your needs, ambitions, and security. In other words, voting for someone whose education and experience are a fit for the job. After all, it is a job that our politicians are supposed to be doing. What a revelation it would be to have a doctor or nurse as Health Secretary. Heaven forbid a teacher becoming Education Secretary or an economist becoming chancellor.

The undeserving Oxford alumni, having been given leg-ups throughout their career, are ignorant of the sheer hard work and sacrifice most people must endure for their meagre privileges. Graduating with the golden-ticket-into-politics, Philosophy, Politics & Economics (PPE) from Oxford, Richie Sunak was at investment firm Goldman Sachs for five years before becoming a partner, a position that apparently merits a salary of close to $1MM. How many people go all the way to the top within five years of starting their careers? Matt Hancock is an economist with six years of privileged experience with the Bank of England, before joining the conservative rank and file as George Osbourne’s advisor in the Chancellery. Now he’s health secretary!

How on earth do we allow someone who has never worked in public health to make decisions that affect the clinical health of the entire nation. Can you imagine the uproar arising from Jurgen Klopp substituting Mo Salah for an unknown former sports science buddy from Goethe University? Is that

3 a ridiculous analogy? Perhaps it would be less concerning if said substitution came in the 89th minute of a testimonial match, but we are talking Champions League final here.

Something needs to be done and soon. Our young men and women must take the lead on issues that affect all of humanity, otherwise it will be them apologising to their children for the state of the planet and society.

4