Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Tom Brown: Speaking up for a victim of the class war

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 02 March 2008
THE best comic sketch of the satirical Sixties was too uncomfortably true to be funny.
The Frost Report's routine on the class system was a bitingly accurate commentary on the social divisions that bedeviled Britain – and still do.

It is worth remembering the script as John Cleese and the Two Ronnies lined up, according to height. B
owler-hatted Cleese looked down on Barker and said "I look down on him because I am upper class." Trilby-hatted Barker looked up and responded: "I look up to him because he is upper class"; then, turning to look down on the diminutive Corbett, he said with self-satisfaction: "But I look down on him because he is lower class. I am middle class." Corbett, in cloth cap and muffler, said resignedly: "I know my place." Cleese, from his lofty height: "I get a feeling of superiority over them." Barker, alternately looking up and down: "I get a feeling of inferiority from him but a feeling of superiority over him." Corbett, still wearily looking up: "I get a pain in the back of my neck."

Both Harold ("One Nation") Macmillan and Tony ("I am a Socialist because it stands for equality") Blair declared after their election wins in 1959 and 1997: "The class war is over." But more than 40 years after The Frost Report sketch, the class war is still being fought.

I was brought up, I suppose, lower working-class by a grandfather who, after a few Wee Heavies, would counsel me: "It disna' matter if the erse is hingin' oot yer breeks, ye're still as good as any other bugger." At school, however, we were taught to defer to our 'betters' and the lesson was 'know your place'. Though we may have been perpetually hard up, there is now a deprived class below even that.

There is still a caste system in Britain – how could it be otherwise when you have a Royal Family and an undeserving aristocracy at the apex of a pyramid of privilege? And, despite more than a decade of Labour Government, there is a deeper division between the haves and have-nots.

The most blatant current example of class-based contempt is the treatment of Commons Speaker Michael Martin. I will not defend him on his expenses and air miles, which are indefensible – not to say downright stupid; but we should all be concerned by the ferocity of the blatant snobbery and crude anti-Scottish racism of his critics.

Instead of confining themselves to his rightly questionable actions, they have attacked his all too obvious working-class roots and his Scottish accent. Actually, it has been one of the glories of British democracy that a metalworker from a slum tenement in Glasgow could rise to one of the great offices of state – but the Establishment has never been able to stomach that. When Martin was nominated for the Speakership, he was subjected to a virulent campaign and the sneering nickname Gorbals Mick. It was both inaccurate, because he was born and bred in Anderston on the other side of the Clyde, and also betrayed an outrageous prejudice.

The journalist who coined it (a metropolitan snob with a pansy public-school accent) makes his offence worse by claiming it is "verbal cartooning" containing the essence of Martin's political identity. In other words, anyone from a poor, industrial west of Scotland background should not get above himself and is to be lampooned for his accent and appearance; for what he is, not for what he does.

Even in egalitarian Labour, there was class division. With Blair's backing, Donald Dewar canvassed Labour MPs not to support Martin's bid for the Speaker's chair but to vote instead for Lib Dem Menzies Campbell – a fellow graduate of Glasgow University with the right airs and graces. And the late John Smith would talk on the overnight train from London about going home to his Coatbridge constituents, "the arse out of the breeks brigade".

Previous Labour Speakers came from lowly origins: George Thomas was from the Welsh valleys and Betty Boothroyd was a daughter of Yorkshire textile workers. But both managed to make themselves 'acceptable', while Martin made no compromises, either in style or accent. Criticisms of his conduct refer to the same handful of slips, yet Boothroyd's many procedural muddles were tolerated, as was one over-sociable Speaker's tendency to doze off or start slipping from the chair.

Martin's origins may explain his present predicament, for he is from a generation of wily Old Labour shop steward MPs. But voters will no longer tolerate exploiting the system. If he uses his remaining time in office to help put the House in order and restore some respect to politics, he might yet rehabilitate his reputation as a basically decent man who failed to realise times have changed.

It is no coincidence that the unprecedented campaign to oust a sitting Speaker has reached fever pitch at a time when the Opposition front bench comprises Old Etonian Hooray Henrys. To look down from the gallery on Cameron and his cronies behaving like sniggering fifth-formers is to realise social privilege is alive and well in the Tory Party.

The class question, of course, is bigger than Martin and more worrying than one man's problems. We are no longer just upper, middle and lower class; in our midst there is an underclass living in extreme deprivation – and, despite Labour's boast of having lifted 600,000 children out of poverty, there are still one million people in Scotland living in hopeless deprivation. Don't let anyone tell you the class war is over. It is still being waged – and being at the bottom of the pile is much worse than a pain in the neck.





The full article contains 968 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 March 2008 10:00 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: SOS News columnists
 
1

Richardinho,

02/03/2008 00:03:34
for f*cks sake Tom, why didn't you write about this last week when you came online? Then you wouldn't have been sitting on your own talking to a wall for an hour!

2

Richardinho,

02/03/2008 00:09:18
Tom rails against upper class English snobbery, yet he is the self-styled hammer of the nats and a staunch unionist.
You can complain all you like about hooray-henrys and old etonians. You're never going to change them. The one thing you can do is not submit to being ruled by them.

Elsewhere in the article Brown complains about the royal family and even criticises Labour (shock!) for not having delivered on it's promises over poverty.
It seems that all Tom's beliefs have been shattered and all that remains is blind prejudice.
3

David Strong,

Edinburgh 02/03/2008 03:42:32
Is this the same Tom Brown who was a close political ally of the 'late John Smith'? Easy to dish the dirt on your Labour Party cronies when they are now dead.
Congratulations Labour lackey, Tom Brown. You always were a complete shmuck.
4

donald,

glasgow 02/03/2008 08:07:06
Class divisions and privilege have increased under Old and New Labour Thatcherites and Brown nosers.
5

Steve,

Bo'ness 02/03/2008 09:00:02
Irony is not dead.
I'd like to see how long he'd last wandering the housing schemes of Kirkcaldy in his bow tie and tweed jacket.
6

Chris,

Edinburgh 02/03/2008 09:58:57
If the Speaker behaves like a shop steward, then he will be treated like a shop steward. His rulings are anything but impartial. MPs are frightened of speaking out against him because he has the power to ensure they are not called to speak in the House. Wonderful system that! We can now see why Dewar didn't want the post to be given to Martin.
7

Alberto.,

02/03/2008 12:19:01
NOT YET CHECKED @a1000hrs.

Comment Scotsman Sunday 2008-03 02. Tom Brown item Class War MR Martin Speaker.

This class war referred to is definitely afoot - in almost every walk of life - Politics, business etc. in Britain! We are well known for it, and probably excel at it - always will! It may be something in the water - who knows?

However, I cannot think that is 'all' it is about in the case of Michael Martin the Speaker!

I have not seen, or really noticed much about him, until his last financial 'mis-demeanour' hit the headlines (It's all the rage now ‘yer know’ - they're all at it!)

I must say, he appears to me, to have a very smug type of attitude and a somewhat overbearing one, as I see and hear him from the TV - this is probably because of his 'lofty position' which he has been appointed to by his Party colleagues, seemingly very much on the basis of 'he will be on our side' - regardless!

Reports on this aspect of his alleged and supposedly non-biased behaviour seem to agree!

Perhaps, possibly, he was appointed as he just happened to be there at the right time of need (presumably the job was or becoming vacant!) and not necessarily anything to do with ability, qualifications (?) - if any held, and seemingly, from reports, not a particularly good / right choice - for many - but I suppose that’s typical of our strictly ‘guided’ - ‘by the few’ political system!

From a taxpayers point of view, his recent, and possibly past (who knows?) apparently easy and simple financial 'opportunities' he may have been taking because of his self importance 'I can do no wrong' - my 'activities cannot be questioned' (what lovely accommodating working conditions - especially for a Politician!) his actions seem very disgusting and disloyal to the taxpayer - who he seems to have obviously wronged with his activities of personal greed and lack of any Principle, even though I thought that ‘Principles’ of all, not just some others, was the ‘be all end
8

Anthony,

Glasgow 02/03/2008 12:49:14
Agree with this fine peice. Discrimination against the poor is the biggest problem in our society. It never ceases to amaze me how many people can favour so-called 'positive discrimination' for many groups, except the poor. Almost as though they want to appear hip and radical on the one hand, but on the other, secretly don't really want anything to change. There is a a sort of social gravity which conspires to hold the poor down in Britain. It's made worse when a poor person who is already held back,is then positively discriminated against, becuase their not a member of an ethnic minority for example. Single variable 'positive discrimination' needs to stop. It's profoundly unjust. We also need a genuine effort to break up those forces which hold the poor down.
9

Chris,

Edinburgh 02/03/2008 13:00:43
#8 Alberto.: Michael Martin was the second consecutive ex-Labour Speaker, breaking a pattern of alternation between Labour and Conservative members which had occurred from the 1965 through to the 1992 elections of Speakers. So it is quite possible that Labour MPs voted for him on the basis that "he will be on our side"! Has he been impartial? Some reports would suggest not, as the Lib Dems found out to their cost recently.
10

Chas,

Glasgow 02/03/2008 15:23:41
Brown is way off beam here. Martin is no victim of the class war. He and his New Labour careerist colleagues have all done well thank you very much out of their 10 years of betrayal of the working class in this country.

Martin represents the worst kind of unprincipled and self-serving politician. He comes from a working class background, but has no qualms about abandoning the poorest in our society, or being part of a New Labour establishment that has presided over worse inequalities in British society than even Thatcher managed. Quite a feat, that. All the while he has his nose stuck deep in the trough, and milks the expenses system for all its worth. Then, when he is caught out, he complains about class snobbery and portrays himself as a victim.

I cannot abide the racist, right-wing reactionaries that dominate the world of London journalism, but at least you know where you are with them. People like Martin, who cloak themselves in working class garb whilst guaranteeing and defending the rule of the rich and powerful in this country are far more objectionable.
11

Home Rule for Pertyck,

Glasgow 02/03/2008 15:49:24
Many defenders of Speaker Martin miss an important trick: voter backlash against the actions of Tory thief and scoundrel Derek Conway MP has been neutered. Frank Field MP described Conway as an embezzler and Sir Iain Blair has expressed puzzlement as to why the Conway case has not been referred to the Metropolitan Police. It is curious that Tom Brown should fail to mention the Conway/Tory cover-up aspect too. He joins George Galloway and every prominent Labour MP (except Fields) in this strange (conspiracy of?) silence. Is the reason that they are indeed "all at it?" It is no secret that Tom Brown is a Labour Party member with close parliamentary contacts. Is that why he is in, apparently, on the conspiracy of silence on Derek Conway? Is an unwillingness to face such tough questions the answer to #1 Richardinho, above who asks why Tom is not online with today's contribution?

Nevertheless, Tom is correct to attack snobbery against the Speaker. Some people have been out go get Mike Martin since the day he was elected-notably Quentin Letts, public-school twit and Daily Mail columnist, coiner of the notorious "Gorbals Mick" insult. Tom Brown, however, does well to remind us that not all opposition to his election came from outside the Labour Party That raises issues that Tom Brown just will not face:just because Martin is a nice man with impeccable working class credentials does not necessarily make him a good speaker -as Donald Dewar and other Labour colleagues foresaw. To tar them with the same snobbish brush as the ludicrous pratt Quentin Letts is both absurd and pretty desperate.


Tom says he "will not defend him on his expenses and air miles, which are indefensible." But that is a major concern about the Speaker's conduct and probity. We are told the £17,000 p.a. dunned from the taxpayer for a house in Glasgow on which there is no mortgage is "within the rules." And, it almost certainly is. The air miles issue is, we are again told, "with
12

Home Rule for Pertyck,

Glasgow 02/03/2008 15:50:16
The air miles issue is, we are again told, is "within the rules." If so, then the Speaker is claiming a privilege thought a misuse of public money if exercised by ministers. And was it also "within the rules" for Mary Martin, his wife, to blow £4,000 on taxi fares while out shopping? Yes, apparently, if accompanied by House of Commons Officials. That was the story given to the press by Mike Granatt, who was Mr Martin’s spokesman until Friday 22 when he resigned. Someone in the Speaker’s office (but not Mike Martin) had lied to him and he, in good faith, had relayed the false information to the media. Mr Granat, an honourable man, thought this a resigning issue. The £4, 000 taxi bill, was clearly OUTWITH the rules and Speaker Martin is culpable even though he, personally, did not lie to Mr Granat.

There is also the matter of the Speaker's competence. There is no nice way of saying this but the plain truth is that Mike Martin is a fumbling, bumbling incoherent incompetent in ways that Betty Boothroyd and George Thomas, from similar working-class backgrounds, were not. An old Labour movement hand like Tom will recognise the following scenario: a really nice guy, over-promoted in his union reveals himself not up to the job. So, this great movement of ours finds him a plum Labour seat at Westminster and nicely eases him out. Call it the Labour-rosette-on-a-monkey syndrome. Clearly, something similar has happened with Speaker Martin. He now needs to be kicked upstairs to the Lords.

Most disturbing of all are signs that Speaker Martin is biassed towards the government. Examples: the way he allows, week after week, the Prime Minister to ask questions of the Leader of the Opposition. This is blatantly out of order. Again, the way he tolerates patsy questions from Brown-nosing placemen allong the klines of "will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating....?" Although such sycophancy did not originate under the Martin Speakership, it has been allowed t
13

Home Rule for Pertyck,

Glasgow 02/03/2008 15:51:05
Although such sycophancy did not originate under the Martin Speakership, it has been allowed to become a raging pandemic under it. Most worrying of all are signs that Speaker Martin is increasingly a "government man" rather than the pre-eminent upholder of Members' rights. Examples of his partisanship were in evidence during the last two weeks in his refusal to accept referendum amendments, unwelcome to the government, on the new Euro-treaty. The LibDem one last week on "in or ot of the EU" and a backbench Labour one before then on the "treaty" itself.

It is clear, following the Conway scandal, that Speaker Martin is the last person to inquire into the expenses isue, especilly with a committee stuffed with fellow opponents of Freedom of Information. I am sorry but, again, there is no nice way to say this: being working-class, Roman Catholic, essentially decent and getting to the Speaker's chair through these attributes just do not stack up to qualifications for staying there.
14

Richardinho,

02/03/2008 17:03:05
I see Tom Brown and Martin as being in a similar position. They come from humble backgrounds yet have made a Faustian pack with the establishment. They do its biddings and are well rewarded for it, yet are still roundly despised for whom they are; hence the almighty chip on their shoulders.

If Michael Martin had any history of making a difference from his position for the community from which he sprang it might be possible to have sympathy for him, but there is none. The only sense in which he is a role model is that he demonstrates how far you can go if you are prepared to brown nose the powers that be.

The fact that his downfall comes from something as petty as cheating on air miles just shows the measure of the man.
15

ColR,

London 02/03/2008 21:39:47
Tom. Snobs and inverted snobs like you are flip sides of the same coin.
16

joppa jock,

Huntingdon 02/03/2008 21:57:22
I think many are missing the point about class distinction and snobbery. OK, Cameron was born into a wealthy family, but that's not his fault. However, Martin, Brown and co. are members of a political party raised to defend the rights of the working classes and they have betrayed the working classes big time as they have all stuck their noses deeply into the trough and raised two fingers to the people they're supposed to represent. Of course Conway will get away his crass actions because nobody on the Labour benches can afford to stand up and attack him or they're all out on their ear. It's the nouveau riche who are really creating a divided country. The old money usually knew how to handle it but the new money want to rub everbody else's noses in it. Robert Burns had politicians sussed out over 200 years ago and nothing has changed. Power corrupts, and our leaders demonstrate that every single day.
17

Pilrig.,

Livingston 02/03/2008 23:22:04
Not for nothing is the House of Commons described as the "best club in London". And amongst the most clubbiest clique there is the group of the Scottish Labour MPs . Anything which threatens this clique is to be resisted whether it be the SNP or the real target of their animosity - the Holyrood Parliament. The sooner the Best Club is consigned to our (Scotland's) history the better.
18

WHISTLEBLOWER,

Pissaff 03/03/2008 11:20:55
Does Tom Brown think that being working class somehow entitles Michael Martin TO BE CORRUPT and rip off tax payers (most of whom are also working class)?

Boohoo, pull the other one. The Labour party has done more to damage the working class at council level, in Scotland, than any other party!!!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.