Letters | 5 February 2011

The route to Westminster

Sir: Andrew Neil is admirably fair in his article on the over-representation of Oxbridge types and the privately educated in both the Labour and Conservative parties (‘The fall of the meritocracy’, 29 January). In my view, this even-handedness is a missed opportunity, as it is surely more to the discredit of the Labour party, which allegedly represents the common man. Yet the evidence suggests that for a state-educated person from a humble background, it would be very difficult to make a career as a Labour politician, whereas it would be by no means impossible in the Conservative party. While most of the ‘People’s Party’ may not actually have been to Eton, they are very solidly upper-middle-class and include a shadow cabinet minister who is directly related to aristocracy and an MP who employs his own butler. Labour activists have been very vociferous about Tory toffs. It is high time we heard a great deal more about Labour toffs.

J.P. Marney
Glasgow



Sir: Andrew Neil regards Westminster as the acme of attainment. But there is a substantial body of opinion which holds entry into politics an indicator of failure in the real world. Indeed, in my time at Oxford, PPE was regarded as a slacker’s course, to which those who failed in more demanding studies (including Geography) transferred.

Peter Urben (MA, D. Phil.)
Kenilworth



Rent-a-hacker


Sir: Any bright 17-year-old can intercept mobile phone voicemail, says Rory Sutherland (The Wiki man, 29 January) — and certainly any bright tabloid hack could. And yet, in many cases, they didn’t. They hired private detectives at some expense to do it for them; it is from the records of two such detectives that most public knowledge of the practice derives.

Phone-hacking required outside contractors for the same reason that it provokes outrage: not because it is particularly difficult or cunning, but because it is both shameful and illegal.