We’re delighted to host another of our new MSPs on Better Nation. Â Today sees Mark McDonald, the newly elected SNP MSP for North-East Scotland (who will apparently forever be known as the guy who “broke” the D’Hondt electoral system, even though he didn’t really!) pen an article for us. Â Anyway, he’s a young MSP (if you are still young in your thirties, says Malc, who’s 27…), he’s been a young councillor and he’s considering being young and being in politics for us.
Hands up if you can tell me who the oldest council leader in the UK is? No googling, although that probably won’t do you any good. OK, how about the oldest council leader in Scotland? Still drawing a blank? Well I haven’t got a clue either, but thanks to the media we all now know that Callum McCaig is the youngest council leader in Scotland, and second youngest in the UK, behind the Lord Mayor of Belfast (which sounds like more of a civic role, but I won’t quibble).
“Councillor, 26, becomes Council Leader†was a stock headline over the course of the last week in June, as Callum became leader of Aberdeen City Council following two SNP by-election victories in quick succession.
Criticism of Callum being “too young†for the position quickly arrived from the Labour opposition, and when he and I were elected to the council four years ago, alongside Kirsty West and her brother John (who became, and remains, Scotland’s youngest councillor) we were widely criticised and patronised when we took on positions of responsibility in the administration. “Meet the kids running your council†ran one headline. So is 26 too young to lead a council? What is the ‘correct’ age to hold a position of responsibility? This whole saga has made me, a young politician, question whether the attitudes we have towards young people in politics are widespread, and if they might have some bearing on the democratic involvement of young people.
If we look to the make-up of the Scottish Parliament, we have around a dozen MSPs in their twenties and early thirties. Indeed Mark Griffin of Labour, at 25, is the youngest MSP ever to be elected. I don’t hear Labour voices critical of Mark’s role in the law-making process, and rightly so because if laws are to have an impact upon young people, then it is important that young people can see that they have voices in positions of influence and authority.
Similarly at a local authority level, service delivery impacts on all age groups, therefore it is only right that all age groups are represented. That’s why the administration on Aberdeen City Council contains councillors in their 20s right up to councillors in their 70s. It is a reflection of the diversity of our society, and we should be embracing and encouraging it, not undermining it by suggesting there is some undefined limit at which a person becomes old enough to hold a position of power, responsibility and authority.
Fans of The Apprentice will know that Lord Sugar is forever banging on about how young he was when he set up his first company, or made his first million, and there are plenty of stories of young entrepreneurs heading up massive enterprises like Facebook. Imagine if these people were told that they could not run a company until they were a certain age. Why should politicians of youth be somehow disregarded as capable, when there are many young captains of industry? Should we not accept that there is as much chance of a young councillor or MSP making a great leader or minister as someone twice their age?
When all is said and done, we forever hear much complaint and discussion on the reasons for young people being disengaged with politics and politicians. I don’t think that they are. I speak to young people all the time, be it a question and answer event at a local school, or via emails they send to me on various campaigns. Young people are incredibly interested in politics in its broadest sense. The problem is that politicians and political parties are generally not interested in them. By showing that young people can have councillors, MSPs and MPs from their own generation, we can start to reverse that and reconnect with them.
What will continue to turn them off, however, is to see age being cast up as a defining issue in terms of an individual politician’s competence. We allow people to put themselves forward to stand for election at the age of 18, if we continue to support that principle, then we should be prepared to allow those who are elected to hold positions of influence, and we should support them when they take on these positions, not cast doubt on their abilities, or make their age the sole characteristic by which we define them.
I still don’t know who the oldest council leader in Scotland is. Frankly, I don’t really care.
#1 by Boorach on July 13, 2011 - 6:22 pm
Well, as I head for 60 I know I wouldn’t vote for my 26 year old self! The problem with too many politicians is that they have little meaningful life experience – and not just the youngsters. Take J Murphy, Shadow Defence Secretary…School/Uni (failed)/student politics/MP. The man has no real life experience but then neither do Mark Griffin or Calum McCaig. I’m sure the two young chaps are perfectly intelligent and probably capable in terms of process and organisation but being a politician requires more than that and that “more” only comes with experience. Personally I think all MSPs and MPs should be at least 30 and have shown themselves to have been successful in a career before politics.
#2 by Mark McDonald on July 13, 2011 - 8:15 pm
Boorach
Many thanks for your comments.
Life experience is not simply based on having a career.
Holding down a low paid job, paying a mortgage, raising a family – these are all far more important points on which to base ‘life experience’ and are more likely to lead to empathy with constituents than a career as a lawyer or doctor.
They are also in no way the exclusive preserve of the over-30s.
#3 by Boorach on July 13, 2011 - 9:17 pm
I specifically mentioned MSPs and MPs as far as an age restriction is concerned. I have no problem at all with the election of young Local Councillors for example. I do think, however, that our law makers need to be well rounded and experienced individuals. Perhaps the test should not be age rather a minimum time spent in gainful employment at any level but there needs to be a minimum standard and those following the Uni-policy wonk-councillor-M(S)P route need to be discouraged. I certainly was not suggesting that the political class be filled with professionals – there are enough “lawyers” in both parliaments!
#4 by Boorach on July 13, 2011 - 9:24 pm
…and frankly not many 26 year olds have a chance of paying a mortgage these days. I certainly had a mortgage at that age but my daughter, at 25 in a good job, has no prospect of owning a property in the foreseeable future.
Was just also thinking about your comment on who is the oldest – I’d be equally happy with a maximum age for MPs and MSPs, say under 65 at the point of election.
#5 by Doug Daniel on July 14, 2011 - 9:16 am
Surely your daughter’s lack of prospects in owning a property in the forseeable future – a situation many people in their 20s (myself included) find themselves in – is exactly the kind of lifetime experience that is lacking from older politicians? 30-odd years ago, my parents were able to buy a semi-detached house in a nice neighbourhood on just my dad’s salary, which is completely unthinkable today except for the well-off (not helped by students from well-off families getting flats bought for them by mummy and daddy, thereby increasing the prices of homes in the first-time-buyer bracket).
There are many things which affect young people that older politicians perhaps do not quite appreciate. Tuition fees in England are a perfect example, as they have been brought in by people who had free university tuition AND grants, thus have no experience of having to get a part-time job to make up for the lack of a grant and having to pay tuition fees.
Younger politicians are also more likely to have a bit of political idealism left in them, which I don’t think is a bad thing at all.
Of course, having said all that, I do find it slightly worrying how many of our politicians seem to be coming from the route of doing PPE at Oxbridge, then becoming a policy wonk, and finally onto becoming a professional politician. However, you could be a policy wonk for years before becoming a politician, so this class of politician doesn’t necessarily encompass young politicians entirely.
#6 by Christine on July 13, 2011 - 8:26 pm
As much as I agree with the point that we should have representatives of all age groups, I still have concerns about the life experience of people before they take on very important roles.
Boorach makes a point that I was thinking as I read the article. There are many people representing us who have followed an easily political track without ever having a job, or experiencing the world outwith political parties. Jim Murphy is a very good case in point and his behaviour and attitudes give away his lack of experience outwith NUS and the Labour Party.
On the other hand, perhaps more young people would vote and get involved themselves if they didn’t see politics as the domain of older men. If they have experience to bring to the table, all to the good but I will never agree with the easy track to a political career (student politics, researcher, MP/MSP/councillor).
For me, it is about people with relevant experience, passion and a good attitude to representation. This might be present in a 20 year old or a 70 year old but it comes from a variety of life experiences.
#7 by Doug Daniel on July 14, 2011 - 9:20 am
I think Jim Murphy’s behaviour and attitudes are more about the kind of person he is, rather than the amount of life experience he has.
#8 by Indy on July 14, 2011 - 7:24 am
It’s all very well talking about life experience but when you are talking about local government leaders you can only draw from the pool of councillors which exist and since councillors are paid a relatively low salary – about £16,000 – there is a tendency for those who are able to do it full-time to be either pretty young or of retirement age. It is difficult for people in the middle – those who have families to support and mortgages to pay – to be able to commit to the job full-time. They are more likely to combine being a coiuncillor with other part-time work and therefore less likely to develop the expertise which would allow then to be leader. Because you need to have a real grip on the working of the council to be able to lead it, you need to be able to judge where savings can be made and where sending has to be protected and you need to be able to juggle different priorities in an increasingly difficult financial climate. It wouldn’t really matter how much outside life experience people had if they did not have a proper grip on those kinds of issues.
#9 by Christine on July 15, 2011 - 12:45 pm
I agree with you Indy but I think that ‘outside life experience’ is exactly what makes people have a grip of the important issues.
Take employment for example, it’s a tough labour market out there, even more so for the longer term unemployed, or those heading towards retirement age. But the political answer (mainly from the Conservative Party) is ‘there are jobs, you just aren’t bothered enough to find one’. How many of them have had months of soul destroying searching for work? Do they really understand the complexities of it if they have just slipped through an open door at every turn? Probably not.
I’m not saying though that people need to have direct experience of a thing before they can understand it btw but I really feel that some politicians seem to have no experience at all in the real world, and I think that is a problem for us all.
#10 by Ben Achie on July 14, 2011 - 8:50 am
There’s a lot to be said for politicians being part-time – it keeps them in touch with what is going on outside the political cocoon. If this approach were adopted it would prevent the kind of issues that have come to the fore currently with News International as it would help stop these exclusive political/media(/police!!) bubbles developing – a prick of commonsense would prevent that! The last SNP Holyrood government was successful as its members for the most part had extensive experience outside politics. Too many career politicians will be bad news for Scotland as they are inclined to lack judgement and understanding, and don’t really know how to really get things done as they have no experience of delivery at first hand. Just look how inept Westminster has become!
#11 by Indy on July 14, 2011 - 10:21 am
On the subject of parliamentarians in their twenties – if there are only a dozen or so that means that only 9 per cent of MSPs are aged between 20 – 30. That is significantly lower than the share of the general population which is in their twenties which is more like 14 or 15 per cent.
Obviously we can’t expect the parliament to be exactly representative of the general population but it is important that it reflects the population and ensures that the views of all sections of the population are represented so those dozen or so twenty-somethings actually have a disproportionately important role to play.
#12 by Richard on July 14, 2011 - 9:31 pm
There is a cliché about age bringing wisdom. Like most clichés, it is broadly true, but far from universal – there are plenty of “old heads on young shoulders”, just as there are plenty of people who have gone through many more years of life without really learning anything from it.
The current mindset that “councillors/politicians have to be middle-aged or older”, has to go the same way as previous mindsets such as “women aren’t rational enough to be allowed to vote” or “the working-classes can’t be allowed to run the country”.
#13 by Boorach on July 15, 2011 - 7:46 pm
Sorry but your argument is ridiculous. Both examples cite minorities and discrimination against them is wrong but we ALL age and by definition every day we live brings more experience. Yes there are many feckless adults but most of them don’t aspire to be politicians – although I can think of a few exceptions. Seriously if Purcell and the hapless LibDem candidate at Inverclyde are examples of Young politicians then God help us.
#14 by Cameron on July 16, 2011 - 11:04 pm
Surely if the under 30s are allowed to vote, and we are, we we should be allowed to be MSPs.
And if we’re getting into ageism then where does it end? You’re not allowed to be older than 60 or younger than 30 because we can’t have old slow witted people in parliament? And why let young people or old people be in any position of power or responsibility then? So no young/old doctors, businessmen, layers etc.
“by definition every day we live brings more experience”
1. Depends how you spent the day
2. Is all experience important? Is that the ONLY measure, or even the greatest measure of importance?
Are integrity, idealism, commitment less important than just having lived for longer?
Pingback: Hacked off – Scottish Roundup