Archbishop of Canterbury appointment revives Cameron's class problem

After being accused of running an "old Etonian" elite, the appointment of an Eton-educated Archbishop is awkward for Cameron.

In the week that David Cameron was accused by former Home Office mandarin Helen Ghosh of surrounding himself with an "old Etonian clique", the media has been quick to note that Justin Welby, who was revealed today as the new Archbishop of Canterbury, was educated at the school. Significantly, the Telegraph reports that there were "questions over whether an Eton-educated Archbishop would be well received in some quarters" and that these "played a part in delaying the final decision".

It appears likely, then, that Welby's education was, if anything, a hindrance, but his appointment, which will be officially announced by Downing Street (although Welby was selected by the 16-member Crown Nominations Commission), will inevitably be cited by some as evidence of favouritism. It will also prompt further discussion about the state of social mobility in Britain. It's notable that the Prime Minister, the Mayor of London and, now, the head of the Church are all Eton alumni. When was the establishment last so dominated by public school boys?

Welby's predecessor Rowan Williams is, of course, a former NS guest-editor (you can read his famous editorial attacking the government for pursuing "radical, long-term policies for which no one voted" here). Asked yesterday in Auckland, in what was his final press conference, what advice he would give to his successor he declared that the new Archbishop should preach "with a Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other".

"You have to be cross-referencing all the time and saying, 'How does the vision of humanity and community in the Bible map onto these issues of poverty, privation, violence and conflict?'

"And you have to use what you read in the newspaper to prompt and direct the questions that you put to the Bible: 'Where is this going to help me?'

"So I think somebody who likes reading the Bible and likes reading newspapers would be a good start."

School students wearing their traditional school uniform line the top of a boundary wall at Eton College. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

The buck doesn't stop with Grant Shapps - and probably shouldn't stop with Lord Feldman, either

The question of "who knew what, and when?" shouldn't stop with the Conservative peer.

If Grant Shapps’ enforced resignation as a minister was intended to draw a line under the Mark Clarke affair, it has had the reverse effect. Attention is now shifting to Lord Feldman, who was joint chair during Shapps’  tenure at the top of CCHQ.  It is not just the allegations of sexual harrassment, bullying, and extortion against Mark Clarke, but the question of who knew what, and when.

Although Shapps’ resignation letter says that “the buck” stops with him, his allies are privately furious at his de facto sacking, and they are pointing the finger at Feldman. They point out that not only was Feldman the senior partner on paper, but when the rewards for the unexpected election victory were handed out, it was Feldman who was held up as the key man, while Shapps was given what they see as a relatively lowly position in the Department for International Development.  Yet Feldman is still in post while Shapps was effectively forced out by David Cameron. Once again, says one, “the PM’s mates are protected, the rest of us shafted”.

As Simon Walters reports in this morning’s Mail on Sunday, the focus is turning onto Feldman, while Paul Goodman, the editor of the influential grassroots website ConservativeHome has piled further pressure on the peer by calling for him to go.

But even Feldman’s resignation is unlikely to be the end of the matter. Although the scope of the allegations against Clarke were unknown to many, questions about his behaviour were widespread, and fears about the conduct of elections in the party’s youth wing are also longstanding. Shortly after the 2010 election, Conservative student activists told me they’d cheered when Sadiq Khan defeated Clarke in Tooting, while a group of Conservative staffers were said to be part of the “Six per cent club” – they wanted a swing big enough for a Tory majority, but too small for Clarke to win his seat. The viciousness of Conservative Future’s internal elections is sufficiently well-known, meanwhile, to be a repeated refrain among defenders of the notoriously opaque democratic process in Labour Students, with supporters of a one member one vote system asked if they would risk elections as vicious as those in their Tory equivalent.

Just as it seems unlikely that Feldman remained ignorant of allegations against Clarke if Shapps knew, it feels untenable to argue that Clarke’s defeat could be cheered by both student Conservatives and Tory staffers and the unpleasantness of the party’s internal election sufficiently well-known by its opponents, without coming across the desk of Conservative politicians above even the chair of CCHQ’s paygrade.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.