I have caught occasional bits of the live proceedings in the Supreme Court these past few days regarding the Brexit case.
Based on sound and vision, my observations of the court:
- nearly 100% white (saw one man with a Sikh turban)
- over 90% male (just a few women present)
- mostly middle-aged or older
- accent mainly Home-Counties/upper-middle-class or upper class
Conclusion - it appears that the claimed progress in equality & diversity in the UK over the past twenty years has bypassed the top layers of the legal profession, in contrast to what you see and hear in the House of Commons. Perhaps it proves that the latter place is filled with commoners.
|
|
Anyone who thinks the law applies to judges is clearly naive. :-)
|
|
Just as a point of interest I used to sit next to David Pannick QC at secondary school. We were adjacent in the roll call. He was always a swotty type then, but one of the more likeable ones with some personality. ISTR from a Telegraph magazine article on him that at the time he became QC he was the youngest ever QC to be appointed.
|
>> Anyone who thinks the law applies to judges is clearly naive. :-)
I note and respect Madf's smiley. There is though a serious point.
The vast majority of the judiciary are drawn from The Bar. Those with experience necessary to have reached the Supreme Court will, for the most part, have entered The Bar before 1980 when entry criteria favoured white males who'd gone to right schools and universities. Family connections probably helped too.
Since then the world has moved on and around half of those called to The Bar in recent years have been female. There is though a retention problem. Those dropping out of their careers to care for children (or aged parents) are overwhelmingly female. Even if they go back later they're running to keep still in terms of lost career progression. There was a piece on the radio (five Live breakfast) around 08:45 this morning on that very subject.
On a personal note, I've met two of the Supreme Court Judges:
My career path and that of Lord (Robert) Carnwath crossed on a number of occasions. He was a barrister specialising in planning and local government in the eighties when I was clerking for various Members of the Lands Tribunal and he regularly appeared in large cases. I met him again twenty years later as firstly Chair of the Law Commission and later Senior President of Tribunals when he was a regular attendee at meetings of the Quango.
Nice enough guy with an acute legal (and small p political) mind, keen musician too. Very much though of his generation at the Bar - called 1968
The other was Baroness Hale, another Law Commissioner and former member of the Quango. Unusual amongst the judiciary in that although she practiced at the bar she made her name as a legal academic.
Quite down to earth, could have been your mate's Mum or Granny.
Oh and Lord Phillips too, first President of Supreme Court, rode a Brompton.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 8 Dec 16 at 20:54
|
The time factor usually explains most observations of apparent disparity, and is most usually ignored by those in a mood to be critical.
If there is a 10-20 year lag because of selection and training and experience, then even if you implemented a change overnight it would still be up to 20 years before you achieved perfect equality.
The only alternatives to accepting the delay are either to import suitable people of the "right" backgrounds from abroad, and sack half the British occupants of the posts, or to fast-track second-rate people who meet the new desirable criteria and accept the resultant deterioration in service.
|
What is going to happen now just out of interest.Article 50 will be started in March but there will be parliamentary discussing about what our exit will look like.This depends on the judges outcome.
Who would have thought that referendums are the answer.
|
|
I don't know but I just wish they would pull their fingers out and get on with it.
|
Supreme Court - equality & diversity - sooty123
