Regular readers will know that Ruthie has something of a bee in her bonnet when it comes to issues of access to the legal profession. So imagine her fury when lounging in bed listening to Radio 4 this morning she heard some solicitor (Sarah Harman, never heard of her, no idea who she is) opine about how unfair it all was, and how something really ought to be done yada yada and yes you guessed it readers, of course she went to public school and was a representative of everything she was telling us ought to be changed.
Propelled by this news from her recumbent position, Ruthie banged off a mail to Radio 4 telling them, amongst other comments, that if they want someone to give an opinion about access to the profession then perhaps they might consider giving airtime to someone who doesn’t come from a privileged position.
Thus it comes to pass that Ruthie will be in the Radio 4 studio at 06.50 hours tomorrow, telling ‘em like wot it is. Please do tune in.
Update - listen to it here:
Here it is in all its BBC glory (and in hideous breach of the BBC’s copyright & broadcasting rights for which we will no doubt receive a nastygram from BBC lawyers imminently).
I’ll tune in but I suppose I need a way to rip the broadcast.
Talking of Privileged backgrounds, what’s it like being in-line for a throne GL
Oh Ruthie did you see this on the beeb about privileged leaders http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6246152.stm
It got me angry to write a rant on my blog.. go tell em’ , it’s a bit early but i’ll download it off the today program website and tune in on the commute to work.
I confess that like Prince Charles I am getting a little bleeding impatient: why can’t all these damned people die? Why can’t they all decide to fly on a very cheap UkraineAir flight at once? One of the ones where the pilot lets his kid have a go at the controls?
I like Prince Charles and his nice organic food. Can he be spared?
Alas no, he will be deboned cooked and served with some of the vegetables he has produced.
And by that I mean William and Harry Hewitt, not carrots (though technically Harry is James Hewitt’s son not Charles’ but let us not get picky).
I find the collected silence of the press about the startled similarity between Harry and James Hewitt highly amusing.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Diana only meet Hewitt after Harry was born? I’m under the impression that that’s why they don’t bother commenting on the matter.
OH! I confess I’d not heard that. I’ll see if Google knows. Or failing that perhaps its in the Morton biography.
In any event whoever did sire it him it wasn’t retard Chuck.
Google says that while Hewitt claimed to have met Diana 2 years after Harry was born under hypnosis he claimed to have met her in 1981/82. One infers subsequent timings were altered to meet Royal needs.
In Morton’s book Diana told Morton she feared Hewitt was the father and she said that retarded Chuck said that he felt sick on seeing Harry, and that he commented first on Harry’s hair colour while noting that they had not had sexual relations permitting anything other than asexual reproduction, if she had been faithful.
None of this is conclusive … without DNA we’ll never know the truth … yada yada
does it really matter? He looks more like a Spencer anyways. Always better than the standard “horsey look” that the Windsors have.
yeah, but he drinks and parties (and has the intelligence) of a Hewitt
It’s worse than that - he has the intelligence of Windsor.
She’s Harriet’s sister. Part of the Longford family.
If I’m awake I shall be listening.
Ah, that would explain the connection. And supports my point well that out of the hundred thousand odd solicitors who could have come on to discuss the issue, they picked someone with political connections who went to public school.
When I was doing some research prior to doing the interview I noted that the bar Council have set up a working party to ensure everything possible is being done to ensure that entry to the Bar “is diverse and from all sections of society, and that entry should not be in any way dependent on the availability of private money”. There are 7 Q.C’s on the committee: 4 went to Oxford, 2 to Cambridge, another to both. One went to a state school.
Whilst I don’t doubt that the committee is well meaning, clearly it is the system as it stands that has propelled these people into their positions and there would seem little incentive for them to change it, and dare I suggest that their experience of the actual problems faced by students from state school backgrounds is somewhat limited.
Being cynical I would almost suggest that this selection of people were chosen precisely because they won’t upset the status quo and the existing vested interests. I doubt that such a conspiracy exists however, rather that people just picked their mates, who unsurprisingly are people with similar backgrounds to themselves. But to expect a committee of such people to make radical recommendations for change in the way that pupils are selected is rather like asking Turkeys to vote on Christmas.
No meaningful change will occur until the Bar Council is brave enough to select a range of people of diverse backgrounds to form a committee. It’s long been my view that the Bar is terrified of change. However if the Bar is to survive long term in a viable form it needs to change and evolve or die.
The notion of “instituional racisim” in the police was coined after the Macpherson enquiry. I fear that the upper echelons of our profession suffer from an “institutional classism” it’s so ingrained that they no longer notice that they are discriminating.
At least the Today programme was willing to give me airtime, and for that they have my respect.
as in Lord Longford?
Dammit Ruthie - you didn’t mention the blog!!! You managed to get Frisby in but not us - argh
Yer sacked - clear your desk out and get out.
Uh I’m not sure that the radio 4 listeners are ready for your posts on ejaculation….
I always thought the matter of my ejaculations was close to your heart?
No my ears. Your constant verbal ejaculations cause me nothing but grief.
I thought it was an excellent interview well done Ruthie. Although it would have been nice if you were introduced as a legal blogger as well.
GL at least she didn’t mention her new blog
and you have a famous working class hero as your co-writer so you will have to be nicer too her now.
I still want that frigging prize, you know my address. This will have pushed it’s potential Ebay price up.
Oh dear no - please spare me working class heroes.
What prize? you didn’t win you twit!
I quote:
“The runner up prize of an autographed picture of Ruthie in bikers leathers goes to moon23 for his veritable storm of suggestions”
I can then auctioned this on Ebay and I predict there will be many people who will want this now that Ruthie has a substantial fan base.
Aw bugger. OK it’s a fair cop. Your punishment for being such a smartarse is to get the prize
No problem if you really want it!! I joke about it, without actually thinking that anyone would really want one! If you mail your details I ‘ll happily send it off to you.
Anyway, whats happened to the Ruthie fan club, Alex? I do believe someone was supposed to be setting up a Ruthie fanclub website.
I am truly an unlikely class warrior. All I ever wanted was a fair chance to do the job I love;I never expected any preferential treatment. So I suppose if I’m fighting for anything its for all students of merit to at least be given equal opportunites to enter the profession.
Alex has gone all silent. Wonder if he is dead or away from the Intarweb. Which is the same thing really. Not that I’m a net junkie.
i think he’s on holiday.
Yes Ruthie, the sign of a true working class hero is failing to realize when they are being a hero. You just wanted to do your job of course, and help those who are repressed by the elitist system in this country.
I can now put your picture up next to Arthur Scargill’s and Che’s on the wall.
Oh, better get a decent iconic photograph of me staring into the middle distance then.
You normally stare into the middle distance: your jaw slack and pondering vacantly.
I think an heroic pose would be better: firm jawed clutching a fluttering red flag, fist raised defiantly towards the black sea of the charging New Labour hordes…
For the benefit of Yank readers who are doubtless perplexed by all this, John Humphries, my interviewer is the (upmarket) UK equivalent of Howard Stern. He normally interviews, sorry destroys, Cabinet Ministers, and celebrities, so to be interviewed by Humphries is a big big deal, and an honour.
Oh purleez, get over yourself
Mmm lucky I’ve got you to keep my ego in check..
Humphrys is the correct spelling… but it was a good interview. I am going to drink a bottle of Rioja at lunchtime and cover the interview and the issues raised. I shall also be smoking a lot in an enclosed public space for the last time
If my post on your interview et al appears tomorrow you will know that I drank too much and had to retire!
Good interview… enjoyed it… and although I get up at 4.00 am every morning… and go to breakfast at 7.00… I delayed my breakfast so that i could listen to the live interview.
[…] it cannot be done properly without this blog’s contribution. We do after all have the only media star in the UK legal blogging […]
[…] Oxford & Cambridge. It is difficult to counter such a point - although Ruthie did her best to. Listen to her interview with John Humphrys. Enjoyable interview. Curiously, Ruthie missed a trick by failing to mention the Geeklawyer […]
Yes been on holiday. Just listened to the interview - excellent stuff Ruthie, although sadly you didn’t manage to include any abuse about GL in there.
[…] Having said all that Ruthie, rather tragically, finds herself without a date this year. Since her plea on this site for a co-blogger was spectacularly successful, Ruthie invites applicants for a Valentine’s date. You can see pictures of Ruthie here and here, and listen to Ruthie being interviewed last year by John Humphries here. […]