When I applied for my college course there was an interview and then a target was set for my A-Levels results. I had to reach that target or look elsewhere.
For every employment I have applied for, there has always been a baseline criteria of educational attainment that I had to have before I would be considered.
As I've moved on in my career there has been a steady increase in the acceptable level of previous experience that was required on top of the educational qualifications.
All this makes sense and is both reasonable and expected.
The requirements to be a doctor are rightly complex and lengthy. Most professionals similarly need to follow some kind of career path to ensure that they have the right experience and skill set.
There doesn't appear to be anything at all required, qualification or experience, to be a government minister or even the actual leader of a country.
This buffoon is a very well educated gentleman. It is probably the level of education that you'd want to have in our leadership but there is something missing in his experience that means he is not doing the job at the level we require.
This lady has the experience of a long political career but it does seem clear that she is not intellectually strong enough to fill us all with confidence if she is going to be dealing with doctors, economists or other specialists.
I'd like to suggest ...
1. A minimum of A'levels in both English and in Maths - We should expect our politicians to be both numerate and literate, and well above average.
2. A university degree or equivalent. It might sound elitist but well, we need good decisions, and we need to raise expectations. A university degree indicates not only a level of attainment but also a degree of application to a task.
3. Five years of local government experience before being allowed to run as an MP. There are way too many individuals who come in to politics at a high level without the right experience. In because of 'who you know' rather than 'what you know'. I fully accept that there are some who this is fine but these should be rare exceptions rather than the norm.
4. Age limits. I argue that you should not be an MP until you are at the very least 35. And you should be retired at 67. That is the retirement age and no, we don't need the benefit of your experience in the House of Lords, go enjoy your grandchildren.
We need to do something. We need to demand a change. If we don't we risk ending with the same problems that the United States have had, and are having.
