Lord Hill of Oareford
This is the photo of Lord Hill of Oareford, the Schools Minister that I thought I’d inserted into my last post. As Jonathan Hill he was a ministerial advisor in various departments in the 1980s and 1990s (he had the reputation for being what my auntie would call ‘a head full of smarts’). He headed up the Prime Minister John Major’s political office from 1992-94. Having now been parachuted into the new Government in the Lords he is having to find his way around the parliament and the Department of Education, remember the silly lingo and peculiar comportment of the Chamber, get a major bill (the first of the new parliament ) through the Lords before recess and at the same time accommodate a mass of detailed amendments while recalling his brief from the Bill team working on the Academies Bill. Report so far? ”Trying hard in his first term at School, shows talent and promise, should do well if he can keep it up”.
5 Comments
Welcome, Lord Hill of Oareford, to ‘my world’
[ subject to your non-opposition to the serious other submissions I have made and look forward to making; notably to Baroness Murphy's agreeable Post yesterday "Religious education, an oxymoron"].
In any event, I wish you a truly sustain-worthy sub-career here.
(JSDM1051F250610)
Really brilliant politician (who also wrote a great book) and a dynamic force in the House of Lords. Many congratulations on his appointment.
Well done Jonathan, from an old Cambridge friend who’s kept faith that Parliament was his destiny, just didn’t expect it to be so sudden!
The man is a plonker and knows nothing about the areas he makes decisions about. He also fails to recognise the needs of children in deprived areas whilst ensuring the beter off are well looked after.
I wish to apologise for my previous comments. They were made at a time of extremely high disappointment and stress. There was a long process of getting to an Academy being agreed, and this was against the wishes of 85% of parents and pupils. The money promised and on which arguments were made regarding making vast improvements to our local school, has been reduced by 50%, and this is a bitter pill for everyone that has the best interests of children in our area. I appreciate Lord Hill was acting on information and advice from his staff, and is probably not aware of all the local circumstances, or how the decision impacts upon people in the local areas. I therefore withdraw my remarks and and make an unreserved apology.