bonsai wrote:
Personally I have no problem about Ruth Kelly being a member of Opus Dei and also holding a position of power and influence. She is open about this membership and there will always be those who believe that such affiliations affect her professional judgements. This is why we have the checks and balances in the parliamentary process.
Personally I would only have a problem if a person in such a position was secretive about such affiliations or if there was no process for questioning or reviewing the persons proffesional conduct. This is why I believe that St James requires a PTA where the decisions of the governors and the school's executive may be scrutinised and the influences understood and the criticisms aired, listened to and if necessary acted upon.
The SES also needs some form of mechanism to provide checks and balances (I'm not sure what form it should take) to ensure that the executive authority is kept in check and power is not allowed to corrupt.
Absolutely Bonsai, that's exactly how I feel too.