Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Ruth Kelly

56 replies

JanH · 16/12/2004 14:59

I'm amazed we haven't had a thread on her yet, on the back of DB's departure - she's one of those Superwomen - "Ms Kelly entered Parliament as MP for Bolton West in 1997 and 11 days later gave birth to the first of her four children." (Telegraph .) And she's only 36. Looking forward to lots of sympathetic "how on earth does she do it?" pieces in the Women's sections.

OP posts:
JanH · 16/12/2004 17:18

she probably has half an hour on alternate Sundays.

OP posts:
aloha · 16/12/2004 17:44

I bet she's the dullest woman on earth though. All those years talking about inflation. Gah. And wanting to be an MP. Now, that's not normal.

turquey · 16/12/2004 17:48

She's clearly not vain, allowing that "just given birth" photo out in public.
Mine are all firmly out of sight, I look like I've just had a lobotomy rather than a baby.

happymerryberries · 16/12/2004 18:00

Does she have a background in education? I have read that she is an economist. It would be nice if we could have someone in the job who has taught in a classroom . Economist, makes her sound as if she will fixate on the ballance sheet, I hope I'm wrong.

DickWhittingtonsCat · 17/12/2004 10:25

I really like it when they tell us about the family lives of prominent women. I actually think they should all "come out" about being mothers, because I find it very inspiring (hey, still time for me to have another three ..., just need to find a guy who wants to "carry the domestic strain" ). They should tell us about the families of male politicians too. I have voted for a local election candidate before on the basis that his leaflet presented him as nice daddy in favour of single childless yuppie on the other leaflet whom I thought would not understand parents' concerns as well.

wickedwinterwitch · 17/12/2004 10:32

That is a terrible photo of her (the just had a baby one)! Do we think she's a mumsnetter? Prob not, there aren't many people here with 4. Or, Janh, is there something you're not telling us?

popsycal · 17/12/2004 10:33

I wonder how many famous people are MNers!
Or lurk...

aloha · 17/12/2004 10:44

I once saw Jonathan Ross's wife write an absolutely STINGING reply to people who were slagging off her choice of kids names on a forum! One poster said something like, "I wonder what that poor kid called Betty Kitten (or something) thinks of her name now" and she wrote "Well, she's sitting next to me, and actually she loves her name. It's unusual and boys think its cute"!!!

serenequeen · 17/12/2004 10:50

i would love to know (1) how she has got so far so fast (2) how much maternity leave she took for each child and (3) how much time per day/week she spends with her kids.

yes i feel terribly inadequate too!

ragtaggle · 17/12/2004 10:59

Am I the only person who thinks that, as a mother of four,Ruth Kelly has chosen the easier option by going out to work? That's not to denigrate her at all - I work full time myself -I just think it's worth pointing out that it's much harder to stay at home with four children than it is to work.

I have a friend who is a SAHM to four children aged between 6 months and seven. Her day starts at five, after a broken night's sleep (Bet Ruth Kelly has a night nurse but more of that later)and then goes at full pelt until eight in the evening. The first moment of head space she gets is when she slumps into a chair, zombified, at eight o clock when - if she's lucky - she'll get an hour to herself before falling asleep in the chair. During her day she is constantly dealing with demands on her time, demands on her breasts(!) and an endless round of mind numbingly boring chores. Of course there are rewarding moments but there's no doubt that she is doing an EXHAUSTING job, for no renumeration at all. (And there are no glowing articles in the paper wondering how on earth she manages it)

Ruth Kelly's day? Lets give her the benefit of the doubt and imagine that she, too, gets up in the night and has a hideosuly early start. Even if that's the case she gets to leave all that behind when she leaves for work at 8 or probably even earlier. She'll probably have a nice uninterrupted cup of coffee (Or three) brought to her by her nice, respectful P.A. She will then have a day of intellecutal stimulation and adult conversation. That, coupled with acres of caffeine, is far more likely to wake someone up than a day with the children at your feet. (Do mothers ever get a chance to finish a cup of coffee? )

RK might then have to take someone for lunch in a nice Westminster restaurant (on expenses, of course) and then spend the afternoon catching up on her paperwork or whatever. (No sticky hands or screaming children at her feet)Then she will come home and spend an hour or so with her children before bedtime. She might bath them or read them a story.

In short, Ruth has just tapped into the man's game. She has realised, like so many of us, that combining a well paid job that you enjoy with children is not hard compared to the thankless task that is full time motherhood. Now, where did I put that cappuccino....

DickWhittingtonsCat · 17/12/2004 11:15

I was having this conversation with Mum last night (she always worked full time and was a wonderful mother to us and is still my best friend) and she reckons that from what you can see whenever they televise Parliament very few MPs really are present in debates and committee meetings and that if you are quite efficient you can do lots of the reading at home with your kids (as she used to do (she wasn't an MP!)) and that being an MP is not necessarily as demanding as another professional (or long hours) job. No doubt, being a Minister is very different from just being a backbencher, though. Generalising, mothers who work full time outside the home tend to be much more time efficient than their father colleagues, and do their work in less time, because the childcare buck tends to stop with the mothers not the fathers. We don't know anything about how much time Ruth Kelly spends with her kids, yet. Also, a lot of the male MPs who are supposed to be working terribly hard all hours turn out to have been canoodling with someone or other and not really working! I would love to give her the benefit of the doubt and believe that she really does love her kids and is close to them, and finishes her paid work efficiently. What a shame if everyone criticises her, grinds her down, and she decides to stay at home, instead of representing mothers at the highest political level.

ragtaggle · 17/12/2004 11:43

Can I just say that I do not think that SAHM love their children more than working ones nor do I think that they are 'better mothers'. In my opinion being a good mother is about so much more than whether you work or not. Mothers come in all shapes and sizes and I suspect, from what I've read, that RK is a good one. (Who sets a great example to her children of what women can acheive if they set their minds to it)

My point was not to denigrate Ruth Kelly at all -just to acknowledge that working isn't anywhere near as hard as staying at home. I speak as one who knows..I stayed at home for ten months and have worked F/T for five. I certainly know which I find easier. (I acknowledge that this is because, like Ruth Kelly, I have a well paid job that I enjoy and which stimulates me intellectually)

pantomimEDAMe · 17/12/2004 11:44

I met her a while ago, at the launch of the tax credit scheme, and was impressed. She seems really straightforward, obviously v. intelligent, generally friendly, efficient person. She claimed that she's just very strict with her civil servants about not taking red boxes home with her. There were plenty of mothers in the room but we couldn't hate her for being so much more successful/better at juggling than us because she did seem OK - not setting herself up as superwoman or anything. Apparently her speeches are rather dull, but that seems to be the worst anyone can say about her.
Clearly it helps if you have a nanny, domestic help and a switched-on husband, though. And I do wonder how much time she gets with the kids ? getting home at 7 in the evening means the baby will be asleep, surely?

color · 17/12/2004 11:54

money money money must be fun in a rich man's world.....

seen too many people like this...

see children at weekends if lucky bring them out for appropriate family photo shots etc...

can't understand why some people have children if at least one of them is there for the children...

if you have the money but choose to put your career before your child/children why bother to have any????

SuzyStockings · 17/12/2004 11:57

@ color - that was a joke, Right?

serenequeen · 17/12/2004 11:59

ss, i suspect color is not joking. the old why bother to have children if you work line usually rears it's head in these discussions

muminlondon · 17/12/2004 12:04

I don't think it's fair to judge without knowing her. Apparently she goes home at 6pm and doesn't work weekends. See Madeleine's Bunting's piece here . She sounds great actually and her husband sounds supportive - and yes, why do we know all about her childcare arrangements and not Charles Clarke's?

PamiNativity · 17/12/2004 12:09

ha ha ha ha - I'd really be laughing if I was out on the streets with my children or in a manky B&B, just because I "chose" not to work.

JanH · 17/12/2004 12:11

She does sound great - makes me feel tired just reading about her.

OP posts:
PaRumPumPumScum · 17/12/2004 12:14

Hi color. I had mine so I could they could suffer while I enjoyed myself at work and it's all worked out according to plan. You mean there's another way?

ragtaggle · 17/12/2004 12:19

I find the 'why have children if you can't be bothered to see them?' line really offensive. Surely it's about personal choice - what is the point of SAHM's pitting themselves against those who work like this? Why can't you accept, color, that the world has changed and that just because some women value their career it doesn't mean they don't love their children. That 'bring them out at weekends for family photos' is such a ridiculous thing to say.

For me, as I thought I made clear, going to work has little to do with 'money,money,money' and everything to do with the fact that I love my job. Like a lot of women today I spent my twenties building up a career that I love. And I hope very much that my dd will do the same - I hope she gets fulfillment in every area of her life and not just through her children. (To quote you back at yourself color 'I've seen that too many times')

popsycal · 17/12/2004 12:22

Color - what if working mums took the same offensive line with you?

Surely what suits one does nto suit all?
Being a boring wrold otherwise

SuzyStockings · 17/12/2004 12:27

Great post ragtaggle!

FlashingRudolphNose · 17/12/2004 12:50

AAAAAAAAARRRGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!

WE ALL WORK HARD - IN AND OUT OF THE HOME!

WE ALL LOVE OUR KIDS!

COMMENTS LIKE COLOR'S ARE JUST PATHETIC!

YES I AM SHOUTING - SORRY!

FairyMum · 17/12/2004 14:02

Oh dear...comments like color makes me laugh. But if you choose to be that offensive, then remember that the people you offend are the people who pay taxes which pay for you to stay at home. I assume you and your children still use the NHS, public transport, education etc etc etc.