Bitterly divided Garrick Club prepares to vote on
female membership again
Tuesday’s debate on whether the existing rules do not
in fact bar women comes amid rising resignations and threats
Amelia
Gentleman
Sat 4 May
2024 06.00 BST
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/04/garrick-club-vote-women-female-members
In May
1924, the Manchester Guardian revealed a “recent innovation in the Garrick Club
to admit ladies to one of its rooms” meant that the queen of Romania would be
lunching at the club during her visit to London. “What would Queen Victoria
have said about such a notion!” the article wondered.
A hundred
years later, the club’s lethargic advance towards allowing women into the
building on equal terms with men continues. On Tuesday, members will once again
vote on the matter.
Before the
vote, at least nine of the UK’s most senior judges and barristers have parsed
the club’s rules to assess whether they do or do not already permit the
admission of women.
The former
president of the supreme court David Neuberger and the former supreme court
judge Jonathan Sumption (both members) have separately written to the club’s
chair to inform him that they agree with the legal advice given by the senior
lawyer David Pannick KC, who recently concluded that there was nothing in the
rules preventing women from becoming members.
Another
club member, Edward Henry KC – who is meanwhile representing some of the
falsely accused post office operators at the public inquiry into the scandal
–disagrees, advising the club: “Unfortunately, David Pannick’s opinion is
flawed.”
Members say
festering disagreements over the issue are poisoning the atmosphere within the
club.
Resignations
and threats to resign are rising steadily, with members on both sides of the
argument declaring that they will give up their memberships if the vote does
not go their way.
The club’s
general committee is split, with 13 (the majority) recommending that women
should be admitted; this group has written to members warning if the vote fails
to admit women they believe “the number who would feel obliged to resign is
some 200, and quite possibly more”.
John
Simpson, the BBC’s world affairs editor, a member since 2001, tweeted on
Wednesday morning: “Various Garrick Club members including Sting, Mark Knopfler
and leading actors and producers have reportedly written to the Club chairman
saying they’ll resign if the membership doesn’t vote to accept women next
Tuesday. Many others like me would also find it impossible to stay.”
Within 24
hours his post had attracted 1,800 responses, many bemused, many ironic (“We
would welcome you at the Drones Club. Just the sort of person we need!”; “Just
find it weird none of you chaps noticed the absence of women before”; “Why all
the fuss about something that only affects 0.000000001pc of the population?”;
“What news of the Women’s Institute?”; “Is the Garrick Club like Fight Club!”;
“Budge up, Rosa Parks, there are some new changemakers in town” etc.)
The Garrick
has come under scrutiny since the Guardian’s publication in March of the names
of about 60 high-profile members from the club’s closely guarded membership
book. The list includes scores of leading lawyers and judges, heads of publicly
funded arts institutions, dozens of members of the House of Lords, the deputy
prime minister, 10 other MPs, as well as heads of thinktanks, law firms,
private equity companies, academics, prominent actors, rock stars, senior
journalists and the king.
Details of
the strong concentration of senior British establishment figures inside a club
that has become notorious for repeatedly blocking moves to admit women drew
anger from campaigners for increased diversity in the arts, business, politics
and the law.
The letter
from 13 committee members noted that the media’s “unfair and unwanted spotlight
on the Garrick” had already prompted numerous resignations, including “a number
of senior judges, Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, Sir Richard Moore, head of
MI6, John Gilhooly, chief executive of Wigmore Hall, and many others, including
Downton Abbey producer Gareth Neame, who also resigned as chairman of the
Garrick Charitable Trust.”
In his
letter to the club chair, Neuberger wrote that he too would resign if women
were not admitted, describing the issue as a “running sore” that was becoming a
“reputational problem”.
Sumption
wrote he had no intention of resigning whatever the outcome, but noted that the
ban on women was “indefensible now that women occupy prominent and
distinguished positions in every walk of life”.
The
arguments of men opposed to the admission of women were “frankly difficult to
understand”, he wrote, adding: “I have certainly never heard it said even by
opponents that women are, as a group, incapable of being good company. One
sometimes hears it said that men are more inclined to show off in female than
in male company, but speaking for myself I have never observed that.”
Tuesday’s
vote will rest on whether or not members agree that the club’s rules should
really be read with the 1925 Law of Property Act in mind, which suggests that
the word “he” should also be understood also to mean “she”, in which case there
would be nothing stopping women from joining.
A general
meeting of the club will be held at a venue in Covent Garden from 5-7pm where
members will debate the issue and vote on whether to confirm a resolution “that
the rules of the club allow the admission of women members”; a simple majority
of more than 50% will be enough for the vote to pass but several amendments
have been tabled aiming to block or postpone a decision to welcome women.
Senior club
members opposed to the admission of women have also written a letter, arguing
that even if the Garrick was accused of being “old-fashioned or even
misogynistic”, members have “the right of free association under the law”.
“It is
obvious that, however equal men and women are on every level of intellect and
achievement, there are differences between them. It is the most natural thing
in the world that both should, from time to time, seek out the special kind of
companionship to be enjoyed in places reserved for and, most importantly, run
by themselves,” their letter states.
Critics
stress that their unease about the Garrick is not based on opposition to men
gathering in single-sex spaces, but focused on the high number of powerful men
in one organisation that has consistently closed its doors to women.
In a letter
to members sent at the end of April, the club’s chair, Christopher Kirker, said
the recent media focus had taken its toll and was “very much to be regretted”,
but added that he hoped the club would find a “route through the morass that
brings us together so that we can return to what makes the Garrick so special:
good fellowship, friendship and fun”.
The club
has been contacted for comment.
A strange picture at the top ! Is it the club for a boy, as the apostrophe would suggest ? i would have thought that it refers to a club for boys and so educated people write it: a boys' club. Funny.
ReplyDelete