The furore—indeed, near hysteria—that I detect in public debate over Jason Arday is striking. It now seems clear that the Cambridge Professor was rather creative in constructing the CV he presented at his interview. Yet the outrage expressed in subsequent public debate about the matter implies that no white Anglo‑Saxon British citizen ever blagged their way into a job for which they were not qualified. 

It’s even possible that, using some of the talents necessary to pull the wool over the eyes of a prospective employer, some of these—possibly charismatic—white male deceivers have ended up doing their job rather well, well enough to avoid detection of their subterfuge – even, on occasion, to win plaudits for their achievements in their ill-gotten appointment. Think Patricia Highsmith’s talented Mr Ripley as a rather fine, albeit fictional, example of the type. That unscrupulous streak is often just what’s required to prosper in high office. 

It must equally be recorded that there are other examples in recent times where obvious charlatans have risen to high office on the basis of unassailable self belief and a talent for holding the attention of the bored and disaffected. Qualifications be damned. Donald Trump has clearly lied his way to the US Presidency just as surely as Boris Johnson abseiled and clowned his way into the job of UK Prime Minister.  Even I, a seasoned and stalwart opponent of the Tory Party, could see that Rory Stewart was better qualified for the position.  

But setting aside these high profile cases of undeserved promotion to high office, I think any person who has been through a working life will be quick to recall instances of individuals promoted beyond their capabilities. The ambitious work harder at finessing their CVs and preparing for their interviews than the modest, self-effacing and quite possibly better qualified competition. I  was witness to  this phenomenon throughout my working life. 

What animates the case of Jason Arday, however, is a concern among many conservative commentators that equalities legislation and quotas for people of colour or women are resulting in inferior candidates being preferred for promoted posts simply to tick the equalities box. 

I have no hesitation in saying this “concern” is nonsense. 

Any significant appointment will come with a basic set of required qualifications. Assuming that one of our aforementioned charlatans or deceivers is not applying, every person on the short list at interview will have the necessary qualifications, regardless of race or gender. Naturally, if for reasons of quota, a woman or a person of colour is given the job, then the white male applicants will feel disgruntled. But as I’ve already noted, the ‘best candidate’ routinely loses out to the more disingenuous—so why single out quotas? After all, women and people of colour will have experienced the sharp end of discrimination and disrespect, and this will bring a perspective to their work that should be valued.  By all means challenge the process if procedure has not been scrupulously followed. But otherwise, if you have lost out in the job application lottery, there is only one proper course of action.

Get over it! Move on!