Quite bloody right too

The committee recommended radical changes to the law before the next election, with the UK languishing at 40th in the world for female representation, though up eight places since the 8 June poll.

However, the government has rejected all six of the committee’s proposals, including any legislation to force parties to have a minimum proportion of 45% female parliamentary candidates in general elections, with the option to consider fines if targets were not met.

It’s the voters who get to decide who the MPs are. If that ends up being 100% Xes then so be it, it’s their choice, no one elses’.

30 thoughts on “Quite bloody right too”

  1. We can’t have women voting for men, that’d never do. Not directly anyway. They can vote for a woman who promises to vote for a man.

  2. In fairness, the requirement is about the gender mix that parties put in front of voters – there’s nothing here about making the voters themselves return MPs proportionately.

    Not that I think it’s a good idea, mind – I’m just sayin’

  3. We have quite enough female fuckwits on the job what with the Fish-Faced Hag , Abbotarse etc,etc ad nauseam.

    We have no need of more.

    Now some Italian style sexy women for Parliament is a much better idea–so long as sex/glamour is the focus and the girls avoid verbiage.

  4. “the requirement is about the gender mix that parties put in front of voters”

    Cool.

    Make each party put one of each on the ballot.

    I look forward to seeing the 17 page list at each election.

  5. Ensuring that no more than 55% of candidates were of the same gender would have had interesting consequences for the Women’s Equality Party!

    If we did have quotas on gender I imagine it would only be a matter of time before we introduced them for race, disability and private education, perhaps sexuality, wealth or even age too. Would make it a nightmare for constituency parties to select their candidates (either at membership meetings or local primaries as the Tories have experimented with), since the decisions of one set of constituencies would narrow the choices available for others. As a practical solution you’d need something like “all-minority all-woman all-state school” shortlists imposed by the central party in certain constituencies, and I can’t see that going down well.

    The other obvious way that parties could get round the legislation is if candidates fought individual campaigns (“independent conservative” etc) rather than on a party ticket, but with logistical support from ideologically like-minded campaign/interest groups rather than the party HQ. Can’t see what would stop them forming a grouping, of whatever composition they like, once elected to parliament.

  6. (Proportional representation with party lists would make it much harder to get around such rules on candidate selection – an FPTP election is essentially hundreds of independent mini-elections and I can’t see a foolproof way of forcing parties to put forward an official list of candidates if they didn’t want to. After all, there’s nothing to stop a completely independent candidate winning a seat without any party support, though it is rare.)

  7. The Unused Testicle

    Personally, I think not enough is being done in the field of private medicine. Here, the diversity mix is appallingly slack.

    We should co-opt vast numbers of all races, gender and ability to work in this sector.

    The elites on such committees, who naturally use private healthcare only to relieve pressure on the NHS, would be able to demonstrate the facility of such a mix

  8. @ MBE
    No problem for WEP as the quota system only sets a *minimum* %age of women among candidates.
    The proposal would ban any man, such as Dr Richard Taylor in Wyre Forest from standing as an Independent on a single-issue platform but give carte blanche to Lady Sylvia Hermon. Mebyon Kernow would be forced to have a majority of women candidates if it stood in an odd number of constituencies.
    This is an attempt to subvert democracy.

  9. I’ve helped select political candidates. The process is that people apply. They get interviewed, can be more than once.
    Have been years when no women candidates have applied to be a candidate at local council selection. Have been many occasions when no candidate has come forward to stand against the party’s own MP for the area – which makes selection much easier.

    What can be done to improve on the process? Get more men and women applying to be the candidate.
    I would hope that every party then chooses which is the best for the job – not based on what sex they are.
    If have 4 men and a woman applying and choosing the woman because she is a woman despite being 3rd best candidate how does that help anyone?
    If 4 women and a man apply and choose the man because he Is a man despite being 3rd best candidate how does that help anyone?

    Now if the constituencies reported on the applications maybe there would be better data to decide future options from.

  10. Did anyone hear the Peter Hennessy interview with Harriet Harman? It was striking how poorly she performed in government but still kept getting senior roles. There’s an argument for Labour to adopt more women labour candidates. If they are going to appoint women to senior positions primarily for the ‘optics’ it would help if they have a few more replacements available in the back benches so they can actually sack a few that aren’t up to it.

  11. Peter Hennessy’s Reflections is pure radio gold. Harman came across as the most frightful harridan, unsurprisingly.

  12. the stupid thing is that I doubt that anyone, I mean anyone would vote for gender before party. They might harangue Tories about it based on their feelz, but how many of the wailing harpies would vote for a Tory woman over a Labour man? Even a sopping wet tory woman?

    Would they feck.

  13. Further to last – and they’d self-justify it as that the Labour man would do more for the Sisterhood than the Tory woman. Which is bullcrap. Particularly as the Momentum lot seem to be to a large degree part of the whole SWP somewhat-rapey-sausage-factory-brocialist club.

  14. Bloke no Longer in Austria

    Well of course we also need to ask how it was that Jack Dromey-Harman managed to become selected on an all-womens’ list.

    What depesses is me, is that in the mob of third-raters that we now have in Parliament, many of the women stand out as particularly stupid or useless. It bothers me, am I being sexist in thinking that the likes of May, Leadsom, Abbot, Kendal etc are thicker and crapper than their male counterparts ?

    In Austria we had a pol. for whom I had the greatest respect and who stood head and shoulders over her male colleagues: Maria “Mitzi” Fekter. She used to be Interior Minister, but became too popular for the leadership so they promoted her to Finance Minister – instead of stringing up asylum seekers, she was forced to recite tractor statistics in parliament. She did a good job in Brussels, though, where she would come out of meetings and declare to the press “These idiots haven’t got a bloody clue…” What a woman.

  15. Make each party put one of each on the ballot.

    An interesting thought – is there any legal requirement that a political party only have a single candidate standing in a seat? It obviously wouldn’t make sense to have more than one and splitting the vote, but I wonder if there is anything explicitly forbidding it.

    Anyway, the only quota on representation in Parliament that I would support would concern lawyers. The number of lawyers in Parliament should be proportional to their numbers in the general population. This would solve a lot of problems.

  16. What depesses is me, is that in the mob of third-raters that we now have in Parliament

    I think it is the natural outcome of machine politics. Lifetime political animals dominate, having done nothing but politics since they left (or were at) university. They know everything about winning the internal party battles. They are completely clueless regarding actual government or leading anything but that doesn’t matter – that isn’t the competition they entered in to.

    It’s as if you picked the England football team by performance in some unrelated activity, e.g. gardening.

  17. @ Rob
    Most parliamentary seats used to elect two members so parties would put up two candidates and quite often the two MPs elected would belong to different parties.

  18. The Left wants more for it’s constituent group. They aren’t interested in fairness or equality, they are interested in their group.

    ‘The committee’s report, published in January, said there was a “serious democratic deficit” because of the lack of female representation in parliament, where men make up 70% of the total MPs.’

    Uhh . . . every damn one of the was elected. Not only does the Left hate democracy, they don’t even know WTF it is. It’s just a prop to be used to get their way.

    ‘We must have women in Parliament, coz equality.’

    They don’t care about equality; they talk about equality because you do.

  19. “It’s as if you picked the England football team by performance in some unrelated activity, e.g. gardening.”

    Given Englands performance in the last 30 years, I think that’s what they actually do.

  20. @Bloke no Longer in Austria, September 8, 2017 at 1:55 pm

    …What depesses is me, is that in the mob of third-raters that we now have in Parliament, many of the women stand out as particularly stupid or useless. It bothers me, am I being sexist in thinking that the likes of May, Leadsom, Abbot, Kendal etc are thicker and crapper than their male counterparts ?

    Agree. A few more: Morgan, Rudd, Soubry, Truss… For brevity: all females on both front benches.

  21. Someone pointed out a while back, the people who are encouraged to apply to serve on committees, to become councillors etc are the very people that are no good at their jobs and the rest of the staff and managers want them moved on.
    I could tell a story or two about some previous MPs and the people they once worked with.
    People that make out that they are important because they were or are an MP when in reality they were so crap at everything else.

  22. You could do what we in the US do and have a primary where you have a scrum of each party vie to represent their party in the general election (except California). The party does not vet the candidates, so anyone can run. Of course that is how we ended up with Trump. He only got about 30% of Republicans to vote for him in the primaries. So there is a down side.

    We need more Maggie Thatchers!

  23. What’s so bad about “languishing” in 40th place for female representation. If all the world’s democracies are vying to have as many women as the voters will elect, ending up in the top 20% by this measure seems reasonable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *