tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post115615242645184352..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Candidate Selection: Further, Wider, Faster, DeeperIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156405600915205892006-08-24T08:46:00.000+01:002006-08-24T08:46:00.000+01:00Adrian,re Verity -just leave her, she's not worth ...Adrian,<BR/><BR/>re Verity -<BR/><BR/>just leave her, she's not worth itAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156354365732218842006-08-23T18:32:00.000+01:002006-08-23T18:32:00.000+01:00Verity,Firstly, if you have not read my last two p...Verity,<BR/><BR/>Firstly, if you have not read my last two posts all the way through, then how do you know that you have answered all my points?<BR/><BR/>Secondly, I said those who 'take Verity's view'..... Not 'verity says....' <BR/><BR/>I then went on to make a fair critique of your view, which I can prove from your own words on this very blog. <BR/><BR/>So far from overlaying anything, I am merely refelcting your own argument back to you and asking you to justify it.<BR/><BR/>Incidently, you also stated "I find that people who state mphatically "this just isn't acceptable" can never tell you why".<BR/><BR/>I disproved your point and gave you ten reasons why it was unaceptable - none of which you tried to answer, except by dismissing them all in a quite foolish way - by saying "yes we get it, you are a fan of women"!<BR/><BR/>So, far from 'having answered all my points', all you have done is dismiss them rather than challenge them.<BR/><BR/>Finally, I don't know if you have ever sat on selection committees for Tory Associations. Well I have and I can tell you that until recently, if you were a women, black or gay, you had a very much reduced chance of getting selected than a white married middle class barrister! On many occassions, the person that I felt was one of the strongest candidates, and even in some cases, the strongest candidate, didn't even get invited for interview or shorlisted because the selection committe thought she should be at home baking cakes and supporting her husbands political ambitions!!!<BR/><BR/>That, I am sorry to say, is fact!Scipiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06514885826616402615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156336726229627912006-08-23T13:38:00.000+01:002006-08-23T13:38:00.000+01:00Adrian Yalland - You are overlaying your own thoug...Adrian Yalland - You are overlaying your own thoughts on my posts, or you are wifully misunderstanding.<BR/><BR/>I have not read your last two posts all the way through because you are too prolix. And repetitive. I've already answered all your pointsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156290441548327082006-08-23T00:47:00.000+01:002006-08-23T00:47:00.000+01:00Average Guy. I too could not care less if the pers...Average Guy. I too could not care less if the person representing me was black, white, male, female, gay, straight, or a mix of the above. <BR/><BR/>What I care about is are they the best person for the job. <BR/><BR/>Now, those who take Verity's view would say 'how can they be the best person for the job if they have been unfairly advanced simply to fill a quota'? <BR/><BR/>A great question. But I reverse it. How can I be sure the person representing me is the best person for the job if I the selection process routinely discriminates against 50% of the population!<BR/><BR/>Verities view rests on an assumption that we are already living in a situation where there are no barriers to advancement for women as long as they are 'forceful' enough. I take the opposite view, which is women are still largely discriminated against, and as a result the 'man' that might just be the 'best person for the job' is actually a women who will never get the chance to prove it!Scipiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06514885826616402615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156263871412094762006-08-22T17:24:00.000+01:002006-08-22T17:24:00.000+01:00Verity, my mother has everything to do with 'shoev...Verity, my mother has everything to do with 'shoeveling women into Parliament'! The point is that, had she wanted to go into politics, she would almost have certainly have been prevented from doing so because The Tory Party would never have let a women stand who didn't at least have a very rich husband and a pretty impressive career, and because she wasn't posh, rich or plummy enough. Thank God that is changing, and women (indeed men as well) outside of the traditional MP recruiting groiunds (the Unions, the public service, law and busines) and now stand a chance of contributing their skills and expereince - to the benefit of all!Scipiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06514885826616402615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156261716558751562006-08-22T16:48:00.000+01:002006-08-22T16:48:00.000+01:00I have spent some time reading with interest Adria...I have spent some time reading with interest Adrian Yalland's and Verity's "arguement" - sorry, but I can't think of a better word there. You both have valid points. There should be more women in Parliament but <B>only on merit</B>.<BR/><BR/>Why is it, however, that this has taken so long. It is coming up to 90 years since when women had equal rights to stand for parliament as men (or so I think, I was a little confused by this as it appeared to me to be the equivalent now of the country being run by 9 year olds - due to the diference in the voting age back then). I could go on for hours about this but I won't. Just because I am interested in social and political history (particularly early 20th century) it doesn't mean anyone else is.<BR/><BR/>Having said all that, however, I don't care if my local MP is male, female, or even monkey! As long as he is the best person for the job and is local.<BR/><BR/>For information, I am actually a woman - the "guy" in my pseudonym is meant to mean "person" and not "bloke". I believe passionately in an equal society.<BR/><BR/>Sorry for the rather long rant, by the way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156253160194538062006-08-22T14:26:00.000+01:002006-08-22T14:26:00.000+01:00Adrian Yalland says: "I agree that many of the pr...Adrian Yalland says: "I agree that many of the problems we face stem from family break down and kids having no mother. But why does that mean we shouldn't have women in Parliament? I don't see the link?"<BR/><BR/>Neither do I. I cannot think we you have loaded family breakdown etc onto my arguement, as I never made it. I don't think it's the government's business to be concerned with family breakdown. People must look after themselves.<BR/><BR/>The government should be running the economy and that is all.<BR/><BR/>I have said consistently that clever, motivated women who get themselves elected to Parliament are probably valuable because they are so motivated. Women who would never have stood for Parliament without massive help from the party are of absolutely no value whatsoever, and are indeed, counterproductive.<BR/><BR/>I admire your mother for her accomplishment, but this has nothing to do with women getting shovelled into Parliament.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156244405050253072006-08-22T12:00:00.000+01:002006-08-22T12:00:00.000+01:00You guys lost me! I was pretty sure I was reading ...You guys lost me! I was pretty sure I was reading a PhD thesis:-) adrian yalland?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156204296180576972006-08-22T00:51:00.000+01:002006-08-22T00:51:00.000+01:00Firstly, I must learn not to type after my 47th cu...Firstly, I must learn not to type after my 47th cup of Cawfeeeee!<BR/><BR/>Verity, yes I am a fan of women, but that is not the sole reason I want more of them in Parliament (and it is athere shouldn't be more women in Parliament?<BR/><BR/>I agree that many of the problems we face stem from family break down and kids having no mother. But why does that mean we shouldn't have women in Parliament? I don't see the link? <BR/><BR/>In fact, a women who would much rather be at home with her kids but is economically unable to stay at home, would, if allowed to get in through St. Stephen's entrance, make a great Parliamentary advocate for issues which would enable more women to stay at home than a man who is just reading from a pressure group breifing paper and will never benefit from the changes he is arguing for!<BR/><BR/>In other words, I can argue for changes in the provision of child care (or whatever the argument might be), but I won't have as much credibility or motivation as a women who will actually see her life drastically improved by it!<BR/><BR/>I was raised by a single mum who had 4 kids, two jobs, a mortgage she couldn't afford and manic depression. But she worked her butt off at being a great mum and also tried to fill the gaps that an absent father left behind. I never lacked for love, food or fun! That kind of experience and success (which cannot be reflected on the bottom line of a balance sheet, or in the number of cases won in court) would bring wonders to the political process if only it were allowed through the door!<BR/><BR/>I don't feel at all that women’s issues can only be dealt with by women, or that Black issues only by black people. But the fact that women’s issues can be dealt with by men does not mean that they should only be dealt with by men!<BR/><BR/>If women want to be politicians, then they should be encouraged to be so - and not prevented from achieving their goals because (a) old farts think it is a man's job or (b) the Tory Party is afraid of being accused to selling out to political correctness for recognising that an injustice needs addressing! <BR/><BR/>Not to do this is anti-choice and in many cases wrong! <BR/><BR/>Talented and able candidates and women candidates are not mutually exclusive! We can have talented women candidates - as the women you point as examples prove. But what you fail to recognise is that if a man has to get 10 out of ten to get selected, a women has to get 12 out of ten! That's wrong - and all I want is for a level playing field for women in the Tory party! If we don't have that then we don't have the meritocratic party we claim we are!<BR/><BR/>It's not about elevating tokenism, but bringing down prejudice and sexism! Try looking at it from the other way!<BR/><BR/>Also, the fact that many of the population now 'demand' more women MPs means that the political party's should start 'supplying' them!<BR/><BR/>Finally, I know from personal experience of knocking on doors canvassing and the studies on the issue that I did at University (many moons ago) that many more wavering and floating female voters would vote for a party that has a 'feminine side' as well as a masculine side. Mrs. Thatcher illustrated many aspects of 'masculine politics' which were very popular with men. Tony Blair had many feminine 'qualities' which means he connected with women (and David Cameron is doing the same - making emotional rather than logical appeals - it's a 'Mars and Venus thing'). <BR/><BR/>If we create a party which is able to reflect the qualities of both males and female - tough, firm, but caring, then we instantly widen our appeal without having to resort to endless policy explanations or yah-boo politics. <BR/><BR/>It's the politics of emotion as much as the politics of policy these days!Scipiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06514885826616402615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156192932669714322006-08-21T21:42:00.000+01:002006-08-21T21:42:00.000+01:00Hello Iain, ok all sorted, sorry I'm a complete tw...Hello Iain, ok all sorted, sorry I'm a complete twit with the computer.Heatherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00509664330575956795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156191370730556782006-08-21T21:16:00.000+01:002006-08-21T21:16:00.000+01:00ICM poll out tomorrow showing Cameron at 40%. It's...ICM poll out tomorrow showing Cameron at 40%. It's getting interesting.The Daily Pundithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10897210727324532431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156188767904294112006-08-21T20:32:00.000+01:002006-08-21T20:32:00.000+01:00Heather, your blog links disappear when your blog ...Heather, your blog links disappear when your blog looadsl. In fact the whole right hand column does.Iain Dalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156188470209905762006-08-21T20:27:00.000+01:002006-08-21T20:27:00.000+01:00Hello Iain, Good God, you've got lots of comments!...Hello Iain, <BR/><BR/>Good God, you've got lots of comments! Huge fan of your blog... slight exaggeration, but you know what I mean.<BR/><BR/>Ok I've eaten my supper, done the washing up,fed the dog, although she doesn't deserve it after eating my lunch. Have just added your link to my site. Can I ask where you are going to put me? I like to think I'm funny, but my friends tell me I'm not at all amusing. <BR/><BR/>Does this mean I have to vote tory now? Actually I'm a "floating voter", so I may well do. My family will be so pround. <BR/><BR/>Keep up the good work. From one "disgusted" resident to another. <BR/><BR/>HeatherHeatherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00509664330575956795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156187461228693352006-08-21T20:11:00.000+01:002006-08-21T20:11:00.000+01:00jonathan m scott says it's a scandal because the p...jonathan m scott says it's a scandal because the party leader says it is. I think you will detect a lack of logic in that reply if you think about it.<BR/><BR/>uk daily pundit - On the other hand ... men are less articulate when they're offended, aren't they, Mr Pundit? You are so angry you could only try to insult me (failed) and couldn't make a valid point. Pathetic.<BR/><BR/>Adrian Yalland, Yes, we get it. You're a fan of women. That doesn't mean they should be legislating. I don't want a Parliament so full of apes that they need some women around the modify their behaviour.<BR/><BR/>I would be delighted to be represented by an intelligent black man who shares my points of view and who is an effective debater. Or a Chinese man. (I'd vote for Martin Li in a NY minute!) My representative doesn't have to be white just because I am white. And they don't have to be a woman just because I am a woman. What next? Age quotas? With so many OAPs, they ought to be entitled to an entire tranche of their own candidates.<BR/><BR/>This is one more stupid, vapid PR wheeze that Dave has come up with without having accorded the Conservative Party the respect of having thought it through. Devised over a dinner party with lots of shrieks of knowing laughter as another bottle goes around. Dear God.<BR/><BR/>Where is the outcry among women for more women legislators? Where? There isn't one. It's not an issue to women. It's an issue to stupid men who think they can see inside a woman's brain. (Smart men do not so presume.)<BR/><BR/>Let us get smart, alert, <I>driven</I> people to do battle for us. If some of them are women whose driving ambition has always been to get into Parliament,fine, let's give them a hearing. They will get themselves onto short lists by hook or by crook.<BR/><BR/>But enforcing political correctness (which is so bloody passé now anyway) on the party reeks of lunacy.<BR/><BR/>As I said on another thread on this issue, this is the longest, fussiest, most fidgety political suicide note in history.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156184507531143362006-08-21T19:21:00.000+01:002006-08-21T19:21:00.000+01:00I'm not convinced open primaries have produced par...I'm not convinced open primaries have produced particularly good candidates. Maybe my knowledge isn't great enough but I don't think many if any candidates selected by such a process have actually become MPs, have they?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156181007884603862006-08-21T18:23:00.000+01:002006-08-21T18:23:00.000+01:00Mr Scott - again based on what experience? Of one ...Mr Scott - again based on what experience? Of one constituency maybe?? Execs are not representative and at least with the whole association it opens it up to everyone - Arent we all about democracy? <BR/><BR/>My god "we should follow the strategy from CCHQ" must be the most amusing comment Ive heard in a while!<BR/><BR/>I wouldnt quote CCHQ as being the font of all knowledge. Wasnt it from CCHQ that plans to remove the vote from the membership in the last leadership election came? Perhaps you'd advocate that too?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156179533282808672006-08-21T17:58:00.000+01:002006-08-21T17:58:00.000+01:00Totally agree VerityTotally agree VerityAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156179397914343922006-08-21T17:56:00.000+01:002006-08-21T17:56:00.000+01:00Verity - can I (as a man) tell you why it is unace...Verity - can I (as a man) tell you why it is unaceptable to have so few women in Parliament, particularly on the Tory bebches.<BR/><BR/>1. Because 50% of the population are women!<BR/><BR/>2. Because there are 'issues' which affect women much more than men, and whilst men 'can' represent women on these issues, and we 'don't have to' have women to resolve these issues, I feel that with input from women on these issues, they might get resolved better and faster<BR/><BR/>3. If there are more Labour and Lib Dem women in Parliament, then we need more Tory women to counteract them<BR/><BR/>4. Women in general are a civilising influence on men, and men are nicer people when women are around (or at least I am a nicer person when around a women that when around a man - but maybe I am just old fashioned)<BR/><BR/>5. Because the public feel they want to see more women in politics<BR/><BR/>6. Because more women want to get into politics, but they feel there is no point as they will be discriminated again simply because they are women<BR/><BR/>7. Because the 2nd best prime minister this country has ever had was a women<BR/><BR/>8. Because variety is good, women are pretty, the central lobby smelles nicer when there are women around, and because women simply have things to contribute and to say that are worth listening to!<BR/><BR/>9. Because all (or most) of the people I love most are women (my wife, my sister, my mother and my daughter), and they all have wonderful qualities which I would love to see more of in politics<BR/><BR/>10. Because not all women are obsessed with shopping for shoes or polishing their nails, or want to be stay at home mums (some do, some don't). <BR/><BR/>The question should be "Why shouldn't there be more women in politics"? Perhaps you could give me ten reasons why?Scipiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06514885826616402615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156178829568801912006-08-21T17:47:00.000+01:002006-08-21T17:47:00.000+01:00Iain, Open primaraies are a great idea, because th...Iain, Open primaraies are a great idea, because they show what the 'wider' pool of voters think, but their decision should not be binding. <BR/><BR/>The process should be in three stages:<BR/><BR/>1. The Exce committe invites 6 candidates (three men and three women, one of which at leasr one must be an A lister and at least one of which must be local) to a 'Question Time' format primary. The primary then votes to whittle this selection down to three candidates, of which one must be a women.<BR/><BR/>The actual maths of the votes should noy be announced (at this stage anyway) in order not to prejudice the second round, where...<BR/><BR/>2. ...the Association membership then choose the final candidate after a hustings event.<BR/><BR/>This gives the Executive the ability to choose a wide selection of candidates from the approved list (keeping the executive happy), as well as the A list (keeping DC happy) and the 'local pool' (keeping the locals happy). The primaries sort out who are the strongest three candidates (keeping the local press happy) and the association make the final choice (keeping the local association happy). All the candidates have a fair crack at the whip (keeping the candidates happy), and hopefully, we win the next election on the basis of having better quality candidates, selected from across geogrpahic, gender, sexual and colour backgrounds (keeping the country happy)!<BR/><BR/>Everyone's a winner on my world!Scipiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06514885826616402615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156177130328415032006-08-21T17:18:00.000+01:002006-08-21T17:18:00.000+01:00This is a nightmare problem to resolve. We can't ...This is a nightmare problem to resolve. We can't continue to have so few women in Parliament, and leaving things as they were and making general 'we need more women' noises clearly wasn't working (I was involved in selecting a candidate for a safe seat a few years ago, and a couple of older female members told me at the final selection meeting that they didn't think a female candidate would be a good idea).<BR/><BR/>However, if I were looking to secure a seat, I certainly wouldn't want to be there for any reason other than that I was the best available person. <BR/><BR/>Given greater numbers of women have been selected in recent months, I am a bit disappointed that CCHQ are intervening in this way at this stage.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156176442548783542006-08-21T17:07:00.000+01:002006-08-21T17:07:00.000+01:00Oh Verity, Verity, Verity. Have they let you out o...Oh Verity, Verity, Verity. Have they let you out of your room again? Given you access to a computer? They should know better. But I'm sure Nick Griffin will welcome you with open arms. Do you have a release date?The Daily Pundithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10897210727324532431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156173955063073002006-08-21T16:25:00.000+01:002006-08-21T16:25:00.000+01:00Of all the issues that Cameron could be concentrat...Of all the issues that Cameron could be concentrating on, crime,economy,immigration,Iraq, sleaze ad infinitum, he foists this on the public. Along with his 'hug a hoodie' nonsense this f...king idiot has shown just how out of touch he is. A total f...king idiot who will ensure Brown will reign for years to come.<BR/>Get real Cameron...the real people deserve a leader in touch with reality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156172843981468492006-08-21T16:07:00.000+01:002006-08-21T16:07:00.000+01:00Sorry Iain I didn't get past your statement "Let's...Sorry Iain I didn't get past your statement "Let's address the positives first. Nearly one third of candidates already selected are women . ."<BR/><BR/>What's good news about that unless they're good candidates? Oh, I see, they're women and will appeal to . . . who exactly? Anecdote, of course, but no-one I've ever met <I>seriously</I> cares tuppence about "more" women as candidates. Anyone who is remotely interested considers the model for this nonsense - the "Blair Babes" - as the worst thing that's happened to representative democracy since the Test Acts. What "real people" care about (and are appalled by) are the limp "I can spend as much as you" non-policies of Messrs Cameron and Maude: the policies they just will not vote for - even if every Tory candidate is a woman.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156171674014278282006-08-21T15:47:00.000+01:002006-08-21T15:47:00.000+01:00When will the Tory 'elite' realise that what they ...When will the Tory 'elite' realise that what they think doesn't count?<BR/><BR/>What counts is the number of 'X's against their candidates name!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1156170034225636202006-08-21T15:20:00.000+01:002006-08-21T15:20:00.000+01:00Good post by Raincoaster. Dave is stewwwwwwwwwpid...Good post by Raincoaster. Dave is <I>stewwwwwwwwwpid.</I> I'd love to see his academic record.<BR/><BR/>bt - Don't apologise for the length of your post. That was an excellent argument.<BR/><BR/>jonathan m scott says: "The low numbers of women selected by Associations was simply unacceptable...". To whom, Mr Scott? And why? Please articulate your thoughts. I ask because I find that people who state emphatically "this just isn't acceptable" can never tell you why. They think they've won the argument by adopting the lofty tone. <BR/><BR/>They're making the Conservative Party into a dog's breakfast, an empty melange of nothingness. Can't we just concentrate on getting qualified, driven, clever, driven people to stand?<BR/><BR/>Dave makes Tony Blair look shy and unwilling to push himself forward.<BR/><BR/>northern soul boy - Wise words. Yes, most of the social problems are down to no mother at home. This is how life is; not how Dave and Frances perceive it from the peak. Children need their mothers in the house.<BR/><BR/>Another point, any women who get shoved to the top of the queue are women who weren't committed or driven enough to get there themselves. Margaret Thatcher, Viginia Bottomly, Edwina Currie, Ann Widdecomb didn't receive preferential treatment. They fought for their place and prevailed.<BR/><BR/>How are the rest of the Tory MPs going to regard these Prom Princesses being chauffered in, I wonder? My guess: with contempt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com