Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Conservatives Advertise for Website Editor & Women's Officer

ConservativeHome reports that the Conservative Party is advertising for someone to work at the Conservatives.com website editor. The job is advertised HERE and there's a fairly detailed job description. Having just appointed a new internet guru, Sam Roake from Google, the Party is obviously taking new media very seriously. And rightly so. However, you do have to question the salary for the website editor, which is advertised as £22k. Political parties never offer huge salaries but this does seem very low for what I would see as one of the key campaigning jobs at CCHQ.

The Party is also advertising (See HERE) for a Wimmin's Women's Officer, which will no doubt provoke predictable howls of outrage from Retired Colonel Sir Ainsley Willingham-Hardthroat and his ilk. This is a highly sensible move. If we are to win next time it is the women's vote which will help us do so. Far more women have moved away from the Conservatives in the last twenty years than men. It's amazing that the Party hasn't had a dedicated women's campaigner at CCHQ before now.


Anonymous said...

What's that? Women have the vote?!

Anonymous said...

The one thing that continues to make me smile about the new look super soaraway lightning conservative party of the modern age, is how very backward and out of date you all are.
This is why you are on the subs bench of politics.
You can berate me if you like but I have lived through the Tory maladministration and survived by the skin of my teeth.
So listen up.

Your news flash headlines:

'Woman selected form 'A' list
Black man selected from'A' list.
'Womans officer' wanted.
'fathers should be present at birth'.
'Men should take more part in childcare'.
'plant trees'
'solar panels'
I could go on...

The Labour party did this 25 years ago. Every single one of these issues.
Your very language coming out of Central office, is laughable to me.
You lot go on about Alistar Campbell and yet my guess is that he just shakes his head in disbelief (perhaps not).

Is it any wonder that Dave looks out of place in the Tory party compared to Colonel Deepthroat?

It's a game to you Tories, go on admit it.You don't really mean it. When you do and you find no objections to anything regarding social wellbeing of neighbours, then maybe, just maybe that person or persons may be eligible for election.


Anonymous said...

I didn't Parachute in to the ardennes for that, next thing we know some oik will be foisting a female PM on us. Bring back hanging

Serf said...

Its is rather low isn't it. Steve Hilton earns that in an afternoon.

Croydonian said...

Choosing 1981 as Labour's Annus Mirabilis is not one of your smarter moves Gary. Anyone else remember Labour under Foot and the formation of the SDP in a reaction to Labour's extremism?

Anonymous said...

Gary says the Tories might be "eligible for election"...we will let the people judge that shall we? You survived the Tories by the skin of your teeth? You might not survive the next time, you will be a VERY OLD man by the time we have finished. I wouldn't berate you...I pity you.

Anonymous said...

CF could do with borrowing CCHQ's IT and web people for a day or two... They clearly need help in those departments.

Do you think CCHQ would be that generous?

Jonathan Sheppard said...

Gary gary gary - 25 years ago your party was well on the way to getting a good thumping at the general election coming up in a couple of years. Now who was leader in 1983?

Anonymous said...

I can't agree with Iain that looking for a women's officer is a good move. It's negative and backward. The message is, "there are normal people (who don't need a special representative) known as "men". Then there is a subspecies called "women". We have to study them very carefully."

As a woman, I find this attitude so disconnected, patronising and negative that it would persuade me to think twice about voting Tory.

Good grief! Don't any of you men live with women and girls? Weren't you brought up by a mother? I find the suggestion that we are alien and apart from "normal" people (men) laughable.

Andrew Young said...


You forgot to mention CF are looking for Copywriters. (More info here - http://www.w4mp.org/html/personnel/jobs/disp_job.asp?ref=3284)

The pay is a bit less than even the Web Editor job, in fact a whole lot less (a VERY round number) BUT we would love to hear from any budding young writers (Under 30s) who fancy themselves as the next Michael Gove.

Helen said...

The reason the Conservative Party did not need a Women's Officer before is very simple: the party managed to appeal to women voters by its policies, had a large number of dedicated women activists; and a proportionately high number of women MPs. Whatever happened to all of that?

Bob Piper said...

I don't think people should be too hard on gary elsby-stoke-on-trent. His actual point was that Labour did these things in opposition to try to make themselves electable. The fact that it still took such a long time is testimony to the amount of work the Tories have got to do, and how far they have got to go to try to overturn what is still a sizeable majority that Labour have over the Conservatives, albeit that very few votes need to change their position. I think Cameron's attempts to appeal to women voters are clever, and the realisation that the internet will likely play a greater part in elections may also be spot on (although no substitute for treading the pavements). The problem the likes of Oakeshott have is just bitterness I suspect. When the next election rolls around in 3 or 4 years, no-one knows what the political landscape will look like, and his predictions are ... just that. Fortune tellers don't win the lottery though.

Anonymous said...

The early 1980's was a very turbulent time for Labour. The security service earned their pay during that time and the Conservatives were declared a safer option for those in the shadowlands.

Today, major Union involment at grass roots level is minimal and feminism is having a rest.

Equality is the new word along with equality of opportunity which is very much the new kid in town.

One of my favourite hobbies is Tory watching. I see quite a lot and most of it is best not mentioned in public. However, I do like to upset as many Tories as I can before breakfast each day.

As I see it, you Tories like to select freemasons as your 'A' list candidates. You aren't much for women, as they should be seen and not heard.By all accounts, not seen either.
A black man is a novelty.
Huskie hugging? Trust me I know,that is equivalent to Foot's donkey jacket.again, trust me, wait until election day.

So get real. Come and live in the real world and accept that Labour is here to stay forever because we treat everyone equally.

You ruled the 20th Century and we will rule the 21st. To lose would mean an end to equality. In your minds, the electorate can't wait to do just that.
Get real. The Notting Hill set is a last grasp of a dying man.
Dave has headlines written all over him but I'll give him his due, we pasted him up here in 97 and he's going to get another one from us when the time comes because you lot are dino's and he is out of place.


The Daily Pundit said...

Andrew Young. You don't need to pay copywriters. Just stick a little c in a circle and it's all legal and above board. Hope that helps.©

Ellee Seymour said...

The pay is a pittance and will not attract quality applicants. Let's hope the Women's post offers more. What about a similar post to get our youth involved?

Anonymous said...

Ellee Seymour says "let's hope the women's post offers more". Let's not.

I do not want some busybody justifying her salary with endless ideas for "women's programmes" and "women's agendas" and a stream of other leftist, nitpicking, intering garbage.

This idea should be killed at birth and binned. Women will absolutely hate it. Appeal to us with your policies for the country and we will vote for you. You patronising morons.

This move tells me how creakingly out of touch the Tories are.

- Anonymousette