Meritocracy V 'Positive Discrimination'

[Chekhov]

43 minutes ago, RJRB said:

So there was direction as a matter of policy from on high.

Why keep squirming?

I am not squirming, there is every difference in the world between a recommendation from on high (that the local party can ignore) and, for example, being forced to have an all female short list. It baffles me how anyone can defend the latter, it really does. More to the point, it is not necessary, as the present Tory leadership campaign proves.....

But the indisputable fact is that both Thatcher and Theresa May became female PMs without any "positive" discrimination, and the fact that all 5 of the remaining Tory leadership hopefuls are either women or from an ethnic minority is NOT down to any artificial "all women or ethnic minority" short list.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Chekhov

[RJRB]

40 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

I am not squirming, there is every difference in the world between a recommendation from on high (that the local party can ignore) and, for example, being forced to have an all female short list. It baffles me how anyone can defend the latter, it really does. More to the point, it is not necessary, as the present Tory leadership campaign proves.....

But the indisputable fact is that both Thatcher and Theresa May became female PMs without any "positive" discrimination, and the fact that all 5 of the remaining Tory leadership hopefuls are either women or from an ethnic minority is NOT down to any artificial "all women or ethnic minority" short list.

OK so going back to your original point of the current 220 women MPs 104 are labour and 87 are Conservative.

Of the 65 ethnic minority Members 41 are Labour and 22 are Conservative.

To deny that “positive” discrimination is prevalent across the political divide and also all public and Civil services is laughable.

The social make up of the U.K. electorate has changed dramatically and savvy political leaders react accordingly.

[Tyke02]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

... the fact that all 5 of the remaining Tory leadership hopefuls are either women or from an ethnic minority is NOT down to any artificial "all women or ethnic minority" short list.

Truss was elected in 2010 - of the many "outsiders" about whom recommendations to constituencies were made centrally in that election. She probably wouldn't have been in a position to seek the leadership if she hadn't had that helping hand of positive discrimination aimed at bring in MPs who would be more attractive to the electorate than the reactionary rump of the party.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

On 18/07/2022 at 20:44, Chekhov said:

 

So, we now know that the next PM will be either a woman, or a member of an ethnic minority, or, possibly, both.

 

 

We now know that it will be one or the other.

Yet neither category has ever led the Labour Party.

[Chekhov]

On 19/07/2022 at 14:16, Tyke02 said:

Truss was elected in 2010 - of the many "outsiders" about whom recommendations to constituencies were made centrally in that election. She probably wouldn't have been in a position to seek the leadership if she hadn't had that helping hand of positive discrimination.

What evidence have you got for that sweeping statement ?

And that cannot have helped Thatcher or Theresa May, so why are you so sure Lizz Truss would not get any where without this patronising discrimination ?

 

On 19/07/2022 at 14:16, Tyke02 said:

reactionary rump of the [Tory] party.

How can that be trues when, at the start of this, the top  places (in the members poll) were taken by women or ethnic minority candidates for the Tory leadership.

Again, you come out with sweeping statements with no evidence for them whatsoever.

Edited July 21, 2022 by Chekhov

[Tyke02]

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

What evidence have you got for that sweeping statement ?

As I said, she was one of those selected centrally by the Conservatives to be recommended for adoption by constituencies, because she was thought to be more attractive to voters than the usual suspects. Without that she would have been just another wannabe outsider. Is that so  hard to understand?

 

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

How can that be trues when, at the start of this, the top  places (in the members poll) were taken by women or ethnic minority candidates for the Tory leadership.

That's a reference to a quote from Michael Portillo in 2006.

 

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

Again, you come out with sweeping statements with no evidence for them whatsoever.

You clearly didn't read the Wikipedia link already posted by sibon that provides the evidence for these comments. 

Edited July 21, 2022 by Tyke02

[Mr Bloke]

12 minutes ago, Tyke02 said:

You clearly didn't read the Wikipedia link already posted by Sibon that provides the evidence for these comments. 

Hmmm...

To be fair, I'm not sure that anyone should be reading any link that Mr Sibon has provided recently!

[Guest sibon]

14 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Hmmm...

To be fair, I'm not sure that anyone should be reading any link that Mr Sibon has provided recently!

I’m insulted.

 

But not bitter. To show that there are no hard feelings, I did a Google and found you this recipe:

 

https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/classic-jacket-potatoes

 

[Mr Bloke]

20 minutes ago, sibon said:

I’m insulted.

 

But not bitter. To show that there are no hard feelings, I did a Google and found you this recipe:

 

https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/classic-jacket-potatoes

 

Hmmm...

I think it's probably best if I don't ask what it was you were searching for!

[Chekhov]

12 hours ago, Tyke02 said:

As I said, she was one of those selected centrally by the Conservatives to be recommended for adoption by constituencies, because she was thought to be more attractive to voters than the usual suspects. Without that she would have been just another wannabe outsider. Is that so  hard to understand?

 

That's a reference to a quote from Michael Portillo in 2006.

 

You clearly didn't read the Wikipedia link already posted by sibon that provides the evidence for these comments. 

You are talking rubbish, but let's explode the last point :

 

You clearly didn't read the Wikipedia link already posted by Sibon that provides the evidence for these comments.

 

Which was :

 

Conservative chairmen and activists in seats considered potentially winnable were in the run-up to the 2010 election urged by Conservative Central Office to select candidates from the new A-list and were in many cases included in open primaries, new and preferred open-to-all selection meetings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_A-List

 

On the other hand what Labour were doing is, apparently, now illegal (as it should be because it is discriminatory) :

 

After Labour was warned that continuing with all-women shortlists for parliamentary elections would become an "unlawful" practice again under the Equality Act, 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-women_shortlist#Impact

 

Tyke02 : "Don't confuse me with the facts"