All women short-lists?

Fact: open primary selections run by the Conservative party have a 100% track record of selecting women candidates.

It is not that open primaries have proved insufficient.  We've just not used them enough.

In fact, we've only used open primaries the one time - in Totnes.  And a first class woman GP candidate was selected.

As I never tire of pointing out - and for good reason it would now seem - every other selection contest run in every other constituency has either been an open or a closed caucus.  Primaries involve everyone. Caucuses are a self-selecting meeting.  It's the outcome, not merely the process, that is different.

Go figure.

UPDATE: Wasn't Bracknell a primary, ask some readers?  No.  It was a caucus. An open caucus, perhaps.  But most certainly a caucus and not a primary.  Read here for more on the difference.

Posted on 21 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell

Comments

I don't think there should be all women short lists. Women should stand on merits alone. If there is a problem of attitudes towards women which leads to non selection then I would say it's the attitude that needs changing, not short lists.

As an aside, I have found many women MPs to be completely unsympathetic and sometimes openly hostile towards women such as myself who have chosen home, family and community before a career. It seems they see women like me as an insult. We are often viewed as nothing more than parasites. Now that's an attitude I'd like changing!

Posted on 21 October 2009 14:19 by OrganisedPauper

I don't think there should be all women short lists. Women should stand on merits alone. If there is a problem of attitudes towards women which leads to non selection then I would say it's the attitude that needs changing, not short lists.

As an aside, I have found many women MPs to be completely unsympathetic and sometimes openly hostile towards women such as myself who have chosen home, family and community before a career. It seems they see women like me as an insult and we are often viewed as nothing more than parasites. Now that's an attitude I'd like changing!

Posted on 21 October 2009 14:22 by OrganisedPauper

Um... Wasn't Bracknell an open primary, Douglas? And whilst Iain Dale wasn't selected, I think that a man (another GP-go figure) was.

Having said that, the idea of all-women shortlists is both barking and unpleasant.

DK

Posted on 21 October 2009 14:32 by Devil's Kitchen

There are undoubtedly many women who could do a damn better job of running the country than men. But what if they don't want to stand? What if they have come to the conclusion that being an MP is a thoroughly dishonourable profession and they would rather do something more useful with their lives?

Are we supposed to accept a poor quality female candidate over a good quality male just to satisfy some gender equality target?

Posted on 21 October 2009 15:00 by Don't Cal Me Dave

Wasn't Bracknell an open primary? And they selected a bloke...

Posted on 21 October 2009 15:32 by George

I was rather hoping you'd point this out Douglas. I wasn't really ever in any danger of being disappointed.

Posted on 21 October 2009 16:11 by Adam

There was an open primary in my constituency. It chose a woman. Unfortunately, she's in favour of UK membership of the euro and was once Ken Clarke's bag carrier. Quite how a raving europhile will restore authority to the House Of Commons is not immediately clear to me.

Posted on 21 October 2009 16:30 by PlanFan

(My mistake: we had an open caucus, infiltrated perhaps by Labour mischief makers who delighted in inflicting a europhile on us.)

Posted on 21 October 2009 17:23 by PlanFan

As a woman I find the idea of all women short lists pretty appalling. Merit only shortlists sounds good to be. My own experience with women MPs is much as Organised Pauper describes; they are more against the rights of families, mother's choice to stay home (or father) and certainly don't seem to like children much.
I haven't decided where to put my vote yet.
The fact that the Tory's are supportive of Home Ed is good and I would be even more persuaded if it is true that you would rid us of the Children's Commissioner..
But these stunts of women lists and other PC stuff puts me right off.

Posted on 21 October 2009 17:26 by Shell

I agree with you entirely. Even said the same on Iain Dale's blog, earlier. 'All-anything' forced shortlists are a disgrace and should be banned in a democracy.

One either supports 'the will of the people' or one does not. How is it possible, after all, to IMPOSE 'the will of the people' by outside force?

Posted on 21 October 2009 17:43 by Elliot Kane

Caucuses and selection panels are made of people with an unusually high interest in politics. Such people may tend to favour male candidates. The general public has a broader outlook.

Open primaries are the answer because the problem lies with the selection panel(or caucus)- not the candidates list.

Posted on 21 October 2009 19:13 by Deborah

Nick Robinson said on "Daily Politics" that Cameron is looking for a Clause 4 type fight with his grassroots to increase his wider appeal, so he is pleased people are protesting, especially as they intend to have very few all women shortlists indeed.

Interesting to read of women MPs being so unsympathetic. Are those doctrinaire Labour MPs?

Posted on 21 October 2009 19:24 by John Page

There was stuff tonight on Anglia News about the defeated conservative candidate for mayor of Bedford, and an "open primary" held to choose the candidate. An Asian was selected. There were accusations, tho, that he packed the meeting, and that he was voted in by people who didn't even speak English but voted for their tribal candidate.

This may be the first problematic primary.

Posted on 21 October 2009 20:11 by Roger Pearse

In regards to the "its all a vote winner theory"

Although it looks good initially, thge fact that the grass roots have fought back now means if Cam DOESNT use the AWS heavily, it will appear he has been beaten by sexist reactionary tory toffs.
Or thats certainly what the Grauniad will say

If he goes on to use AWS heavily next year, these women will find themselves at war with their ward branches.
He can run 600 women candidates, but if none of them have on the ground door knockers, they'll be eaten alive.

What if UKIP get their act together and make candidate selection a decision of the wards?
Will we see mass defections?

Again and again I have to ask what the hell is Cam playing at.

Posted on 21 October 2009 20:38 by DominicJ

Roger Pearse:

1. It was not a primary. Not a primary. Again, not a primary. It was a caucus

2. Do read Iain Dale's account.

Posted on 21 October 2009 20:44 by Douglas Carswell

What concerns me as much as this policy - a failure under NuLab as everyone knows - is what other silly ideas Cameron has got up his sleeve which will gradually drain away the "natural" Tory vote towards the minor parties before next May.

Posted on 22 October 2009 11:58 by Mike Spilligan

Make A Comment