Harriet Harman is off again

[ger147]

The Tour de France is a commercial enterprise and it's primary purpose is to make money for everyone involved. It is not to give male cyclists the opportunity to express themselves through the medium of cycling, to promote healthy living and exercise through cycling or provide a platform for the best male cyclists in the world to display to compete to find the ultimate cyclist. It's to make money, and if it didn't make money it wouldn't take place.

I'm sure if Harriet wants to bank roll a Tour de France for women then one could be organised. If not, she should shut up about things that don't concern her and get on with representing her constituents. I very much doubt that the subject of a Tour de France for women has been a hot topic at any of her recent constituency surgeries.

 

[stevie_r]

Do you think 1 in 5 represents a meritocracy?

It represents a fair result given that only 21% of the candidates that stood for election last time round were women.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I quite like Harriet, she has a bit of a brain on her and a mind of her own.

Not your normal rent a quote politician.

I think history will be kind to her.

I do to. I get the impression that for some - as soon as she opens her mouth then what she is saying is leftie rubbish. But actually she is usually expresses a concern held by a significant section of our population suppoerted by a reasoned and thought-through argument - and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Indeed - this time 70,000 have signed a petition asking for a women's race. That's a lot of petitioners. She is giving senior politial voice to that wish. A good and resoponsible thing.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Somehow quoting female models and porn stars has not really helped your argument.
Was that the first thing you thought of?

^^^This - depressingly cynical comments from @Ethan there I'm afraid

 

[cookelad]

If someone sat in his or her château thinks that putting on a female TdF will create more income than the value of the effort it takes to stage it, THEN it will happen not because an English (as loved as we are in France) politician thinks it should!

 

[FairwayDodger]

It represents a fair result given that only 21% of the candidates that stood for election last time round were women.

EXACTLY!

So the problem isn't with the electorate, it's with the candidate selection process.

 

[ger147]

I do to. I get the impression that for some - as soon as she opens her mouth then what she is saying is leftie rubbish. But actually she is usually expresses a concern held by a significant section of our population suppoerted by a reasoned and thought-through argument - and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Indeed - this time 70,000 have signed a petition asking for a women's race. That's a lot of petitioners. She is giving senior politial voice to that wish. A good and resoponsible thing.

Are all the folk who signed the petition willing to pay their share to make sure it takes place? I doubt it...

 

[Ethan]

I think she's one of the few conviction politicians we have and an absolute shining light amongst the dross in parliament. She obviously feels strongly about the inequities women face in our patriarchal society and has decided to stand up and speak out against it knowing full well the level of abuse and ridicule she will take from misogynists everywhere.

Lots of hatred of all-female selection lists and no comment whatsoever on the fact that only 1 in 5 MPs is female. They may be a crude approach to tackling this problem but how else can this be addressed? Actually don't answer; I'm sure most of you already think there are too many female MPs.

She isn't a conviction politician. She is someone using a particular issue to advance her career.

All female selection lists are used cynically when Labour wants to force in a pro-Union or pro-Progress (modern wing of Labour) insider. Otherwise, they do not use lists, such as when they want a safe seat for a fool like Dromey, aka Mr Harman.

You are being taken for a ride if you think Harman is a genuine champion for women.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Are all the folk who signed the petition willing to pay their share to make sure it takes place? I doubt it...

What's cost got to do with it. If the TdF comes back and says that the reason it's not holding a womens race is the cost of it then you deal with that when it arises. But first you ask the question.

 

[ger147]

What's cost got to do with it. If the TdF comes back and says that the reason it's not holding a womens race is the cost of it then you deal with that when it arises. But first you ask the question.

It's already been stated that the reason is cost...

 

[stevie_r]

EXACTLY!

So the problem isn't with the electorate, it's with the candidate selection process.

You are making a massive assumption there that if the selection process was somehow fairer for women then 50% of candidates would be women. It aint necessarily so

 

[Foxholer]

EXACTLY!

So the problem isn't with the electorate, it's with the candidate selection process.

Er. Perhaps more to do with the Candidates for Selection.

Changing the Candidate Selection Process seems a bit like corruption to me! And a policy of All-Women Shortlists certainly is imo! And it broke the law too!

 

[FairwayDodger]

Er. Perhaps more to do with the Candidates for Selection.

Changing the Candidate Selection Process seems a bit like corruption to me! And a policy of All-Women Shortlists certainly is imo!

The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....

 

[stevie_r]

The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....

So if the selection process puts forward 4 men for every woman I'm going to make the fairly safe assumption that 4 times as many men wish to enter the process; unless of course you have evidence to the contrary.

 

[Ethan]

The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....

Perhaps more women have the good sense, or ethical reasons, not to get involved in politics?

 

[ger147]

If she cares about women's cycling so much:

1) Why is she not pushing for a grand tour for women in the UK instead of expecting a private company in a foreign country to stage one for British female cyclists to take part in?
2) As a senior cabinet minister at the time, where was she in 2009 when the last female Tour de France equivalent was held in 2009 - 3 stages due to be held in the UK were cancelled due to a lack of funding. I don't remember her stepping in back then?

 

[Foxholer]

The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....

I'm certainly happy to acknowledge it as an issue. But not as a travesty.

Do you have the figures for the ratio of candidates put forward for Candidate Selection though. I don't, but I'd suggest it's pretty much the same ratio! So getting more (capable) women to put themselves for candidates should be the aim. Work from the ground up, not just the top down.

Btw. From what I understand - and it's hearsay only - there is considerable resistance in the NHS for equality in the Nursing field - in the other direction of course!

 

[chrisd]

Do you think 1 in 5 represents a meritocracy?

I'm not in the least bit concerned whether 1 in 5 in favour of men or women or any other variation, I just want the best person available for the job!

Positive discrimination is still discrimination to me

 

[Ethan]

I'm certainly happy to acknowledge it as an issue. But not as a travesty.

Do you have the figures for the ratio of candidates put forward for Candidate Selection though. I don't, but I'd suggest it's pretty much the same ratio! So getting more (capable) women to put themselves for candidates should be the aim. Work from the ground up, not just the top down.

Btw. From what I understand - and it's hearsay only - there is considerable resistance in the NHS for equality in the Nursing field - in the other direction of course!

FD is confusing equality and equity. People often do. If the ratio of candidates who are put forward is 1:4, then the current system is equitable. Equality is not necessarily a desirable outcome. Harman certainly doesn't believe in it with regard to the rights of divorced fathers.

 

[FairwayDodger]

I'm certainly happy to acknowledge it as an issue. But not as a travesty.

Of course not, but imagine the next parliament only had 20% men; you wouldn't be happy!

Do you have the figures for the ratio of candidates put forward for Candidate Selection though. I don't, but I'd suggest it's pretty much the same ratio! So getting more (capable) women to put themselves for candidates should be the aim. Work from the ground up, not just the top down.

No I don't either, would be interesting to see these. I do agree the reasons for the lack of women in parliament goes beyond sexism in the selection process.