Let best person possible stand for election

editorial image
Share this article
0
Have your say

I see the question of all-women shortlists for Conservative candidates at the next general election has been mooted.

Shame! It was bad enough (and you could argue illegal) when 
Labour started this noxious 
practice. It would be a real 
backwards step if it spread, like measles, to the Conservatives.

Those who select party candidates should look for people with the ability to do the job, and not based on their gender, sexual orientation or ethnic background. It just seems so obvious to me.

Do you remember a little while back when two top television sports reporters were sacked for making on-air some disobliging remarks about the ability of women to understand the offside rule? That all seems a very minor peccadillo compared with the idea of all-women shortlists. If you or I say anything regarded as “sexist”, we are likely to be in trouble. Yet the politicians who devise these ill-judged laws, are happy to breach them with impunity because it suits their warped ideologies. In short, it is a gross insult to women to suggest they need a leg-up to compete with men in this area. Margaret Thatcher would have none of it.

And today you can be sure that Anne Widdecombe would come out hot and strong against the idea.

Why do some politicians have such a poor opinion of women? This idea should be stamped out 
before it takes root.

It is beyond belief that the Church of England should continue to invest in Wonga after this pay-day loan company has been caught sending bogus and threatening 
letters to those they regard as 
defaulters from their excessive 
interest charges.

The Daily Mail summed it up superbly: “How can an institution that smugly shuns investment in defence companies see nothing wrong with backing a firm that demands extortionate interest rates from Britain’s poorest? A firm, moreover, that sends its customers threatening letters from fictitious solicitors – and then charges for them?” The laughable Church’s Ethical Investment Advisory Group has come up with spurious and pathetic excuses for continuing their admittedly small investment.

How can we be expected to take seriously the pious platitudes that emanate from the mouths of Anglican clergy, from top to bottom, when we know that this goes on? Quite frankly, it beggars belief.