Are Dave's Dolls any better than Blair's Babes?


When the group was first formed, I wholeheartedly supported Women2Win’s basic aim: to encourage more women to enter politics for the Conservative Party. I still do support them BUT, what I’m hearing, isn’t encouraging!

Yes, there are some highly talented women in W2W and some of them have already been selected for safe and marginal constituencies. Jane Ellison (Battersea), Harriet Baldwin (West Worcestershire) and Laura Sandys (Thanet South) are just three such shining examples.

But other women, often wannabe candidates, meet every other week in expensive bars, the kind of places where a small glass of chardonnay will knock you back ten quid! They bitch, plot and expect everything to be served on a plate – preferably by David Cameron himself. They don’t want to get their hands dirty with ordinary constituency campaigning, swallow every eye-catching initative from CCHQ and, more often than not, their knowledge of Plato is non-existent.

Most of the them are aged between 25 and 45, have rich husbands or partners and see politics and the Conservative Party as a “fun hobby”. I know of one young woman, who seriously lacks people skills and political nous, who has been short-listed for a very winnable seat. What the devil is going on?

After almost 10 years of listening and watching Blair’s Brain-Dead Babes in the Chamber, could Dave’s Dishy Dolls be even worse? The jury’s out.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Better "Dave's Dolls" than Ming's Mingers! Remember that goddawful cow they had that got kicked out _ went off to run and ruin the RSPCA with all her multi-culti and PC crap

Matt Davis said...

You'll no doubt be accused of bitchiness or sexism or something for this post Justin but you are bang on the nail with it, couldn't agree with you more. To my certain knowledge there is one of Dave's Debs who at the last GE got the worst possible report from both her Assoc and from the relevent area team but is still shortlisted for a safe seat purely because she put a lot of effort, not into campaigning, but into smoozing W2W and its' leading lights.

David Allen said...

Does anyone know if W2W have any kind of 'quality control'? It seems silly to back just any woman simply because of her gender _ this will only tend to over-promote people who should get thinned out through the natural selection process of grassroots constituency activism and the rounds of candidate interviews. A prospective candidate needs to be able to lead a team in their area, which means having credibility. That credibility comes from having themselves done (in the past, in other areas perhaps) all the things they will call upon their team to do: delivering the leaflets, knocking on doors, making those calls, writing the letters to the press, producing the In Touches, having stood in lesser elections. I'm not suggesting that those experiences are SUFFICIENT qualifications to be chosen _ but they should be regarded as NECESSARY. Nowadays, many activists choosing a parliamentary candidate could be forgiven for thinking that the person in front of them is there simply because they attend the right cocktail parties and have the right sex chromosomes.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Hinchcliffe,

I am in total agreement about what you have written here. I am from South London and I have attended one of their 'networking' functions and I can honestly say that a lot of the women are just as you described, rich in their late 30's to mid 40's. These women some of whom are incredbily condescending. I met one recently from North London who completely blanked me when I told her that I worked in the NHS.

This woman I believe wants to get selected in Haringay I think she's called Jill, apparently she has a selection coming up in Colchester as well. Clearly her agenda is about promoting her ego. I know some of the Conservative activists in Haringay (sorry Justin - I've never met you -perhaps we can do lunch sometime)and they have never even heard of her. How can someone who has no experience of working within a particular community and has extremely poor people skills expect to become an MP there? It's an insult to really dedicated people like lydia Rivlin, Catriona Mackenzie, Tom Mason and Eric Lattimore.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Newmania said...

I `m highly interested in this post Justin which is quite a controversial one I `d have thought. There are obvious problems with a quota and I have always been suspicious as you would expect but coming from you I now fear the worst. There has always been something about women and there careers which is a bit hard to take in all jobs . They do seem to have a tendency to take themselves absurdly seriously the moment they have some role or other and in politics that is an ever present problem to start with

Fascinating


(Whats the thing about Plato all about you`ve lost me there. I know alittle about Plato ..hope that gets me in the club whatever it is )

Newmania said...

rich husbands or partners

Like a Doctor or something you mean?........arf arf

Ellee said...

There's Vicky Ford, Andrea Leasdom and Pritti Patel too, not sure if they have rich husbands. I think the cost of standing as a candidate is so exhorbitant, whether you are male or female, it is going to cost several grand. I simply don't know how women manage it when they have a young family too. There is no way I would want to send my kids off to boarding school.

mutleythedog said...

Yes - they all seem to be rich professionals, which doesn't seem that different to me to the male candidates - other than the not so very important obvious.

Anonymous said...

I hear that this post was cited on 18DS last night _ hitting the big time hunter!

Newmania said...

Wonder if I helped a bit

Justin Hinchcliffe said...

What did you do, Mr N?

David Allen said...

Well, Newmania certainly helped raise the decibel level on this subject by publicising your post and posting himself on the same subject.....

mens sana said...

Nothing wrong with being between 35 and 45 is there? And nothing inherently wrong with being a woman? And the truth is that being a candidate costs money so either they or their husbands are quite likely to be well off.

Women shouldn't be discriminated against or for-associations should choose the best candidates for them regardless. That is not what went on with the A-List, and is not what W2W want.

To that extent you are right. The rest of your post is quasi-socialist rubbish!

mens sana said...

maybe I was a bit harsh, but look at the number of mediocre men in parliament and on the candidates list, some of whom get shortlisted for winnable seats. I'm sure many women were overpromoted to the A-list, but I dont think many if any have been selected for winnable seats, so the point is that despite CCO and W2Ws best efforts the associations are doing their job as they see fit.