Ann Widdecombe has recently criticised David Cameron's selection process for Tory candidates, saying that it will lead to a Conservative government full of "second-class citizens". She’s concerned about older politicians who lost their seats in 1997 being passed over in favour of new, first-time candidates, and seems to think that selecting a more diverse range of candidates is primarily a tick-box exercise.
Now, Labour as a parliamentary party could probably be more diverse in terms of age, gender and ethnic origin, but at least we’re trying. All-women shortlists have contributed substantially to the growth of women’s representation within the Labour Party, while the Tories languish well behind. Women making up only 8.8% of Conservative MPs, compared to 27% of Labour and 14.3% of Lib Dem MPs. Discussions around ethnic minority shortlists illustrate how seriously our party takes increasing diversity.
Widdecombe’s assertion that she’d like more women and ethnic minority Tory candidates, as long as they get there on merit alone, is fundamentally flawed. In any sphere of public life dominated by older, white, ABC1 males, it’s going to be harder to come forward as a potential candidate if you don’t fit into that narrow category. Women aren’t so hard to find on the Tory benches because they’re less good than the men, but because they often don’t have the confidence or the opportunity to put themselves forward in the first place. As for Davey C’s efforts to attract more new PPCs, why not?
So, you could vote for the Tories, a substantial number of whom think, apparently, that their non-middle-class white male candidates are mainly for show. Or, you know, you could vote for a party who believes that your ability to be an MP and represent your fellow citizens doesn’t depend on various biological details. Now there's something to think about.