I have already dealt with the right hon. Gentleman, who has not been in the Chamber for the whole debate.
Why will the Labour party not allow people to be selected simply on merit? As Labour seems to need all-women shortlists, it must mean either that the party picks women who are not the best candidates or that the local Labour party is full of people who are so sexist that they would not select a woman even if she was clearly the best candidate. When the Solicitor-General sums up, perhaps she will explain which it is. Given that we Conservatives elected a woman leader of our party 34 years ago, we shall take no lectures from Labour. Indeed, Margaret Thatcher said:""I owe nothing to Women's lib.""
What the public think of all-women shortlists is clear. One only has to look at what happened in Blaenau Gwent. One of the safest Labour seats was lost because of the party's politically correct obsession with all-women shortlists, yet Labour still continues to ignore public opinion and press on with them. My question to all those Labour Members who say, "It's so important that we have more women in Parliament" is: will they support Conservative women candidates who stand against Labour men in marginal seats? If it is so important to have more women in Parliament, come what may, I might presume that they would. However, I suspect that they will not, because deep down they know that people's views are more important than their gender. I also want to know how many of those male MPs who bang on about wanting there to be more women MPs did so before they were elected to Parliament themselves. Frankly, I would have much more respect for many of them if they offered to give up their seat so that a woman could replace them, but of course very few of them ever do that.
Many other measures in the Bill are either revolting or ridiculous; I do not have time to go through all of them now. However, there is one marvellous thing in the Bill that I must commend. Page E9 of the explanatory notes, which is about direct discrimination, says that "racial segregation is always" wrong. I could not agree more. I hope that that will lead to the Government making sure that people who come to this country integrate into a British way of life. I hope that it will mean an end to organisations such as the Black Police Associations, to competitions just for ethnic minorities such as the decibel Penguin prize, and to information being published in dozens of languages.
It is not often that I quote Edwina Currie, but she summed up my attitude perfectly well when she wrote in the Daily Mail:""Has she"—"
that is, the Leader of the House—""noticed, in her little Westminster cocoon, how many small companies, strangled by this Government's obsession with red tape, are going bust; how many ordinary men and women are losing their jobs; how many individual bankruptcies have been declared; how many homes repossessed?""And she's wittering on about equality?""Predictably, her fellow feminists have lined up to offer their support. In The Guardian, the headline for Polly Toynbee's column trumpeted 'Harman's Law is Labour's biggest idea in 11 years'—which just about sums up this miserable administration.""
I could not have put it better myself.
Equality Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Philip Davies
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 11 May 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Equality Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
492 c636-7 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:36:42 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555886
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555886
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_555886