Some wannabe Labour leaders are more equal than others
Peter Hoskin 3:11am
Harriet Harman certainly knows how to grab headlines. This morning it's her claim, in interview with the Sunday Times, that "Men cannot be left to run things on their own." Fair enough, you might say, but here's the kicker: Harman also admits that a couple of years ago she tried - unsuccessfully - to change Labour party rules so that there would have to be a woman in one of the "two top jobs" of party leader or deputy party leader. Chalk it up as yet another step in her merit-be-damned quest for equality of outcome, then. But one - it must be said - that's slightly less ridiculous than some of her more recent ideas.
The question, of course, is of why she's bringing this up now. The only answer which springs to mind is that she's trying to position herself for the post-Brown leadership struggle; setting out the case for why Labour need one woman in particular - a certain Harriet Harman - to lead them through the wilderness years. Whether it convinces Labour folk or not, it's surely a blow for Brown. I doubt he'll appreciate having his holiday disturbed by a stand-in going on manoeuvres.



Previous






Moraymint
August 2nd, 2009 6:13am Report this commentThis is what happens when people who have never lived out here in the real world find themselves in positions of political power.
Harman's politics are the politics of ruin. That's why the Labour Party has led the country to the brink of disaster.
Time really is running out whilst this crowd of idiots remain in Whitehall.
mitch
August 2nd, 2009 8:19am Report this commentWhy not just go the whole hog and have a proper quota system.
In the cabinet we could have 50% male and female, 25% from each major religion(sub divided into fundamentalist and other),50% disabled and just to be really fair 50% from the opposition.
I suspect the rules will state "as long as Harriet get her way its fair"
She really is barking mad.
Percy
August 2nd, 2009 8:20am Report this commentAhhh... Agent Harperson, her Tory controllers must be thrilled with her work.
Charlie
August 2nd, 2009 8:37am Report this commentYes the worry is "How much more damage can these goons do between now and the General Election"?
Mike
August 2nd, 2009 8:38am Report this commentWell...she has data on her side. The clique of men who are currently in power have destroyed the country. So if she had only said "you can't trust NuLabour men to run the country" then you would have to agree with her.
Whether NuLabour wimmin would be any better is theory open to challenge, but so far not factually disproved.
Pete-s
August 2nd, 2009 8:44am Report this commentTo put Harriet in context, I saw this happen in Parliament. Harriet has proposed her equality bill equal rights and all that. Alan Duncan then took her to task for the stats she had put up, something like 26% pay differential. Our Harriet just happened not to mention that this was comparing the wages of men, mainly in full time work, with the wages of women, a lot in part time work.
When accused of misleading the house, she did her usual bluster justifying her deliberately misleading stats. Thats Harriet for you, never held back by truth, honesty and fairness, well she is like the others, a politician.
Alan Douglas
August 2nd, 2009 8:47am Report this commentI don't suppose there is any mention that the woman concerned should be a family member of nobility, is there ?
No, thought not.
Alan Douglas
Alan Douglas
August 2nd, 2009 9:07am Report this commentVote for me, Harriet Harman, because I don't have a penis
can equally well be rendered (in a completely non-sexist way) as
Vote for me, Harriet Harman, because I'm the biggest dick around.
Alan Douglas
Mike Spilligan
August 2nd, 2009 9:09am Report this commentMitch: How could anyone argue with this logic? - except Harperson, of course.
While we haven't had 50% of the top two positions being taken by women, we have had enough women in cabinet (and I won't upset you by listing their names on an unsullied Sunday morning) to test this theory. Just think of them and their rabidly extravagant and hypocritical views, just for a moment, proves that it won't work.
Suki
August 2nd, 2009 9:12am Report this commentI'll repeat Peter Hitchens and Melanie Phillips: this is the most radical government this country has ever seen, and now it's really shining through.
They have ruined this country forever.
The Laughing Cavalier
August 2nd, 2009 9:37am Report this commentA few weeks ago I missed the first few minutes of Any Questions on R4 – since the year dot known in my family as "Bigot’s Half Hour".
I then heard the first question and some daft harpie parroting the Brown line about 60% uplifts in helicopter hours, then hiding behind “security” to avoid discussing specifics. Listening to the next few questions I assumed she was just some stupid Brownite backbencher chosen for lack of imagination and slavish devotion to the party line. But it was her, the woman who is just a heartbeat from the nuclear button. The Deputy Prime Minister no less.
Then, finally the paedo question came up, relating to NuLabour’s latest desire to put 11m people who might come into contact with children onto its latest whizz bang ultra secure database. Naturally she wants us all investigated. So, recalling her contacts with the Paedophile Information Exchange and similar vile groups when she was lawyer to the NCCL (it was Patricia Hewitt who invited PIE to affiliate) I thought it rather amusing that under the proposed laws, if she were not a leading member of NuLabour's Nomenklatura, and, therefore, above the law, she would most likely be among those banned from visiting schools, maybe from public office altogether. This woman is unfit to lead.
Fergus Pickering
August 2nd, 2009 10:39am Report this commentHow you lot do go on? What's wrong with one of the two top people being a woman? Because it would stop meritoroius persons like John Prescott? Since when nhas the Deputy Leadership of either party had anything to do with merit? Give the lady a break, why don't you?
Nicholas
August 2nd, 2009 10:46am Report this commentMuch of the decline in Britain can be attributed to the disproportionate influence of women in public life, generally, but to the crusading activities of wimmin, in particular. They are by and large foolish creatures, interested more in gossip and fashion, who wear silly shoes even whilst pretending to do important jobs, with a level of hysteria about anything they disapprove of and a frightening ability to pursue single issues with a mad-eyed gleam. Once they have something to shriek or nag about all reason and rational considerations are gone. Their capacity to take umbrage, to bear a grudge and to be offended by the most trifling issues is fantastic. Political Correctness is a woman. The word "Complaint" was invented by women.
The preponderance of single mothers and the disproportionate influence of women/wimmin in primary education (wotcha going to do about that Harmon?) has resulted in a whole generation of men who weep on television and display their "feminine" side to the point of pukedom. "Woose" is the operative word - although I'm not sure how to spell it and equally uncertain about its plural. Whatever, the propaganda and coercion have been so effective that many men now actively conceal their "masculine" side or allow it to be caricatured as something archaic and ridiculous.
Television advertising now routinely shows men as Neanderthal idiots and women as clever, smart and in control. More propaganda.
Although there may still be more men in more important public and private positions than women their public words and actions are cowed by the fear of female disapproval and of offending "that monstrous regiment of women" that now passes for public opinion in this land.
No doubt the money-grubbing excesses of our politicians, where they are not women already, are driven by the women that are behind every successful man. The twin modern foolishness of designer fashion and interior decoration cost a great deal of money and it is therefore unsurprising that their compulsion has entered politics with the women.
And the EUSSR? That is stuffed full of po-faced strident women absolutely slavering in their desire to invent new ways to control and emasculate the male population, aided and abetted by useless male Quislings who have long since given up the proud badges of manhood, the willingness to take risks, to fight and die for a worthwhile cause and for ones friends, the reason, the good-humoured tolerance, the pragmatism, the disdain for authority and officialdom and the love of rough games and high jinks that characterise the male species.
Occasional Ostrich
August 2nd, 2009 10:48am Report this commentNutty Hattie, the Michael Foot for the twenty-tens.
Jeremy
August 2nd, 2009 10:51am Report this comment"Men cannot be left to run things on their own."
She's just trying to court the female vote for Labour.
Were I the Prime Minister, I would tell her that we already have enough effeminate men in the Cabinet not to require the presence of women.
dorothy wilson
August 2nd, 2009 10:53am Report this commentThis silly woman is becoming more and more barmy.
david
August 2nd, 2009 11:03am Report this commentWhat a vile loathsome women Herriet Harman is sadly we still have to tolerate this idiotic woman for a few more months she is one of the reasons why white working class men will not be voting Labour in June i would surjest Labour put a sock in her foul feminist mouth.
Lord Monkington-Smythe
August 2nd, 2009 11:20am Report this comment@ Fergus Pickering
I think the problem is less that Harman wants to demand that the leader/dep.leader is a woman (which in itself is dodgy, why should a Labour MPs be forced to select leaders on the basis of gender?) but more because she just happens to be one of those who would benefit. Harman knows how to fill her political boots, and I can imagine that many Labour MPs would rather have John Redwood run their party than her.
Grahame P
August 2nd, 2009 11:36am Report this commentI recall a certain minister, a while back, admitting she wasn't up to the job of Home Secretary and lamenting the lack of 'training' for ministers. Leaving aside the issue of why our Prime Minister would appoint someone so inexperienced to run one of the great offices of state, someone who by their own admission wasn't up to the task, one wonders why on earth she ever accepted the post in the first place. But it stands as a good example, as well as a good warning, of a merit-be-damned approach.
When the most important factor in the minds of those who govern us is politically correct equality of outcome, we would have to be fortunate indeed if those who end up holding the levers of power also happen to be the very best people equipped for the task. The notion that we should appoint people to high office based on the shape of their genitalia, perhaps providing them with training if they're incapable of doing the job, is absolute lunacy.
logdon
August 2nd, 2009 11:50am Report this commentShe's obviously so good that Mandy has all but in name taken her job.
He was the one who grabbed a Newsnight interview with Nick Robinson the day after Broon scuttled off on his holiday. Symbolism of high order but where was she?
Somewhere in a dark corner, lipstick smeared glass in hand, tears welling in her eyes, smudged makeup, singing, 'It should have been me' or 'I will survive'?
Much as I hate Mandelbum, he makes her look like a rank amateur. In other words she had the chance and blew it.
You have to wonder how much stick Dromey gets from 'er outdoors. Imagine the 'Duties roster' on the kitchen pin board?
Then we look at the record of the other New Labour ladees?
Smith, Blears and Flint, all gone. Likewise Hewitt, previously.
I can hear the plaintive, wailing refrain, "is it because I is a bird"?
No, it's because you're all bloody useless is the mass response.
As for wifey in the dark when it suits, 'I didn't know anything about hubby's dodgy mortgage dealings', Jowell? Under her stewardship how much has the Olympic budget risen?
There are extremely able women out there. They didn’t get to the positions they hold by mere dint of being female. They proved that they were best for the job. Did Mrs Borgia endorse affirmative action amongst the Florentine Sisters outreach group? More likely to poison them.
Socialist Harman cannot get that. In her mind it has to be managed, controlled and fed by number lead diktat.
And so the rise of mediocrity reduces all to the level of the mediocre
Maggie
August 2nd, 2009 12:08pm Report this commentYou have to remember the sort of men she's been mixing with for the past 12 years. If I'd spent as much time as she has in the company of Blair, Brown, Mandelson, Hain, Miliband, Balls, McBride and Dromey I would probably agree with her.
john
August 2nd, 2009 12:52pm Report this commentNicholas 10.46
Splendid stuff. I still can't take seriously women who paint their faces and totter around on stilletos.
David Bouvier
August 2nd, 2009 1:03pm Report this commentShe actually thinks that the triumphs of the Labour party, its dynamic leadership, since she became deputy leaders is evidence in favour of male+female leadership?
If there is any recent lesson it is that we can never again allow Labour to be in government alone, since they have royally messed up the economy, AGAIN.
Michael Booth
August 2nd, 2009 1:07pm Report this commentHow about a National "Stop Harriet Harman" Campaign? Personally, I find her remarks about men - and attitude towards men - deeply insulting. Every man in that woman's constituency should be writing letters of complaint.
Michael Booth
August 2nd, 2009 1:11pm Report this commentHow about an Equalities Bill which prevents married couples or partners from holding office on the same board, panel, committee or cabinet, to ensure opportunities are open to others? Whoops - no...didn't think so.
logdon
August 2nd, 2009 1:53pm Report this commentI blame the Spice Girls.
Verity
August 2nd, 2009 3:13pm Report this commentNicholas, 'wuss' is an American term. Pl 'wusses'.
I have a theory that most paedophiles, if they voted, would vote Labour, like most other inadequates. Because socialist women scare them to death. Eighty-five per cent Labour would be my guess.
There really is no creature as grotesque as a socialist woman. (I except the late Ms Dunwoody, of course.)
Verity
August 2nd, 2009 6:20pm Report this commentFat, greedy, pudding-faced Harriet Harpic says you can't trust men to run things. Hattie, put down that extra creme puff and listen up: I'd rather trust a man to run things than a middle aged harpy on HRT.
Fergus Pickering
August 2nd, 2009 7:45pm Report this commentWell, Verity, the last few men haven't done too well, have they. Since the blessed Margaret we have had John (disaster), Tony (mega-disaster), Gordon (disaster cubed). Not too good for the men, I'd say. How bad would Harriet have to be to be worse than that lot?
King Prawn
August 2nd, 2009 7:57pm Report this commentThe only reason she won the Deputy Leadership election is because her husband stabbed Blair in the back with the Cash-For-Honours scandal.
Nicholas
August 2nd, 2009 8:42pm Report this commentVerity, re 'wuss' - thank you. Is the origin of this word known?
Verity
August 2nd, 2009 9:23pm Report this commentFergus - Except for John Major who did, after all, come in just as Conservatism was on the wane, every piece of garbage you mentioned above is a socialist/communist/Gramsci/Trot. It has nothing to do with them being male. It is communism and fascism that are the toxin, not testosterone.
Verity
August 2nd, 2009 11:30pm Report this commentHarriet Hormone.
Verity
August 2nd, 2009 11:42pm Report this commentNicholas - I'm guessing, but the word David Cameron substituted for 'twit' in a TV interview has the US slang equivalent of 'pussy'. As in, men who can be led by the nose by their wives and girlfriends are described by other men as "pussy whipped". I think that men started saying "wuss" and "wussy" as a substitute for a semi-rude word. And it caught on and went into general usage... (I'm no etymologist, which is one way of saying, 'I'm guessing'.)... and developed a life of its own, as words tend to do.
Someone else may know different.
Mike
August 3rd, 2009 12:46am Report this commentThe term "wuss" is a common term here in Australia (not sure it originated here, though).
Hard to define in a few words, but everyone know what it means.
If I had to try, I would say it means "acting like a soppy girl"
David Alexander
August 3rd, 2009 2:35am Report this commentHarriet Harman anagrams to Rather Man Hair.
Indeed.
Pedro
August 3rd, 2009 3:39am Report this commentWhy one man and one woman? Why not one straight and one gay? Or one white and one black? Or one native-born and one immigrant? Or one Christian and one Muslim?
Is Harriet prejudiced against gays, blacks, immigrants and Muslims?
2trueblue
August 3rd, 2009 8:31am Report this commentLead by example, I say. Shame having had the opportunity she had to engage mouth before the brain was in gear. Labour have wrecked the country, no matter what the gender issue. Harman is a noodle, and it should not reflect on us women, just her.
Steve
August 3rd, 2009 9:11am Report this commentHattie, if men and women are equal then it makes no difference if we have 2 men, 2 women or one of each running labour.
Of course, if you want one of each, then it is implicit that men and women are different.
Which may just cause you a few philosophical problems Hattie.
If you don't get it, ask a man to explain it to you.
Karla
August 3rd, 2009 1:34pm Report this commentI want to see Harriet at the top of the greasy pole; nothing will please me more. She'll undoubtely ensure Labour will spend longer on the opposition benches and who knows, perhaps she'll bury them altogether. Hail Harriet.
lucy
August 3rd, 2009 1:44pm Report this commentHarriet Harman and her anti-family, anti-male, feminist, politically correct garbage, represents all that is wrong with this country. This woman isn't a lady, I can't help thinking her kind not that many years ago would get the riding crop and be sent to bed. How much longer are the 'men' in this country going to bring their daughters upto be the worst women in the world (if they are allowed to visit once a week or their baby hasn't been aborted against their will). We thought patriarchy was bad before we tried feminism, we were wrong. The National Organisation of Women has been around for 30 yrs and only has a membership of 500,000 (less than 1% of US female population), anti-feminist groups such as enlightenedwomen, ladiesagainstfeminism, Truewoman, homemakersforamerica etc. etc. Some boast huge memberships yet 99% of women in politics, media etc. are feminist and men these days don't have the backbone to stop the feminist minority passing laws that are harmful to traditionalists like me. Women who look after their husbands and run the home should always be the majority for the sake of humanity.
michael
August 3rd, 2009 3:07pm Report this commentBatty Hatty, do-gooder par excellence. The naked callendar beckons..
Back to top