Philip Davies MP provoked howls of anguish when he was elected to Parliament’s Women and Equalities Committee last month. - Now the committee is back in session, the supposed “anti-feminist” gives his view from the heartlands of the
“gender equality industry”…My very first session on the Women and Equalities Select Committee coincided with the first evidence session on an inquiry into Sustainable Goal 5 on Gender Equality.
This is clearly not the first subject for discussion down at the Shipley Pride on a Friday night, but that didn’t dampen the enthusiasm of the six witnesses who came before the committee – academics, the Fawcett Society and other politically correct people with clearly far too much time on their hands.
It was also obvious early on how crucial an issue this was for the other members of the committee – all of whom were asking helpful questions and appeared to be hanging on every word they were given.
Apparently the UK Government has signed up to this particular UN Development Goal but is not doing enough to meet it – never mind the fact that some parts are ridiculously unachievable (such as the elimination of all forms of violence against all women and girls). Are we really going to eliminate all violent crime in the UK? Really?
'It looks as though being on the committee is going to mean listening to a lot of irrelevant claptrap from people desperate to be seen as the most politically correct.'Then of course we have the obvious issue of how a goal regarding gender equality can only seek the elimination of violence against women and girls? If we are going for unrealistic goals why not include men and boys as well?
But, as many of us soon discover, these people do not actually care about gender equality – they are only interested in women and girls. It seems violence against men and boys is absolutely fine – particularly where this particular UN agreement is concerned.
Anyway, the long and short of the two-hour session was that the Government was not doing enough (as all select committee sessions are always told) and in particular the things we needed more of from the government were: “measurements”, “targets” (I always thought a goal was a target but I learned that in the PC world of too much time on your hands they are very different things!) “reporting”, “tracking”, “monitoring”, “annual reviews”, “plans”, “strengthened engagement”, “more ownership”.
In other words, what they were wanting was more guff to keep all of the people in the “gender equality” industry in employment. But I couldn’t see how any of this “reporting” etc was actually going to help any woman or girl, to be honest.
So just as the Chairman (a title that I am sure I am not supposed to use) was wrapping up the session, I asked what I thought were two pertinent questions. The first was “How important were these goals to the public?”
I suggested that if these goals were really important for the electorate then presumably the Government would be busting a gut to do all the things they asked for. After all, governments want to get re-elected.
I put it to them that the reason why the Government wasn’t doing all of these “measurements” etc might just be because the public couldn’t give a stuff about Sustainable Development Goal 5.
I was instantly told by the Chairman of the Committee that my question was irrelevant to the purposes of the inquiry!
I still can’t see why – surely exploring why the Government haven’t done these things is very relevant but, then again, such a line of questioning might expose the fact that nobody actually cares about all this rubbish.
I then suggested that none of the things they had come up with would make a difference to anyone’s lives and could they suggest some policies they would like to see implemented that might actually make a difference. I am afraid to report none were forthcoming at the meeting and it seems that wasn’t the point of the inquiry either.
It looks as though being on the committee is going to mean listening to a lot of irrelevant claptrap from people desperate to be seen as the most politically correct.
I may need to order some betablockers for future sessions – listening to this nonsense must be seriously bad for your blood pressure!
Edited by AA