Monday, February 05, 2007

Spam in the lamb turkey

We have been waiting ever so long for Cameron to reveal his policies... Or, rather, any policies. Given the time that they have had to think about them, you would have thought that the Tories would manage something better than this sort of shit. As Timmy points out, advocating yet more government interference in private business to solve a problem that doesn't exist is hardly a ringing endorsement of the idea that Cameron really is a Tory, rather than a soft-blanket socialist.
We've got the usual selection of idiocy and lies in this discussion of equal pay.

Contract clauses banning employees from revealing their salaries to colleagues could be outlawed by the next Conservative government in an effort to help close the pay gap between men and women.

Current Tory Party missing the point, yes.

The Tories are risking a dispute with some of its staunchest supporters in business by floating the idea, but the leadership is keen to signal its concern about the 17.1% gender pay divide.

That number's about right: but it is across all age cohorts. I don't think anyone doubts that 30, 40 years ago there was direct discrimination. The question is, is there now, in the younger one? Have we already done all we need to to get rid of discrimination? Given that the gender pay gap amongst the under 30s is miniscule, perhaps we have?

In fact, the report that Timmy looked at some time ago would suggest that, yes, we really, really have sorted this out.
So for those under 30 there is in fact no (noticeable) gender gap in pay, for those in their 30s there is some and for those over 40 a considerable one.

This is entirely consistent with two possible causes. That women who take a career break to raise children do indeed get paid less. Not all that much of a surprise there really. That we did indeed have discrimination against women a generation ago and that we do not now.

What it clearly does not show is that there is any discrimination against women who have entered the workforce in the last 10 - 15 years.

So, we had a probem, do not have one now and don’t need to do anything more. So can everyone shut up now and we can get onto problems that really do exist?

Bookdrunk, of course, disagrees and actually apears to agree with Polly Toynbee's call for everyone to declare, publically, what they earn (something that Polly herself has consistently refused to do. Because she's an awful, deceitful, hypocritical hag).
Given that discussions of the pay gap are frequently mired in either wholesale denial of a gap, or disagreement over the size or cause of the disparity, wouldn't greater transparency benefit everyone?

Er, actually, I can think of numerous reasons why greater transparency would have counterbeneficial effects—quite apart from the fact that it's absolutely nobody's fucking business how much little I earn—and I'm sure that you can too.

Is this ill-informed right-on-ery the best that Cameron and his advisors—with all of the resources that they have in the party—can do? Looking at Cammy-Baby's other fatuous announcements, it seems that it is.

Having turned off all of the traditional low-tax, small-government Conservatives—who can no longer pretend that Cameron's Tories stand anywhere near them in terms of political values—the Boy Wonder has announced his big, vote-winning election message. And what a message it is!

Truly, it is a rallying call to conservatives and libertarians everywhere; a strategy with such a bold message that no one could possibly think of doing anything other than voting Tory. It is a rallying call to both the faithful and the masses, a message of such positivity that it is difficult to see how The Tories could possibly lose.

Do you want to know what it is? Ha!—silly me; that's obviously a rhetorical question: of course you do. Well, here it is: are you ready? Here goes: the message is...
Please vote for us otherwise the bad guys will get in again.

Doesn't that just fill your soul? Don't you believe that you are now voting for a truly progressive, positive party of go-getting geniuses and bold implementors? No?

Of course, you're right; that is essentially the same slogan that the embattled NuLabour used at the last election. Mired in sleaze, hampered by daily reports of the carnage in Iraq and losing steam after two terms in office, NuLabour had to resort to the tired, "vote LibDem and get the Tories" argument.

That the supposedly reinvigorated Tory party are having to use it when faced with one of the most corrupt and illiberal governments in modern British history is, frankly, worse than pathetic. It's the signal that they don't have the courage of the convictions that they won't yet announce.

And time is running out...

2 comments:

bookdrunk said...

Ah, no. While it's fun to tar your supposed opponents with the brush of Polly Toynbee, I was asking a genuine (rather than rhetorical) question. So..

I can think of numerous reasons why greater transparency would have counterbeneficial effects..

..let's hear them.

Clarice said...

A hag? What exactly is a hag, please, and why are you calling Polly Toynbee one?

Isn't calling her an awful deceitful hypocrite enough without having a bash at her gender, looks or age as well? And what have these got to do with her actions or point of view anyway? That's a cheap, hateful and pathetic shot, Mr Devils Kitchen. At least she doesn't go around like a misogynist calling women she disagrees with hags.