Liz Kendall Sexism Row Fail

With each passing day, and voting beginning in around three weeks’ time, the Labour leadership campaign of Leicester West MP Liz Kendall looks a yet more forlorn cause. Today’s news is typical: the tally of Constituency Labour Party (CLP) nominations stands at 106 for Jeremy Corbyn, 98 for Andy Burnham, and 86 for Yvette Cooper. Ms Kendall has garnered the support of just 14. She’s run out of road.

But, given the nature of the voting system, those calling for her to pull out are not thinking this one through: votes are allocated to second, then third preferences as candidates are eliminated when those votes are counted. There is little point in taking a name off the ballot right now. There is, though, no point in trying to whip up controversy for the sake of it, and the latest such event does those involved no favours at all.

Charles Falconer, long-time friend of the saintly Tone, is backing Burnham. He explained his choice thus: “Neither Yvette [Cooper] nor Liz [Kendall] can steer the party through the challenging few years ahead of us when we need a leader who can reach out to all wings of the party and provide unity”. What he did not do was make any generalisation about the capabilities of women in a leadership role.

Not that you would know that from Ms Kendall’s response: “It’s depressing to see a senior man in the party dismiss the contribution of women so easily … For Charlie to say that somehow women aren’t tough enough to lead the Labour Party is a gross insult and, as for standing up to Jeremy Corbyn, I’m the only candidate who has been saying he would be a disaster for our party and that I wouldn’t serve in his shadow cabinet, unlike the candidate Charlie is supporting”. If only Falconer had said what she claimed. But he didn’t.

Cathy Newman of Channel 4 News disagreed: “I can spot sexism a mile off, and I’m not afraid to say it. But Lord Falconer - Charlie to his mates - is no sexist … what cheerful Charlie was saying was a statement of fact, based on YouGov’s opinion poll released early this week”. The involvement of the Murdoch Times has not helped matters.

The paper, seeing its chance to make mischief, reported Falconer’s comments under the headline “Women ‘are not tough enough to lead Labour’”. That, he observed, “suggests I think that women are not tough enough to lead the Labour party. That is not my view and I said nothing that suggested it was … The Times itself has acknowledged in emails that the headline was ‘stupid’, ‘misleading’ and ‘sexist’”.

Would Ms Kendall now accept that? Well, no, the Times headline may have been wrong, but “I based it on what he actually wrote … He said that myself and Yvette weren’t up to the challenge of leading or uniting the party, and I think that’s just plain wrong. He only picked out the two women”. The impression is given that someone is arguing in their spare time. And that person appears to be Liz Kendall.

Sorry, team Kendall. Your candidate is not going to win. Maybe quit the attention seeking.