AMIDST the outcry surrounding the story of Angela Rayner’s posture in the House of Commons another depressing facet emerged.
There was very little recognition to be found in all of this about her ability as a politician. Perhaps this is another way in which sexism works: that in the rush to condemn it the real attributes of a woman’s character and professional aptitude are often overlooked.
In one elegantly-written article today, the antediluvian attitudes of several male MPs was discussed along with several eye-popping anecdotes provided by women politicians who had encountered it.
Nowhere in this long piece was there any discussion about Ms Rayner’s formidable gifts as a top-drawer politician and one possessed of the qualities to be an effective future leader of the UK Labour Party.
In any previous coverage of Ms Rayner’s career, the facts of her early life are dutifully ticked off: how she was raised on a council estate and how she had to leave school without any qualifications, having become pregnant at the age of 16. And then, these obligatory biographical details having been dispensed with, it’s on to the “Labour’s firebrand” narrative: calling the Tories “scum” and her tense relationship with her boss, Sir Keir Starmer.
There is rarely any analysis of why it’s so difficult for any individual facing these challenges to reach the House of Commons, let alone thrive in it to the extent that they are now regarded as one of the most influential political figures in the UK. On either side of the Border, people from authentic working-class backgrounds are notable in both Holyrood and Westminster only by the paucity of their numbers.
To read the rest of this analysis, sign up to The Herald's political newsletter, Unspun, for FREE and get unrivalled political analysis in your inbox every day at 6pm.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel