Miriam Cates under investigation

[Arealnumber]

Why has Miriam Cates suddenly gone under investigation? The comments in The Times are usually highly supportive of the MPs that speak out against Gender Ideology but they're properly railing against her. What has been her downfall?

“However, its her party that trebled tuition fees, charges super hi interest rates inc when BoE rates at 1%, student loans at 4% and has not increased thresholds, in fact has lowered them.”

Of course.

However, it is also a fact that there will be MPs who disagree with the decisions or who even have changed their mind, and who wish to have discussions about the way forward.

That is democracy in action.

Surely if an MP disagrees about a key part of their parties policies, then they stand as an independent or for another party?

Do you know the difference between an Independent Parliamentary standards watch dog committee investigation and a political party investigation?

Trump supporters shout "witch hunt" at all and everything, he can do no wrong, even when the judiciary finds against him, which is exactly what Cates supporters are doing on here, Stating this isn't name calling

Trump is a legitimate candidate in a democratic countries election process, i don't agree with him at all but he certainly shouldn't be put in the same category as a Nazi.

I was listing regular insults aimed at GC women.

Why is Rosie Duffield being investigated by the Labour Party? Why was Caroline Farrow, and others, arrested by the police? Why have various GC women run into trouble with their employers, trade/professional associations etc?

I have said up thread that I have no idea why Cates is being investigated. However there are enough examples of GC women being persecuted by process to cause me be to be less than 100% sure.

So that makes me a Trump supporter?

I know I used to identify very much as being on the Left; but have come to realise that the Left/'progressive' worldview is one in which there is a linear kind of march towards some defined utopian end-point - where everything and everyone is equal and nobody suffers; whereas I see now that human beings don't essentially change their nature and that history keeps repeating certain themses and patterns - just in differing social and geographical contexts.

Conservatism is about retaining what is of practical value and has shown to work. Seeing the need for stability as an important foundation for any society. Radicalism forever seeks overhaul and complete re-structuring - always in pursuit of the idealistic and ultimately unobtainable.

Idealism is rooted in the mind - in the realm of ideas - and as such is detached from earthly realities and forces of nature - forever hoping that human beings and societies will somehow transform themselves into the perfect aesthetic. The 'right side of history' sentiments are rooted in this idea.

I think in the West we have come pretty much as far as we can in terms of equality and legislation. People are different, and not everyone is equal in all things, and inherent differences and values will ineviatble start to re-assert themselves. War, conflict and violence are perennial. -even amongst 'progressives'. I used to live on a peace camp - and I can tell you it was anything but peaceful. The sorts of issues that people were fighting on the outside were all there within people. Often the 'be-kind' activists are the most hateful and intolerant in behaviour.

A thousand times this!

Which part of the Tory policy are you referring to which you believe Miriam Cates should leave the party over?

Lol! of course not, i said "sound like Trump supporters" not they support Trump.

We know why she is being investigated: “actions causing significant damage to the reputation of the house as a whole, or of its members generally”

We don't know the specifics but it will almost certainly be fraud, abusing her position, bullying, as has been the case in other MPs accused similarly.

Its utterly ridiculous to suggest as some have done on this thread, its because of her GC views/witch hunt.

Apparantly she isn't in favour of student tuition fees and the consequent loans, which unlike when they were first introduced now charge high rates of interest. That being so, and it has been suggested it is a policy that disproportionately impacts woman and puts them off having babies, which is a big concern of Cates, it is rather surprising to find her in the party that introduced those fees.

Sorry am I missing something here? Which party was in government that first introduced tuition fees for universities?

And are you suggesting that her university fee disagreements are a big enough divergence of politics to leave a party over? A party that has a very wide range of support for different issues.

You judge her for not supporting high university fees, for saying that universities can offer more flexible approaches to studies other than only face to face lectures and you then judge her for obviously not choosing to follow your preference that she leave the party over those university fees.

Ok. Good to know.

The Conservatives in 2012 massively increased tuition fees and reorganised the student loan system at the same time.
Mariam Cates, apparently at the NatC conference wasn't saying that woman shouldn't be educated in order that they can have more babies (although others at the conference hold that view) but instead was saying that high student debt means it is hard for woman to have babies. It is a little odd that she is a member of the political party that caused that high student debt.

Sorry am I missing something here? Which party was in government that first introduced tuition fees for universities?

Exactly, is it a bit like forgetting who introduced the GRA, often seen on here

When joining a political party, there is always going to be a compromise between one's own beliefs and the policies of the party. Given that it is virtually impossible to be elected as an independent in the UK, the best that prospective MPs can do is to join the party which most closely aligns with their views on most issues. Expecting complete agreement on all issues is unrealistic.

I would say that feminism, like a drive towards equality in anyvother aspect, is counter to right-wing or conservative politics. The nature of the right wing is that it entrenches heirachies, and as such is inherently anti-equality.

I agree about feminism being compatible with traditional social norms, though, it need not be an inherently progressive movement.

And which government commissioned the report that shaped those fees?

Do you believe that an incoming Labour government will abolish those fees? What do you expect to happen with a Labour government and university fees in the future?

It is like some people believe that political parties are a huge homogeneous belief system. This doesn't reflect reality at all. Political parties have factions constantly fighting themselves all the time. That is the reality and that is democracy.

I don’t think this is the case. The right is also about the individual and personal responsibility. For women this can mean achieving, earning and subsequent freedoms. One party had Thatcher as elected PM after all and the other no female leaders.

In many ways the Labour movement mirrors unions which are not particularly pro women

Of course. This is always going to be the case

Given that Cates is most vocal about women's issues, does it not strike you as a little odd to join a party that consistently in its actions introduces policies that disproportionately adversely impact women?

Until the Conservatives crashed the economy last year, the Labour party were committed to wholesale changes to tuition fees, unfortunately due to the lunacy of listening to Tufton street, that opportunity no longer currently exists.

Labour won’t deliver much at all. It’s good if people are already anticipating that.

There’s very little they’ll raise and spend, just the added bonus of gender ideology, unfortunately for women and dc

Yes. You want a diversity of thought and experience within any party.

So Duffield will raise issues of concern to her, and hopefully to her constituents. As a woman she worries about the impact of student loans, the impact of current sex/gender education on suggestible young children, and the need for single sex spaces. Good on her.

She might be wrong in suggesting delaying sex education until secondary schools as one poster argued upthread, because such education was needed before some girls might start their periods. So debate. One solution might be to Introduce some "our bodies and how they change" education at primary school but delay the more complex stuff till later on. The point of parliament is to debate. Good on Cates for raising issues that many women are concerned about. My best guess is that too many of her male colleagues (and plenty of the opposition) are focussed on fiscal policy and will not thing things that directly affect women are important.

Which party should women join if they are concerned about women's rights?

The Labour party, which has victimised Rosie Duffield for knowing that a woman is an adult female human?

The Lib Dems, who come out with nonsense about seeing into people's souls to determine whether a male in a women-only space is a predator or a 'true transwoman'?

The SNP, who wanted to enact legislation which would allow any man to be legally recognised as a woman if he said he was?

Plaid Cymru who forced Helen Mary Jones to recant (over comments she made about GRA reform) or be deselected?

The Tories seem to be the only major party which isn't blatantly anti-woman.

Yeah? So Labour won't make university free if they get in? When will they do that, do you think? And how do you think they will fund that, do you think?

Can you tell us which government made the objective that half the students leaving school in the UK would attend university?

Huge difference between 9k of debt and 45k, remember that the Tories removed the mtce grant and added it to the loan, so most students are borrowing at least 15k per year, often more, then there is the threshold issues and interest rates.

All stack up to a very high tax burden on learning, bear in mind many Uni students will go on to drive GDP growth & pay a lot of tax, so are being charged twice in effect.

A party on 22% atm hasn't got wide ranging support over very much at all.

TBF to New Labour, getting more students in Higher Education is a good thing, we were below the EU average in the 90s, now we are just a little above at approx 37%, France is higher, Germany is lower.