@WEP_UK My Speech 9th September 2015 at #WEdo

On the 9th September this year I was honoured to be asked to present a short 5 minute speech at the Women's Equality Party fund raiser held in the Conway Hall, London. I have received several requests to post the speech for those who were unable to attend to read. So with great pleasure, here it is.

Good evening everyone. I am Simone Wilson. I am the Managing Director and 4th generation owner of the last surviving wholly family owned tap manufacturer in the UK. Yes my little firm makes taps for kitchens and bathrooms. I’ve been in the business since I left school as my parents recognised I had a talent for engineering. One evening I left work as usual and as the radio tuned into PM to hear the day's news, or more accurately the twaddle being spouted in the election campaign, I came in halfway through Catherine’s interview. I was so happy to hear what was being said, and thought YES, about blooming time! Finally I was hearing someone talking common sense. I resolved there and then that this was something I wished to be a part of. A few weeks later I heard the announcement, again on PM, that Sandi was leaving the News Quiz. I knew why even though the reason for her departure was not given. I was overjoyed that she was to be a part of WE too.

The more astute of you will probably have noticed that there is something else about me, something quite irrelevant to the job I do or the fact I am a natural engineer, and that is I am a transwoman.

For years I lived my life as a man, not really appreciating the privilege accorded to me by my birth in that gender. My father - MD before me, the staff, customers, and tradesmen I dealt with on a daily basis accepted I knew what I was talking about. My knowledge was respected. Why was that?, because I was MR WILSON. I never gave the issue of women’s equality a thought as it was something we have always practiced in our business valuing our female employees for their contribution. We paid a rate for the job regardless of the gender of the employee. I thought that was what everyone did. Silly me.

Then I transitioned. And things changed. 

I have trained the women in my office to handle most of the technical calls that come in, but on occasion they do need me to take the call over. When they tell the caller, hold on please I’ll pass you to our MD, she’ll know the answer, the response is all too often, “oh another woman don’t you have a man I can speak to?” If the girls simply pass the call to technical, when I answer with my name I get the response, “I was after technical assistance”. Doh! So I enlighten the caller with the fact I have been making taps for 40 years, I have made the tools to cut the brass, I have machined the castings, programmed the machines, assembled every single type of tap we have ever made, that I have been making taps longer than they have been putting them in. 
They usually fire a technical question at me, to which I give them an equally technical reply. Oh they say, you DO know what your talking about. Yes I do, I say, so how may I help you sir?

So by following my heart and transitioning I suddenly find myself having to prove that I am competent. That which had been granted by accident of birth had been stripped away. I realise that I too now, like you, have to go the extra mile to prove myself where before I did not. I have run headlong into society’s perception that women are not competent in the traditional male position. Oh, and it isn’t just men who question my knowledge, often women who phone up seeking technical assistance express the same doubts as to my competence.

So why this story? Well the solution to such attitudes is rooted firmly in our core aim number 4 - WE urge an education system that creates EQUAL opportunities for all children and an understanding of why this matters. It is the second part of that statement that is fundamentally important. Only when our children are given the opportunity to learn skills and trades that they are naturally gifted in, regardless of the stereotypical gender role assigned to those skills & trades will society correctly value that skill regardless of gender.

And don’t even start me on equal pay!

When I look at our objectives, I see a common denominator. EDUCATION. Educate people on what they are missing out on by not striving for equality for women. WE are 51% of the population. It is time for women to take their proper place in all areas of our society, to stand shoulder to shoulder with men as equals, and to be respected for the talents and energies WE can unleash.

Why I am @WEP_UK

During the 2015 Election campaign I heard something quite astonishing. Something that grabbed my attention, something that made me stop my car and listen. What was that? you may well ask, well it was Catherine Mayer being interviewed on the BBC Today programme on Radio 4 just after 5pm. Sadly I missed the start of the interview but as I listened I wanted to know which political party this person represented as I was swung to vote for them there and then. That is how much the words of Catherine Mayer struck a chord with me.

The Women's Equality Party suddenly became a goal to be a part of, and as soon as the party opened its doors for membership I was in there like a shot. It isn't just me either who has been inspired to be part of this party. Of course I can't speak for others, just for myself, and this is why I am #WEP_UK.

The party is definitively pan-political. Regardless of your specific leanings, the core objectives of the Women's Equality Party apply. These are:

1. WE are pushing for equal representation in politics, business, industry and throughout working life.

2. WE are pressing for equal pay and an equal opportunity to thrive.

3. WE are campaigning for equal parenting and caregiving and shared responsibilities at home to give everyone equal opportunities both in family life and in the work place.

4. WE urge an education system that creates opportunities for all children and an understanding of why this matters.

5. WE strive for equal treatment of women by and in the media.

6. WE seek an end to violence against women.

You tell me a politician of whatever persuasion who is against any one of those objectives and I think I would have to dine on my hat. The problem is that they are not core to any of the established parties, and are not considered important enough yet they really should be. This has to, and will, change.

The main problem though is that we as a society, nay the world at large really, are very hung up on the gender binary. We somehow seem to conveniently forget that as a whole we are people. There as as many talented, gifted, and skilled women as their are men. What is needed is to have the best people doing the jobs, not put aside those who could be the best people simply to get the visible  gender balance correct.

In my humble opinion, it is not necessary to have the numbers match, as the 50/50 parliament twitter group desires. It may well be that in doing so we throw onto the scrapheap the right person for the job simply because they are the wrong gender. To do this would be just as wrong as ignoring women in the first place has been. If it transpired that the current makeup of parliament had in its members the right people then naturally they would have the views of the Women's Equality Party across the board, there really would be no need for the Party full stop. But they don't, and there's the rub.

The Women's Equality Party embodies the right attitude, of having the right person for the job. Men are very welcome to be a part, this isn't another gender exclusive party as we have seen in the past. It's focussed on Women's Equality simply because that is where the greatest inequality is found, but inequality is just women focussed?, not at all. Men have just as much at stake as women in equality and the single biggest inequality suffered by men is in their role as a parent. Raising children is perhaps the most single satisfying, and fulfilling job I have ever done. Sure children can be frustrating at times, but the pleasure of seeing a well rounded individual take their rightful place in society and start to contribute to it is wonderful. Our society makes this hard for men, and it really shouldn't. Objective number 3 is aimed fairly at getting men the equality they, and their family, rightly deserve.

This one aspect was the key to getting me on board. Here was equality being striven for in all the major areas that effect our lives, not just for one gender. Put these six objectives at the heart of any political party and we are on the road for a much better and fairer society. It is time to stop working in a binary structure, working against each other which diminishes the effort. Pull together, sharing equally in all aspects will bring about such a change that will be to the benefit of all people.

Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely

Here we go again, same situation, different industry. What am I talking about? Big corporates of course. This time it is the motor manufacturer VAG who has been caught playing fast and loose. OK so it won't have the same major impact on the economy as the banking crisis did, but the principles are just the same. Huge corporates believing they are able to do as they please and disregard rules and morals in pursuit of the bottom line, or if you have a more cynical view as I do, then bigger bonuses.

VAG has been caught cheating on the emissions test for their diesel engined cars. I mean it is clever of course and the facility to re-map the engine management system is well known. I know a 2 litre BMW diesel can, by simply uploading new engine management software, gain a 50HP increase or around 30% more oomph. That is a respectable increase but at the cost of fuel economy and of course greater emissions. That is the point really, we are wanting ever cleaner engines yet we are not prepared to accept the loss of performance in our pride and joy in order to achieve them.

Governments accept the figures they get and use the data to calculate the various theoretical emission levels based on the known number of vehicles on the road. They then proudly tell us that we are making strides toward greener driving as the percentage of vehicles on the road produce less pollution. But sadly this is not the case as the engine management system detects it isn't on test and so reverts to its less clean but more fun mode. If you as the consumer choose to do this to your engine then when you're caught you carry the can, but the global effect for the numbers who do have their engine mapping modified - the vast majority of car owners don't really care about doing such things themselves - is negligible.

It is a whole different ball game when the manufacturer of a vehicle makes that decision for the owner without the owners knowledge or consent. Oh and I dare to speculate that VAG are not the only motor manufacturer to adopt such tactics. They just got well and truly caught with their pants around their ankles. I hate to think what is going on in the board rooms of the other companies who have been doing the exact same thing but have yet to be exposed.

The real problem is the pursuit of profit. It is so dominant in business that such cavalier attitudes to rules and regulations, let alone the moral aspect to such decisions, is allowed nay encouraged to flourish. Ok so the pursuit of profit is true for all sizes of business, after all profit allows for product development, investment in new plant, investment in jobs, wage rises, bonuses, shareholder dividends, and so on. The trouble is that in big businesses like VAG, the seniors become complacent and start to behave in a manner that the SMEs cannot dare dream of doing. Big businesses enjoy government pandering to their needs, after all they employ huge numbers of the population and are a significant part of the country's economy. The law suits that will line up against VAG could, especially in the USA, have a serious effect on the stability of the company which will mean they need support from the public purse, just as the banks did in the UK. The people who put their company at such rise should be prosecuted to the full extend of the law and made to pay for their actions, not be given the sack, and like as not a nice golden handshake so they can swan off and enjoy an early retirement in their Mediterranean Villa. Herr Winkelmann who resigned from his post as CEO of VAG, thus washing his hands by taking such a noble action as falling on his sword, should by rights carry the can. Like the sign on the President of the United States' desk says, "The Buck Stops HERE"

The people who have the temerity to take such actions also display a total lack of morals. Their greed in the pursuit of profit seems to be at any cost, even if that cost is our planet. Governments across the world are trying to reduce the effects of global warming only to be stabbed in the back by a few corporations. Who on earth are VAG to ride roughshod over hard won goals in pollution control? I am so not impressed with the makers of the "Peoples Car".

Re-nationalisation of Railways. Does Mr Corbyn have a point?

Today I hear the news is Jeremy Corbyn's announcement of plans to re-nationalise the country's railways, aka BR MkII. Ok so I will admit I was not a fan of the original break up of our railways. I was never comfortable with the way the system was broken up and thought that the end result was destined to be a failure. Anyone who had anything to do with the railway up to the point of denationalisation will know that the original company identity and ethos was alive and strong throughout the workforce. These men loved their railway with a passion, and especially the difference that endured through nationalisation. They had a pride in their line that the great post-war socialist experiment failed to remove. You could see this in the way each line had its individual locomotives. The last pride in the line was crushed by the system of privatisation chosen by the Tories.

THe Tory plan was in my opinion a dogs dinner, or a complete mess. I could not understand the principle of giving the plum routes to private companies. All that would lead too is the exact same result as the demise of our countryside bus services that have left so many communities, mine included, isolated. This as far as I was concerned bad conservatism. Had they chosen to break up the system to the way it was before the original nationalisation, each company being responsible for the trains and the tracks I'd have been all for it.

So Mr Corbyn has announced his policy to re-nationalise our railways, but just how to do it and remain friends with the European Union. As a life-long Tory I should oppose this body and soul, but I also love railways. It is a form of transport that is romantic which naturally appeals to my feminine side. Travel by train and you get to enjoy the countryside as it rushes by. You're not confined to your seat. Having a meal on the train still is a highlight of travel. I use trains quite a bit for UK travel, and the private companies have had a good impact on ticketing and pricing, something I seriously doubt would have been achieved under public ownership. These changes have brought about a massive increase in the use of train travel. Brought about a big investment in modern comfortable rolling stock. It has allowed a big increase in the main line running of heritage trains which brings in a lot of money from enthusiasts who love to travel in the old way behind a steam engine working hard. So I guess it is easily arguable that the changes have been beneficial by and large. But I can't help feeling that to re-nationalise our railways back to the way it was would be detrimental, hopefully common sense will prevail and see that the "East Coast" experiment which earned a lot for the treasury would teach labour that running a state owned operation along private owned principles reaps the rewards they seek.

The decision in the Railways act 1999 to remove the possibility for state owned franchises to operate is the sticking point. I'm all removing this part of the law so that private and public can run side by side, The government can then make additional funds for the treasury, but in order to do so will need to be kept on its toes to compete. Full nationalisation of an industry simply kills the competitive drive to excellence and just promotes complacency, and reduces choice.  However, put public and private side by side, it may just work.

Rugby - The World in Union

I am currently in hospital following major surgery last Wednesday. I was able to watch the opening ceremony of the World Cup on television, and what a lovely opening show it was reminding me of the amazing show put on at the opening of the 2012 Olympics. I didn't catch the rest of the game that followed as tiredness took hold, but today was a different matter.

Like many people I cram more into my life than is probably wise. Why is it we live our lives at such a frantic pace? I think I may leave that for now and perhaps explore that another time. So with time on my hands thanks to being bedridden, I could settle down to watch the games that my otherwise busy life would have had me miss.

The first two games went with expected form, but still excellent and enjoyable rugby nonetheless. Then the third game started. South Africa vs Japan. Like most people I though this was actually going to be a walk over for South Africa after all this is a team with its members holding over 800 caps. So being stoically British it was inevitable I would be rooting for Japan the definitive underdogs.

Well what a game I was treated too. This was Rugby being played to the highest level with skill, guts and determination on display. At no point were Japan overawed by facing one of the top teams in the world. They never let the South African's reputation overshadow their ability and so stayed with them try for try, penalty for penalty. It all came down to a nail biting finish where they could so easily have finished the match in a draw, a result that they could have rightly been proud of but no, they chose to go for the win, and were rewarded for their display of courage and tenacity.

The Sporting World Cup events always showcase their respective games, and Rugby is finally taking its rightful place as one of the great team games in the world. I look forward to seeing its takeup by other countries and the world cup growing each time it is held. It is a game of gentlemen, a fast paced and exciting spectacle. For me it knocks football into a cocked hat.

The first tiny chink? Perhaps.

For as long as anyone can remember women in politics have been subject to a certain kind of scrutiny that has not been made of their male colleagues. You know the sort of thing I mean, the way we dress, the way we do our hair, the critique of our makeup, and that is the minor stuff. Then they talk about having children, being married and so on - damned if you have experienced either and damned if you haven't. Basically anything but that which is relevant to the politics of the person is discussed at length and printed. This is something that rather unsurprisingly irks women, and we've kind of had enough of the imbalanced way.

I was listening to Woman's Hour on BBC R4 on Monday, and they had a guest editor being interviewed in depth, none other than Kim Cattrall. It was a lovely frank interview that I enjoyed very much, but the thing that stood out in my mind was when she spoke about ageing, and not having children. Her frustration at the judgemental position of the media and the negativity surrounding whatever choice the woman makes was clear for the listeners. However I digress, but felt it worth mentioning as it reinforces the point.

I didn't sleep to well, I've a big event, a life changing one at that, ahead of me this afternoon. At such times try as we may, sleep will evade us. No matter as I did a little surfing whilst sipping my cocoa and came across this little magazine article on the BBC entitled Jeremy Corbyn's Speech, Deconstructed (Link). What a surprise lay in wait a short way into the article. I got the distinct impression of glossing over most of the speech as that wasn't important. No what I got loud and clear from the article was the dissection of Jeremy Corbyn's style, his grooming and clothing choice. The writer says,

"Many people might be annoyed at any politician's dress sense being the subject of discussion - rather than their policies "

then proceeds to devote a good chunk of the piece to being annoying for many, but not for me.

One of the core objectives of the new non-partisan political party, the Womens Equality Party of which I am proud to be a Founding Member is to seek equal treatment of women by and in the media. I can't recollect reading an article on a man in politics that is giving as much space to how he looks, dresses, and acts as it has to what and how he says it. Equal treatment seems to be on the agenda at last and bravo to Jon Kelly.

To Cut or to Build - THAT is the question.

I watched the Labour Leadership election results on BBC as will have many others. I was not surprised at the result, and quite frankly I am pleased. Why is that you may wonder? Jeremy Corbyn is a man I can respect. He has his principles, and perhaps most of all he appears to me to be honest. This is something quite special these days. Quite how such an honest and open approach will sit with the position as leader of HM Opposition is yet to be revealed. Politics is a funny game, and decent straight talking honest and open people tend to find themselves out manoeuvred. Politics seems to have much in common with poker.

Following the announcement, pundits have been quick to come out with their views both for and against both the man and his politics. I feel it is time that Labour revisits its roots and rediscovers what it stands for. When clause 4 was thrown out and rewritten in 1995, I lost my respect for the Labour Party as they abandoned a core principle of Socialism. Having done so it followed by the landslide victory of 1997, and New Labour took power. But what was that all about? Many said at the time that in order to grasp power the only way to do it was to put on the Conservative coat that had been carelessly left lying around. As a traditional Tory voter when Tony Blair went to the country seeking a 2nd term, I was very tempted to vote Labour simply because I didn't believe the name represented the party in power. The distinction between Left and Right had gone, there was no clear water. This has continued in the Labour party for years now with them seeming to pay lip-service to their core supporters who clung onto the name and colour.

Finally in Jeremy Corbyn I see the party will regain the clear water in politics that has been missing for so long. What I feel he must be careful is not to take the party back to the last century and the problems of the party and its members back then, but rather pick the best of what it stood for, and resist the temptation to resurrect the bad parts.

One of the things he said is "Britain cant cut its way to prosperity. We have to build it" works for me in a way, after all I and my business are part of old England in that we still make our products here in the UK. However, I see that the cuts were necessary as much of the government machine was bloated. Here's the point you see, and it is a business head that sees you need to keep expenditure under control but maximise output. This benefits the team - aka company because all the members get to benefit. Nothing de-motivates a team more than a few of its members not pulling their weight, or being perceived not to be doing so. Indeed experience has demonstrated to me that to cut out those who do not pull their weight does not put any more on those who do. They simply feel much better because they do not see anyone having a free ride. The Conservative route is to cut, the Labour route is to build, but I believe the best way to prosperity is to do both.

Where am I? Politically Speaking

I've asked myself this question time and time again. By rights I am a dyed-in-the-wool Tory, yet not all that is Tory sits comfortably with me. My Grandmother was Labour to the core, and we enjoyed many a political debate together.

Debating, not arguing, had a profound effect on me as I grew up as it, and still does, caused me to listen to valid arguments. However hard as she tried, my Grandmother couldn't persuade me to become Labour.

I rather feel I am non-partisan as there is no single party that clearly represents my views, not even the majority of them. The problem is that each party has to stick by its principles and whilst this does resonate with those who see that way as right regardless, I'm afraid that I do not.

Ok so I run a business, I'm one of those greedy fat cats - or am I. When the going gets tough, and oh boy was the last recession tough, the first thing that gets cut is my salary. Sure when the good times roll, I will take my share of the good times, but when they don't I try to ensure I insulate my team - note I don't use the word "workers" - as much as possible from the effects. When the good time roll I see the team gets a fair share of the profits they generate for the company. I see this as being fair and equitable after all it is their efforts that make the profit is it not?

It has been an uphill struggle to get my team to see that the old US & THEM attitude that used to prevail in our company back in the day is not how it is or should be. A company is only as good as the people in it, and I have tried, and largely succeeded in persuading them that they are the company, not me. We have worked together to improve the bottom line, maximise the profit, but only because they know that I am resolutely committed to ensuring they get their share at the end of the year. This is how it should be as far as I am concerned. I don't ask my team to work harder to make more, I ask them to work smarter. Do more, but without more effort, and it is paying off to the benefit of all.

So when I think about how I run my business, I don't see me as a proper Tory. I'm certainly not a Socialist, neither am I Liberal. I use the best of the idealogical spectrum to run my business, and it works - really works.

If this can apply in business, albeit a small one, can not the same principles be scaled up so that bigger companies get the same result from their teams? Why not the same principles apply to the whole country?

So what am I politically? Neither Labour, Liberal, or Conservative. I think I will have to settle on pan-political, and continue to cherry pick the best of the spectrum.

Sexual Harassment or not?

Yesterday, 10th September 2015 saw an explosion in the media when Charlotte Proudman publicly outed Mr Alexander Carter-Silk over a personal message sent to Ms Proudman through LinkedIn, a well known business, as opposed to social, media website.

The content of the message is here:

There are many who take the view that this exchange should not have been published by Ms Proudman. However, right or wrong as you see it, it has made the public domain and caused quite a stir in doing so. There has been much already written on the matter both for and against these two people, but I feel that what is being missed by other commentators is the vital underlying issue, and that is the lack of respect on display.

When I see the words of Mr Carter-Silk "I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect" there is only one inference one can draw from this and that is he knew he was crossing the line.

These enlightened days in which we live we have tolerance for all manner of things where once we did not. The way the ladies and gentlemen behaved back when my parents were courting just post-war has largely been lost. It does still happens from time to time, and as an old fashioned person myself, it is lovely when it occurs. When a gentleman holds a door open for me, I don't see it other than a display of proper respect and courtesy. It seems to me that we have lost so much of the common courtesy and respect for each other in essentially a generation or two.

You can see this in the way people behave when they get behind the wheel of their cars/vans, rushing for a train, getting a drink in a busy pub. Everyone is in such a rush to get there first, or at least ahead of the person in front. Impatience is on display everywhere these days, because we have to live our lives at such a frantic pace. It seems to me that so many have become careless, yes care less, on how their actions affect others.

So is the example of behaviour shown by Mr Carter-Silk Sexual Harassment? Well of course it is, but why do I feel it is so? Simply because the comment was made from someone who didn't know the recipient outside of the professional context. In the right context, Ms Proudman would likely have enjoyed receiving such a message.

We as a society are losing sight of the right way to behave toward each other, and I feel it is time we stopped this downward spiral and started to behave for the good of us all.