In recent comments to this blog, an issue has been made of the fact that Charlotte Vere once had a nanny for her children and had holidays in Switzerland and Barbados.
While maybe not intended, there is an element of sexism in these comments. I have yet to see negative comments made of a man who has made it to the top should he have a wife at home looking after young children or if the mother of his children is working and they jointly employ a nanny. No, it is only women who attract comments if they have a nanny.
And so what if she has had holidays. Good luck to her.
The issue here is not about nannies and holidays, it is about need, and whether that need can be met regardless of ability to pay.
I have no difficulty defending Chuck Vere in regard to these criticisms. However, if in her campaigning and support of policies that directly or indirectly limit the potential of women to achieve their aspirations, get education and training, pursue a career, because of the absence of or restrictions on childcare, then she can expect this blog to single her out for criticism. But that criticism will be based on policy not gender.
At the heart of this debate will be public funding, and as a Tory candidate she will face close scrutiny regarding support for Tory cuts to the poorest and most marginalised.
Perhaps Chuck Vere will make an early commitment to unambiguously support free or affordable childcare.
The Brighton Pavilion campaign, with three strong women candidates in Nancy Platts, Caroline Lucas and Chuck Vere, will attract sexist criticism. On the other hand it will inspire a generation of young girls that candidacy for high office is something open to them. For this this blog thanks Nancy, Caroline and Chuck.