Spatial intelligence and the Returning Officer... (the chamber ensemble mix)

So, there I was, vaguely thinking about candidate selection, when my Twitter feed was suddenly disturbed by talk of Question Time, most of it disapproving as usual (David Starkey? Really?). But amidst the despair, one comment caught my attention like a brightly coloured fish.

Belinda Brooks-Gordon, one of my Region's candidates for Europe, asked why no-one ever looks at how candidates are selected, suggesting that you could 'degender' them. I was intrigued, so I asked what she meant. An intriguing Twitter conversation followed, in which we were joined by Jennie Rigg, and it got me thinking. In the search for equality of outcome, have I rather forgotten for whom the outcome is intended?

Let me explain. As a Returning Officer, the aim is to develop, and manage, a process whereby each candidate is treated the same, a process which can be defended against appeal. And that, of course, is good for Returning Officers, easy to operate, ticks all the appropriate bureaucratic boxes, etc., etc. But does it serve the candidates or, for that matter, the members that well? Suddenly, I'm not so sure...

Designing a simple process that doesn't discriminate is difficult, so perhaps I shouldn't try. Instead, why not offer candidates equality of opportunity? I could offer each candidate a slot which they could use as they prefer, giving a presentation, or a speech, or simply having a conversation with members, playing to their strengths as they see fit. It does offer a challenge to members, in that a direct comparison is more complex, but is that such a bad thing?

So, does that avoid inadvertent discrimination or bias on the part of the process, and will it lead to the selection of a more diverse range of candidates? Well, we'll never know unless we try...