Why does a government which calls itself Conservative even have a Minister for Women and Equalities? The post was invented by the Blair creature and first held by Harriet Harman, that apostle of social and sexual revolution. But when David Cameron, posing as a Tory, became Premier in 2010, he kept it on.

Cameron was, as he privately said,  the ‘heir to Blair’ and this was one way of proving it, so keeping the BBC – which polices the borders of what can be said or thought – from destroying him at election time. Since then, under various names, it has been held by several Conservatives, including the allegedly anti-woke Tory leadership campaigner Kemi Badenoch, plus Liz Truss and, of course, Miss Woke herself, the remarkable Penny Mordaunt.

The whole thing, which operates in the name of ‘gender equality’, is based on the firm belief that women ought to go out and earn wages to be fulfilled and that the raising of the next generation is a second-rate task, best farmed out to paid strangers.

This is, of course, a point of view which deserves a hearing. And boy, has it had a hearing since the new wave of American feminists got going back in the 1960s.

It suits the state, because it creates millions of new taxpayers. And it suits big business, because it provides a willing new workforce. And, of course, it suits the minority of women who pursue exciting high-flying careers of the Cherie Blair type, and who can afford good nannies.

It is not so great for those who must work in call centres and such places, leaving their young all day in dreary childcare. And it is pretty terrible for the children themselves, in my humble opinion.

It is certainly not a conservative idea, any more than the other aspects of ‘equality’ – mostly political correctness dolled up as virtue. Conservatives are supposed to defend family life and the institution of marriage.

If a woman (or a man for that matter) prefers to stay at home to bring up and educate the young, conservatives respect them for it and, at the very least, don’t get in their way. But look at how the tax breaks and the social attitudes go, if you want to choose this way of life.

The tax and benefits system, and the attitudes of all parts of the state, will help almost any form of childcare – except the one where a parent stays at home to do it and the family has to cope on a single income. Since this form of ‘equality’ got under way, the old form of family has been badly squeezed. You have to be rich, or grimly determined, or both, to do it. And in any case this point of view is now dismissed by millions as bigoted.

Why does nobody in politics oppose this anti-family policy, even though there are good, strong arguments against it? Here’s why.

Read here