Audio of the interview. Lo and behold, the Times article was accurate.
A row has erupted after Conservative leadership candidate Andrea Leadsom was accused of suggesting that having children made her a better choice to be prime minister. The Times quoted the mother of three as saying having children meant she had "a very real stake" in Britain's future.
She later said she was "disgusted" with the interview's presentation. Times journalist Rachel Sylvester defended her article, saying she was "baffled" by Mrs Leadsom's reaction.
Speaking outside her home in Northamptonshire, Mrs Leadsom said she was "disgusted about how this has been presented". "In the course of a lengthy interview yesterday, I was repeatedly asked about my children and I repeatedly made it clear that I did not want this in any way a feature of the campaign," she added.
"I want to be crystal clear that everyone has an equal state in our society and in the future of our country. That is what I believe and it is what I have always believed... this campaign must at all times be principled and honourable." In an earlier statement, she said the reporting had been "beneath contempt".
Ms Sylvester told the BBC the article had been "fairly written up" and she was "baffled" by Mrs Leadsom's "rather aggressive reaction". "I asked her a very straightforward question... She raised Theresa May and the fact that she doesn't have children," she said. "I asked her directly 'what are the differences between you and Theresa May?'."She said 'economic competence and family'... she clearly thinks that is a big selling point with her."
Ms Sylvester added that it was "accurate journalism" and she thought Mrs Leadsom was "naive to make that comparison and not think it would become an issue".
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36752865
No comments:
Post a Comment
Due to a small but consistent influx of spam, comments will now be checked before publishing. Only egregious spam/illegal/racist crap will be disapproved, everything else will be published.