At the end of the debate we were asked, who influences us now? Then; who will influence us in ten years time?  I think the real question is who is influencing our children now? Then; who will influence our children in ten years time.

Before leaving the house my teenage son asked where I was going. I told him about the debate. He asked me if I had ever heard of Phillip DeFranca. I had not.

I had enough to to get online and find out about him. He he is young man who web-cats for three minutes a day on gobal current affairs. He gets between 500,000 and four million views and his influence amongst the 14 to 19-year-old age group is huge.

Few of those at the debate will have heard of him and, although he reaches people through YouTube, I do not believe it is Google who has the influence it is Phil DeFranca. As we move forward the power of individual will increase. If you want to know who is going to be the biggest influence in our lives, try looking over the shoulder of your teenagers as they scour the internet. That is where the answer is.

Is it any wonder that so many of them choose to inhabit the risk-free world of computer games. I am not talking about those violent, savage games such as Grand Theft Auto but of the mythical, charming world of Final Fantasy.

Yes, they are fascinating, compelling and a haven for so many stressed-out teenagers. But are the safe. In the direct sense; yes. But they have an insidious quality which makes them a very real danger for our kids. In the end, many of our youngster prefer the virtual world to the real one….and that has very many dangerous implications.

At 8.OOpm on  ITV’s Tonight  I revisit three boys I interviewed three years ago about their computer game addiction. I wanted to see if they were off their drug of choice and working their way back to the real world. Two have made good progress but a third is still deeply immersed in his struggle.

This report has particular relevance to me since my own son developed a compulsion for computer gaming while I was making the original film. He has turned a corner…..but it has been a long and tiring three years…for him and for the rest of our family.

We under-estimate the lure of these games at our peril. The challenge now is to connect with our teenagers and make every effort to make real life a safe place to be.

It appeals to me on another level. It is an activity that makes me feel more connected with my community and with the powers that be in Brussels. Through my political activities I have met my Euro MP and several candidates. My point is this: it does not take much time or effort to get involved, and the rewards are considerable. Think about how much better you feel when you view your bank balance regularly. You know how much i there is in your account and you can then manage it properly. It is the same in politics - pay attention to what is going on around you - even in a small way - and you will start to feel a lot better about life

Over the last few weeks we have spent hours debating the moral corruption and selfishness of MPs. In many cases we have every right to do this. Haven’t we fallen a sleep at the wheel, though. Voter apathy is a big problem but to carry on the analogy indifference can be a two-way street. We looked away for long enough and we were taken advantage of.

The best way to stop any kind of horror is to expose it to public scrutiny. That doesn’t mean just reading an online account of your MPs expenses, it means paying attention to the political process. Like our newspapers sometimes we get the politicians we deserve. As Peter Gabriel said of the South African apartheid regime after the death of Steve Biko……”the eyes of the world are watching now.” Steve Biko needed to be politically aware and active. We can’t all be active…but we can be aware.

When I thought about it, I realized that there would be many more at the top if the number of women entering politics increased at the bottom. The City and big corporations have all been able to entice more women into their ranks and then successfully plug the leaky pipeline…..that is all that has to happen in politics.

What women need is practical help coping with their responsibilities. We are the sandwich generation and often have to cope with young children and aging parents. What about making childcare tax deductable? Shirley Conran once said that the biggest boost to the feminist movement was the washing machine…..how right she was.

And what about making politics appealing - at least to the point where women can understand its relevance to our lives.

I am not in favour of positive discrimination because I don’t think it is necessary if enough women participate. It really is a numbers game.

In a feature I wrote for the Mail on Sunday recently I wrote of what it was like to be an ordinary woman trying to become an MP. Some readers suggested I was far from ordinary because of my job as a journalist and my contacts in the media world. This misses the point entirely.

In a sense we are all ordinary people who can behave in extraordinary ways depending on whether we are dealt a blow or bestowed a boon.

I once interviewed Pam Warren the survivor of the Paddington Rail crash, who famously wore a plastic mask to help her scars heal. Her hands will never recover and her tendency to suffer flashbacks will always remain. She has become a motivational speaker: courageous and inspiring. But she would agree with me that she is just an ordinary person.

In my job as a journalist I have met many extraordinary people, from the lorry driver from Rochdale who raised half a million pounds to fund his daughter’s cancer treatment to the widows of the New York fireman, but at heart they were all ordinary. My extraordinary good fortune was to meet them.

We need people who can rise to the challenge by behaving well. It doesn’t matter what their job is. Plenty of current MPs were ordinary people behaving badly what we need is ordinary people behaving well. What we need most of all is leaders behaving well. The best way to spot a leader is to look at who is following. On June 4 we will know.

I would like to thank everyone who took the time to comment on the article. Debate is the essence of our democracy and the ability to criticize should be defended at all costs.

However, I should like to take this opportunity to point out a few issues contained within the article which have been misunderstood.

I was not complaining that I felt let down by the Party after less than a year on the list. Rather, I was highlighting that, having got on the list and tried to “start at the bottom”, I was annoyed about Mr Cameron’s reopening the list for “ordinary people”. I noted that his announcement specifically stated that applicants need not have a political history. The absence of this “political history” is central to many of the less positive comments about the article. I am happy - as I stated - to acquire a political footprint. I am less than happy that it would appear that this is now not necessary.

I have not given up trying to be an MP. Quite the reverse. In fact I am off to a local campaign (Zac Goldsmith) meeting in the next half an hour. However, I believe that we should use all the talents at our disposal. Yes, I am able to write for a national newspaper but is that not one of the key skills required for a politician? I note that most of the shadow front bench have, at one time or another in the last 12 months, contributed to newspapers. Indeed, Michael Gove makes a living that way. Being able to communicate on this basis should not preclude my standing and does not, in my opinion, compromise my claim to “ordinariness”.

Finally, let me say that I would like this debate to continue so please keep the comments coming.

During this 12 month period, the 645 MPs listed in this analysis claimed a total of £92,933,748 or an average of £144,176 per MP. Of this, the second home allowance cost the taxpayer £11,584,454 or an average of £17,960. The total second home expenses accounted for just 13% of the total. The cost of supporting MPs’ offices was £66,877,327 or £103,686 per MP. This is equivalent to 73% of the total expenses claimed by MPs in the last reported year.

Without wishing to pre-empt the Telegraph newspapers’ next analysis, I am concerned that some MPs will be unable to justify staffing expenses of over £100,000 in one year. For the record, there were 17 MPs in this bracket with a further 212 MPs claiming between £90,000 and £100,000 for staff in their offices.

Clearly this is all above board but the suggestion that MPs are employing family and friends, thereby further boosting their income, is likely to follow any such examination.

The problem remains the defence offered by MPs when questioned about the issue of expenses. This appears to be nothing more than the system is to blame and everything was done with the approval of the Fees Office. This is insufficient. Particularly, if the largest cost to the taxpayer is the expenses claimed for the running of offices with, as far as I am able to discern, little or no official over-sight.

The case for total transparency is proven. The defence of “playing within the rules” is redundant. The time to cease these “office politics” long overdue.

No. According to many of my friends I have joined the ranks of the truly crazy people. I have decided to leave “ordinary life” behind and try to become an MP.

Many of my friends and family are stupefied. I have no background in politics and although I have been a journalist all my working life, I have never reported from the lobby.

But for five years I have reported on some of the worst social issues to face this country and what I saw was a perfect storm.

Pregnant teenagers, the fall-out from 24-hour drinking and a nation living on credit, co-joined with too many politicians looking for a sound-bite with precious little front-line experience of life in Britain on the edge.

Last summer I did not even belong to a political party. I did not know any MPs, any councillors or any political advisors other than the ones I had interviewed for ITV, Sky or the Daily Mail….and some of those have crossed me off their Christmas card list after encounters on ITV’s Tonight programme that did not go their way.

But I have always been a Conservative at heart so I joined the Richmond Park Conservatives Association and started doing some research.

I discovered I had to sit the Parliamentary Assessment Board in order to get on the list of approved candidates. I was, by now, so close to the deadline I had to mail the forms from my holiday, having slipped into a French supermarket photo-booth for the pictures first.

Twelve weeks later I found myself in a Cheshire hotel room with six hours of tests ahead of me. I was only slightly more nervous covering the overthrow of Indonesia’s President Suharto. I also remember registering that I was the only woman, the only person with children and the only person with no political footprint whatsoever.

Still, I passed the tests and got onto the List. I still find it hugely impressive that a political party is prepared to move that quickly when they see someone with potential.

Since then I have had a great deal of support from the Candidates’ Committee and from individual MPs I meet along the way. Senior Shadow Cabinet Ministers have taken the time and trouble to give me their advice. But now I am concerned.

I can see that there is sometimes a very big gap between the candidates favoured by the local associations, and the ones on the list. This is understandable. The associations develop relationships with potential MPs over many years. They can be resentful of anyone being parachuted in.

Alternatively I can understand our leadership wanting a more diverse range of candidates. It is the only way to get to the widest range of voters. We already know how important it is to have accessible women MPs – some commentators have called it the Grazia effect.

There is a disconnect here, but it is not insurmountable. At least we are able to fast track promising candidates in a plausible way, even if it does not always work.

But while I agree with much of what David Cameron had to say this week, I feel strongly that the debate over the selection of women has become mired in party politics rather than a discussion over how the selection process can accommodate the practicalities of life as a woman in Britain.

The simple fact of the matter is that many women who could be persuaded to represent their communities do not have the time or the support system to start a political career in the current system. Representative women are not single barristers, special advisors or scions of political dynasties. Representative women juggle a combination of family budgets, child-care and supporting partners – if they are lucky enough to have one.

Take one afternoon this week. I had a letter-writing panel to re-structure, a ward committee meeting to chair, emails to write thanking people I met at the previous evening’s Conservative Women’s Organization’s dinner, three children to feed, two sets of homework to supervise, a partner whose business had spent the day under intense pressure. To cap it all, the cleaner did not return from Poland.

Oh. I forgot about the day job. I run my own company, DuberleyMedia, which underpins the whole endeavour.

Now, I am a determined person, but even I had pause for thought when I found myself in the middle of Northwood Hills on a cold winter’s night last year, with a sack of leaflets, a torch and a map for company. Did anyone know I was there?

Since then I have had many enjoyable trips but I am beginning to wonder about the opportunity cost to my fledgling business.

My day out in Waltham Forest was fascinating. I was helping with a local by-election. I spent a pleasant morning with the ex-chair of the association - a charming woman but I am not sure that it increased my political footprint. Maybe I now leave a slight indentation.

As part of Zac Goldsmith’s campaign team I spend a lot of time – as he does – on street stalls or out canvassing and leafleting. I love it. My local association is packed with genuine people but it is time consuming and does it help me get a seat? I am not so sure because no other association will have any contact with me before they see me on the day of a selection.

Recently, I made my first applications. I got to the last eight for Holborn and St Pancras. The selection panel was nerve-wracking but then so was being shot at in Jakarta and tear-gassed in Seoul. I received some very useful but retrospective advice from Teresa May and I will be using it next time.

The trouble is I can overcome my nerves – three years of covering riots and mayhem in the Far East and hundreds of live-shots for 24-hour news saw to that. I can polish up my performance but I know from years of experience in raising children and running a home while working in a pressurized environment, that the way forward is with a clear framework. Without that many women candidates will end up either exhausted or broke - or both.

I

The simple fact of the matter is that women who could legitimately represent their communities do not have the time or wherewithal to start a political career in the current system. Representative women are not single barristers, special advisers or the scions of political dynasties. Representative women juggle a combination of family budgets, looking after children and supporting their partners. They are not given time off to run round the country, fighting every seat that comes available nor are they likely to be tipped the wink on the selection process like Georgia Gould, reported in Daniel Finkelstein’s informative article.

I support David Cameron wholeheartedly. However, when I am out canvassing the people I meet feel an abiding sense of distance from their political representatives. They are not like us, they tell me. Little wonder, if we are only able to choose from a group of people who have the ability to put their lives on hold for a prolonged period of time with no financial recompense.

Our claim to live in a democratic society must extend to the ability of all to seek office. The day-to-day needs of representative women must be taken into account when setting selecting procedures otherwise the current problem will persist.

In the run up to the next election, while candidates are still be selected, all parties must consider that representative women need more help to become involved politically. This need not be preferential treatment. However, it should not penalise women who can bring insight to the problems of today simply because they cannot campaign 200 miles from their homes and children.

Not every budding political woman is Margaret Thatcher but, then, not every budding political woman has a Denis.

What is wrong with us? Faced with economic oblivion, countless examples of society coming unglued and the continuing drip, drip of environmental doom, we content ourselves with a puerile debate about who knew about Damien’s e-mails. Do we really care? Or is this analogous to a 16 year old planning revision rather than getting into the books?

It was wrong. More people knew about it. It is a damning indictment of our political elite. Point ends.

As we drift into an election year, the politics of stupidity are well and truly upon us. Easter may be silly season but that does not give us leave to take leave of our senses. Wake up and smell the coffee!

We should be debating how to get close to three million (say it again) people back into employment. We should be talking about whether this, or any other Government, can cut its way through a labyrinthine tax code and allow people to get their lives back. We should be discussing what we do about 65 year olds retiring with mortgages, no job and a paltry pension. In short, we should be talking people, not the minutia of the Westminster Village’s also rans and never weres.

Where are all the good men (and women)? Have they given up on politics, philosophy and economics? Or did they not get the grades and read Media Studies instead?

We are faced with serious times and serious problems. If I am the only person on planet UK who does not care what Damien did then I am on the next plane.

Listen to your head or your heart, it doesn’t matter. But, please, do not listen to the noise.