My mother is so lucky. Just five minutes’ walk from her house is the best independent bookshop in Britain. And I am not being sentimental or biased. The Aldeburgh Bookshop won that accolade at the British Book Awards this year.

Deservedly so. Inside, it is bright and cheerful, with an eclectic range of books, knowledgeable staff and comfortable armchairs. You can order any book in print and it will be in the shop within 24 hours. Why use Amazon when you have a service like that?

The trouble is that most of us don’t. It is far easier and more convenient for us to buy books online or to pick them up on our weekly supermarket shop than to trek to Waterstone’s or Ottakar’s and probably pay more for the privilege. Because books are a commodity, like CDs or iPods, it makes no difference where you buy them. So, as long as you know what you want, you may as well go for the cheapest option.

Why are books cheaper in supermarkets and online? Because publishers give those retailers far bigger discounts than they do to the specialist chains. No wonder that Water- stone’s is trying to strengthen itself by making a bid for Ottakar’s. Both companies have seen their book sales fall over the past few years in the face of intense price competition. When the latest Harry Potter came out, Asda and Tesco sold it for £7.99 (against the official price of £16.99), while Waterstone’s and Ottakar’s could afford only £11.99.

Yet it is those very same publishers — and their authors — who are now bewailing the takeover. Ottakar’s must remain independent, they say. We don’t want our high streets homogenised.

It’s an attractive argument, and one that would normally win me over. Aren’t we all in favour of diversity, of consumer choice? Yes, but this choice won’t be available for much longer unless the specialist chains do merge. Year after year they lose sales to the supermarkets and online bookstores, thanks to the publishers’ pricing policies. Ottakar’s has already put out two profit warnings this year and at one point saw its share price nearly halved.

Authors really need these specialist shops. Tesco won’t sell an obscure novel or the work of a first-time writer. Supermarkets don’t stock backlists — all they sell are bestsellers. Authors rely on specialist shops to make their name. So, rather than railing against this merger, they should be putting pressure on their publishers to treat the likes of Waterstone’s and Ottakar’s more fairly.

We have seen this phenomenon in the music market. The supermarkets and Woolworths stock only chart hits and popular bands, but they can afford to undercut the likes of HMV, Waterstone’s owner. As a result, HMV’s like-for-like music sales have fallen by 9.2 per cent this year.

It is probably true that Ottakar’s allows its managers more freedom to buy and promote their own choice of books than Waterstone’s does. But, if that is the case, then publishers should exhort the new merged company to use Ottakar’s buying practices rather than lament a situation that they brought about in the first place.

None of this would have happened had the Net Book Agreement still been in place, which forced books to be sold at a fixed price. Yet we should not be Luddite either. The book industry has not collapsed since the NBA was abolished. Far from it. Consumers can now afford to buy more books, and they do. Interest in literature has probably never been higher. Newspapers compete to offer bigger and bigger book supplements. Literary festivals, such as the current one in Cheltenham, are packed and thriving. Good first-time authors have no problem finding a publisher. Book clubs are springing up all over.

But we still value the advice and variety that a proper bookshop can offer. And publishers should value the marketing opportunity for less famous authors that the specialists provide. If they want a good bookshop on every high street, they should price their product accordingly. And if we want one, we should stir ourselves to visit them, as Alan Bennett reminded us this week, not order automatically from Amazon.

After all, that’s what the good citizens of Aldeburgh do.

Tory party needs to be feminised

In Portcullis House today, the four Tory leadership contenders face one of their most important hustings, at a meeting of the Contact group of Conservative women. Why should these women matter so much? Because they are the only people likely to put the contestants on the spot on an issue that ought to matter hugely to the party.

As our wider society becomes increasingly more equal, the Conservative Party has been beached. It is still overwhelmingly male. Before the last election, 92 per cent of its MPs were men; now the figure is 91 per cent.

Women used at least to be seen as the backbone of the voluntary party, even if they didn’t make it to the House of Commons. Yet only two of the 17 members of the Conservative Party Board are women, and one of those is the secretary.

At the election, the Tories did disastrously among women voters, who used to support them disproportionately. To win women back, the party has to look more female and to talk more about issues that matter to women.

Today, the leadership contenders should not be allowed simply to mouth platitudes about encouraging more women candidates. They must be forced to explain exactly how they will achieve it. And if they look at other political parties all over the Western world, they will find that the only successful method is to use some form of positive discrimination.

I know it doesn’t sound Conservative. But not sounding Conservative is precisely the tactic that any new leader needs to adopt. And being bold about feminising the party would be a great start.

Digital disaster?

A postscript to my column last week about the horrors of the digital switchover . . . Several readers have e-mailed me to point out that, with digital TV, you can’t watch one channel and video another. And now, the BBC is telling us that the licence fee must soar by well above inflation, at least partly to pay for the switchover.

Any more punishments it intends to inflict?

maryann.sieghart@thetimes.co.uk

Times Recommends

• We have kit and leadership. Let’s go
• Behind the scenes at the biggest deal
• Conferences — what a waste of money