Why on earth would a City firm in this century stoop – or perhaps that should be stand on tip toes – to demanding its female workforce wears high heels to work?

The reason I raise the question is because MPs have just called for laws that should ban this sort of blatant discrimination to be enforced, and for those responsible to face fines.

The reason for why firms still operate policies of such paralysing stupidity, of course, is me. Or people like me. By that, I mean men with a few miles on the clock.

Y’see, while it is starting to change (albeit far too slowly), business is still overwhelmingly dominated by men.

Those men who have control of budgets and the power to make decisions over them, usually have a few years behind them.

City firms like to put us in a good mood when we pitch up to discuss business armed with possible contracts. And before you make the point that I’m not in business, it also holds true for financial hacks. They want me in a good mood so I write nice things about them.

Apparently that’ll happen if I'm taken up past the bland corporate artwork to the meeting room by someone who is young, and attractive, and female.

If she’s tottering around on heels, well that’s just the mother lode. Phwoarr! Did you see that? Where do I sign up for that seven figure consulting contract? Damn it, I'm just going to turn this into an article that reads PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) is great! The receptionists wear heels!

In case you were wondering where PwC comes into this, it was at PwC's offices where the high heels policy was in place that caused the furore that led to the MPs’ report.

Actually, to be strictly correct, it was in place at the recruitment agency that provided the receptionists at PwC's offices. So it’s not PwC’s fault. Even thought it was PwC that hired the firm – Portico – with the policy.

Unfortunately for PwC, you can outsource the function, but you don’t get to outsource the responsibility. It doesn’t work like that. People are inclined to ask whether you knew about the policy, and if you didn't know, then why you didn't know.

Portico, and perhaps PwC too, seems to think that I'm really, really shallow. Or that my entire gender and demographic is really really shallow. I know parts of it are. But it bothers me that firms like this think we're all that way.

For the record, I am not the victim here. The people we should be concerned about are those at the sharp end of regressive, asinine and discriminatory policies like this.

People like Nicola Thorp, who was sent home for turning up for a shift at PwC wearing flat shoes that I'd imagine are rather more comfortable for escorting people around buildings than high heels. Not to mention rather better for your long term health, given the damage spending hours on your feet in heels can do to your posture.

If you really want to put me in a good try serving up coffee that doesn’t taste like mud having languished in a metallic beaker thingy that I can never work out how to operate. Or outsourcing its provision to Café Nero, or (even better) to Union Coffee or Square Mile, companies which source beans with the capacity to wake even the most somnolent of taste buds. PwC could even bask in the reflected glory of how well the growers are treated. It could at least be worth a try. It’d put me in a good mood, anyway.

In the mean time, while Portico has apparently dropped its policy, there are plenty that haven’t. So let’s fine those that haven’t got their heads around the fact that sexist dress policies demanding women wear heels would have looked outdated in the late 20th century, let alone the 21st.