Forum Topic

Why are there so few women in government?

So far four in the cabinet - only one in high profile job and another four in the lower reaches (and I am not sure whip in the Lords wholly counts)Are there no talented women in the tory party? (we pretty much know there are only about two in the LibDems which is shocking in itself)

Sara Nathan ● 5972d19 Comments

may be they are just not good enough .... who would choose such a career?

Dee Cook ● 5971d

Men do!Are all of them good enough?

Sara Nathan ● 5971d

Looking through the next tranche of Departmental appointments, I can spot Pauline Neville-Jones, Theresa Villiers and Justine Greening for the Tories, plus Sarah Teather for the other lot. That's four out of twenty eight so far. I'd expect to see Greening make strides in this parliament; she's bright and ambitious, and was briefly a resident of Julian Avenue. She stood here unsuccessfully in the 2001 parliamentary election, when it would be fair to say she didn't get the sort of backing from her party that Angie Bray got this time.Why aren't there more? Because both parties have neglected to ensure historically that sufficient women enter parliament in the first place. God knows there is no shortage of mediocre men in the House, but the supply is large enough to find the talent. The Tories have at least started to address this, but the Lib Dem attitude to diversity of representation has been, and remains, antediluvian. For an allegedly progressive party, their failure to take any steps whatever to address this is frankly a disgrace. Every single one of their MPs is white; almost all of them are male. When the moment came to nominate to the Cabinet, five white men were pushed forward, and they won't even have felt sheepish about it. I'm disinclined to believe that the chaps in suits are all that much better than Teather or Lynne Featherstone. Theresa May recently reflected that Labour was right to adopt the approach of all-women shortlists, controversial as they were (both inside and outside the party). No other strategy has delivered the same kind of results; although the Tory 'A list' policy this time has seen a marked improvement, it only exists as a response to the way in which Labour changed the benchmark. It's still sad that Baroness Warsi is there as a token of diversity in Cabinet, given that she'll be unpaid and will not have a senior ministerial role, but a few years ago a Tory government wouldn't even have thought about the gesture.It's not been a good few weeks for women in politics; elections are still testosterone charged affairs, and my own party could and should have done better in the campaign in projecting high profile women. I do worry that the progress of recent years will peter out.

Steve Donnelly ● 5971d

Baroness Warsi seems to have a fairly good reputation - and didn't do badly on the "griffin" Question Time - I've spoken to other peers who rate her.Among the Libdem peers, there is the delightful - and able - Jane Bonham Carter. Why could she not get a job?The four junior minister look good and pre-possessing but as you say Lynne Featherstone is thought to be a Good Thing and could be there. I don't know how the Libdems have got away with it for so long. Losing Susan Kramer was a real blow from the feminist perspective.At least in the last government there were enough female ministers that actually you didn't have to think about it. My favourite was Meg Hillier at the Home Office - but she was "my" minister so maybe that doesn't count. The problem of having so few is that failure by any one comes to be seen as a failure of ALL women and a proof of our incompetence so it becomes wholly circular: women don't do it because it is hard and isolating and they are over-scrutinised...so there are few of them...so it's hard and isolating and they are over-scrutinised.

Sara Nathan ● 5971d

Because they are too busy asking why there aren't any women in government! Facetiousness aside, there are good evolutionary reasons why women dont fill top jobs and only a small bit of it is having children.  And  you may as  well ask why there are not more women commiting violent crime. The two are not as far removed from each other as you'd think. Men who are insensitive, bullying, aggressive but not violent tend to become leaders. Men who have all the above traits but are violent are psychopaths and in jail or marginalised.Both sides, if there are sides to be taken, have reason to wish for better.

antony obrien ● 5971d

The failure of the Lib Dems in terms of female & BME representation is due to their refusal to adopt any affirmative action programme. They actually set up a committee to look into the lack of gender and ethnic balance in their parliamentary party. But sadly, whenever the matter is discussed at their conference, there is always lots of hand-wringing about how something needs to be done (but never the will to actually do it).I remember back in the mid-1990s, when there was controversy over Labour's all-women shortlists, a representative from the national party came to one of our branch meetings to discuss the issue with us. I was the loan voice arguing that the party needed to stick to its guns and see AWS through. Many of those present (including women) said they agreed that something had to be done about gender imbalance in the House of Commons (at that time 91% of MPs were men) but didn't agree that AWS was the way to do it - on the grounds that it was unfair to men.I countered by explaining that the party had had thousands of ipso facto all-male shortlists, and I ended by telling the representative that if the party gave up on AWS then NOTHING would be done about gender imbalance - and the whole issue would be kicked into the long grass for a generation.Often, you cannot bring about equality without a short-term mechanism of positive discrimination. Those who say that AWS does not take people on merit have a very low opinion of women - because they are, by definition, implying that the under-representation of women in parliament is somehow a reflection upon the relative "merit" of the two genders.In fact, it is not even essential to have AWS in order to make progress on gender equality. If the Lib Dems could at least do what the old SDP did (i.e. insist that every shortlist of between six and ten candidates for a parliamentary nomination must contain at least two men and two women) their representation of women might improve. It certainly worked for the SDP: they had a higher proportion of female candidates than the other three parties in both the 1983 and 1987 general elections.

Robin Taylor ● 5971d

Because all the public schoolboys would be embarrassed in their presence.

Colin Carroll ● 5971d

And yet many other democracies reserve seats for women - 40% in some places - and don't seem to engender the same suspicion or fury. It works well for them.I rather approve of all-women shortlists -or at least the SDP compromise version. Just waiting for things to get better doesn't seem to work well in Parliament - actually it's not going that well in the Judiciary either!I do wonder if having the genes that could otherwise end you up in jail are really a pre-requisite for them ending you up in parliament. A feminised institution might be better for all of us - or as my feisty deputy at Channel 4 news would say when the chaps were being particularly alpha male and tiresome: "gentlemen, do please stop waving your willies". Seemed to work rather well.

Sara Nathan ● 5971d

"particularly alpha male and tiresome: "gentlemen, do please stop waving your willies".Is that why Jon Snow wears colourful ties?

Colin Carroll ● 5971d

I thought exactly the same thing, Sara.  In fact, the whole election campaign seemed to be completely male dominated. All the women had been airbrushed out (along with George Osborne).  Where on earth were they all?I was a feminist at college in the 70s and I'm still a feminist, and it saddens me that although great strides have been made in so many areas, the face of government has not changed.  It is also, I have to say, almost exclusively white as well!

Anne Brown ● 5971d

"I rather approve of all-women shortlists " But Sara would you rather get a job because you were deemed the best candidate or simply due to your gender?  I know which I would prefer.  I am on the whole against positive discrimination.  Also if you are going to criticise the all male cabinet look at the PM and the Deputy PM BOTH their wives are the main breadwinners in their families with Cleggs wifey holding down a pretty high powered job

Jen Morty ● 5971d

And look how they were treated/behaved in the campaign!Not Mrs Clegg actually, but the other two.It would never be solely down to your gender obviously there would be competiton not least from other talented and ambitious women. But we are not likely to make progress without.

Sara Nathan ● 5971d

I think they pre-dated both Sue and I.

Sara Nathan ● 5971d

"But Sara would you rather get a job because you were deemed the best candidate or simply due to your gender?  I know which I would prefer.  I am on the whole against positive discrimination."A common misconception, Jen. The truth is that a lot of the men who are in the House of Commons are most certainly NOT there on merit. They are often there because their female counterparts encountered discrimination during the selection process. How else do you explain the fact that women have been cross-examined by selection committees about their commitment to their husbands and children? Do you honestly believe men are cross-examined in this way??As a male myself who was once selected as a candidate, I find it patronising that people think I need to be helped by this sort of anti-female discrimination. I would actually like to think that I was selected on merit! 

Robin Taylor ● 5971d

Not likely to make progress,  what about Thatcher,  all the women in top jobs in the last government.  I think if a woman wants to make her career in politics she can.And Robin of course lots of people get jobs they do not deserve i.e. they are not necessarily the best but that is life.  I would not want to start out with the agenda of an unfair position i.e. only being considered because I am a woman.

Jen Morty ● 5971d

I find myself nodding in agreement at a lot of what some people have said on this thread.  I'm not sure we have the full answer to why there are so few women in government, however, and maybe there's more than one root cause.I've been comfortable with positive discrimination, but as one poster says, it may serve to break the pattern of male domination in government.  I agree with Robin in that "(it's) a common misconception......The truth is that a lot of the men who are in the House of Commons are most certainly NOT there on merit" and I'd go one step further, quite controversially, and say that applies to many posts outside parliament!  I've worked with many men in the past, sometimes being the only female, so I think I speak with a little authority (at least in my map of the world!)  Generally (beware: generalisation coming up of course) men are really good at promoting the self and not shy at all, in the main, at spotting the key elements in the job which make one shine and stepping up to the plate.  In other words, women, GENERALLY,  are really good at detail, ploughing away, keeping the business going, daily running, nitty gritty, full of ideas and not very good at self-promotion, stepping up to the limelight and claiming that space.  That's my experience, both in business and as a therapist.  I've had many a moment of glory snatched away from me because I wasn't too keen to push forward ("oh no, really, after you, please) usually by a man.  Testosterone.  It's very powerful.

Angela White ● 5971d

Apologies, that should read "I've NEVER been comfortable with positive discrimination".

Angela White ● 5971d

"Not likely to make progress,  what about Thatcher,  all the women in top jobs in the last government?"Well, Thatcher was a bit of a red herring in this regard. The telebiog "Long walk to Finchley" illustrated the prejudice she encountered in attempting to find a seat in the 1950s. Unfortunately, she was an example of someone who, when she finally fought her way on board, pulled up the ladder behind her. Her cabinets were the most male dominated in modern times (herself apart), although this latest one hardly covers itself in glory.As for women in top jobs in the last parliament - well, QED! Labour in 1997 engineered, quite deliberately, the biggest increase in women MPs in history and, as a result, put in place a pool of talent from which ministers and cabinet ministers later grew. Some came through an AWS, some did not, but the point is that a space was created in which talented women could push through.If you believe that our democratic institutions should reflect our society (which I do), then you have also to accept that there is an infinite supply of evidence that the selection processes have been deeply discriminatory. (Unless you think that women are simply less talented, of course.) At that point the choice is between hand-wringing (the Lib Dem position) and action.There is now plentiful, empirical evidence that the AWS system is the only one to deliver quick and significant results; when the Labour party suspended their use in 2001 because of legal challenges, the momentum in increasing women's representation completely stalled. As a result the government legislated to confirm their legality beyond dispute.The ideal is to get enough women in senior positions in public life to ensure that attitudes of the constituency selectorates are changed in a lasting way, without the deep-rooted, institutionalised sexism that the AWS system was set up to challenge. If we reach that happy state, then the need for positive discrimination will be over; I think it would be a giddy optimist who felt we were yet there.If Parliament is to lecture others about their behaviour - as it needs to in, say, women's representation at executive level in FTSE boardrooms - it will do so with greater moral authority if it has, across all parties, put its own house in order first.

Steve Donnelly ● 5969d

Have just discovered that an erstwhile Ofcom colleague was elected MP for Newcastle - and a frighteningly clever, black woman to boot.Such good news as she will be a fab MP and I would have thought a fab minister too - though as a new Labour MP (as opposed to a nu-labour one, ovvie) she may take a while to manage that.

Sara Nathan ● 5968d