Gender quotas a positive step

IT HAS been interesting to follow this week’s discussion on gender quotas in the letters column and to see the charge made that they are undemocratic or discriminatory.

In fact these quotas have been introduced in almost half of all countries precisely because it is recognised that a democracy cannot be considered complete without the full participation of women, as well as men, in political life. Indeed countries such as France, Spain and the Netherlands have also embraced gender quotas in the corporate boardroom. As long ago as 1997, the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s (IPU) Universal Declaration on Democracy explicitly related democracy to “a genuine partnership between men and women”.

Our government — as well as those who fear that quotas could be discriminatory — could learn from the IPU’s use of gender neutral quotas. This would mean that, instead of requiring that 30% or 40% of the general election candidates selected by political parties should be women, our legislation would require that a minimum of 30% or 40% of either sex be put forward. The current proposal suggests 30% should be women when the quota is first applied, and 40% thereafter.

Gender-neutral quotas are not only non-discriminatory, they also ensure that the lower required percentage does not become a barrier to the increased participation of either sex. Of course, candidate selection quotas alone are unlikely to bring real change in the levels of representation of women in the first few elections in which they are applied. This is one reason why they should be applied in local as well as general elections. In part, this is because an incumbent has an advantage over a newcomer. Their positive effects should, however, include forcing parties to examine the culture within which they operate and making them take seriously the issues that inhibit women’s full participation.

Sandra McAvoy

Cork Women’s Political Association

Douglas Road

Cork