Forced quotas are not the way to go to encourage women in politics

I WOULD like to comment on an ongoing discussion about the participation of women in electoral politics. It is of course true that women have been under-represented in politics compared to men and much has been written about how to increase their representation.

The United Nations has identified a few avenues whereby female participation in politics and governance may be strengthened, the two most notable being, an equalisation of educational opportunities, and the introduction of a quota system.

I would welcome the equalisation of educational opportunities, but I do feel that a legal quota is not the best way forward towards trying to achieve a more acceptable balancing of the genders in political life.

Interestingly, quite a number of Irish female TD’s are against gender quotas on the basis that they have been elected on a level playing field to everyone else and would not like this to be in any way diluted or lessened, in the eyes of the electorate.

I do realise that, for instance, Rwanda in 1995, was ranked 24th in the world as regards female representation in politics, and subsequently jumped to first in 2003, after quotas were introduced.

Having a ‘critical value’, below which is deemed an imbalanced government is not necessarily the best way to go. In the Republic of Ireland recently, it was proposed that a bill was being considered whereby political parties were going to be compelled, when selecting candidates for election, to have at least 30% of them female.

Obviously this system could possibly contribute to the exclusion of an excellent male candidate, so as to include a female of lesser ability. This is not what democracy is or should be about.

This proposed legislation also neglected to state that a political party needed to appoint at least 30% male candidates. So in fact, this law wasn’t to be at all pro gender balance, but rather pro females solely. Add in the fact that if true gender balance was to be achieved, then a figure of 50% might just seem a bit more realistic, although unworkably unfair.

While I agree that there is a desire and a need for more female representation politically, I feel this ought be brought about by encouragement rather than by the imposition of laws and quotas. Also, in the same way that I think that a third level college education is a hugely laudable thing for everyone, I wouldn’t ever wish to see it made compulsory.

Women in politics have done admirably throughout the years, if not in the numbers we would want to have seen. In the Republic of Ireland, we have had brilliant representation at the head of state for the past 21 years by two female presidents.

Perhaps the upper house of the Oireachtas is the place to strive to advance the argument for increased female participation in politics. It is indeed ironic that, given that the Seanad had 100% more female representation than the Dáil, that people speak of abolishing the Seanad. Over 50% of the Irish Population is female, so even in a referendum on the abolition of the Seanad, women alone could save it, this would be a great ‘encouraging’ way to promote the power and value of the female vote, and might just contribute to a higher interest and participation politically of same.

Louise Patricia Sheridan

Ballytrust

Ballinagh

Co Cavan