I have always believed candidates for all parties should be chosen solely on the basis of merit – regardless of gender or any other factor.
I also believe ordinary grassroots members of political parties should be the ones who pick candidates to represent them.
For both these reasons – for many years – I’ve been a vocal opponent of gender quotas being imposed on Irish political parties (also against any other type of quota being imposed on parties).
I was wrong…
I now firmly believe I was wrong in thinking you couldn’t have one while maintaining the other. It’s very possible to have quotas and, at the same time, let ordinary members choose their candidates on basis of merit.
My political life
I’ve been involved in politics off & on for most of my life. Much of that time I have been, and still am, a member of Fianna Fáil.
I’m delighted my parliamentary party are fully supportive of the gender quotas legislation that came before Seanad Eireann today.
I hope their Amendment – proposing gender quotas also apply to Local Elections – is taken on board. (If parties thought about it, this makes complete sense for blooding new candidates ahead of next General Election).
I’m very conscious in supporting my parliamentary party on this. I’m in a minority among my party’s ordinary members. Many Fianna Fáil members are understandably opposed to the introduction of quotas – for a variety of reasons:
- grass-roots opposition to this Gender Quotas legislation is a common theme among members of all parties (from talking to friends in other parties)
- the most common reason I’ve heard for opposition is – Quotas are “undemocratic” & will result in “token women” candidates being imposed by HQ.
- the other usual argument is: Why stop with women, should there not be quotas for every other type of minority to make our Dáil truly representative?
Dealing with these issues in reverse order…
- gender is different because circa 50% of population is female & 50% male – women are not a minority & should not be regarded as such. (Also, 50% of all other sub-categories would also be female.)
- Calling any candidate a “token candidate” is unfair on both the process & individual. No one – regardless of gender – should be labelled as “token”.
Selection Conventions
I’ve attended multiple selection conventions. Anyone who can say (“hand on their heart”) all candidates have been picked on the basis of merit alone should consider politics themselves. They have obvious ability to lie with a straight face – either that or they are clearly delusional!
What now needs to happen is …
all parties should select candidates democratically at local level, u sing the rules that apply.
Contrary to popular belief one member, one vote (OMOV) selection and Quotas are not mutually exclusive.
People need to just operate within the constraints that apply when choosing candidates.
Quotas of type (for example, geographic) have been used for years without ever being called “quotas”. Grassroots members just need to adapt to the new circumstances.
In the case of my party, Fianna Fáil, this will probably mean that, for 2014 ‘locals’, we’ll operate two new types of quota – gender & younger-than-30s.
But neither should conflict with candidates still being selected on merit at local level by the local membership.
Temporary quotas
(they should become obsolete within 4 General Election cycles) are one small but important part of the overall solution to get more women involved in politics.
Temporary quotas should never be considered in isolation – instead they should be seen as a key part of the overall solution.
Where quotas will come into their own is in terms of changing the culture internally in parties. No matter how much we’d like to deny it, the culture in parties is still mildly misogynistic. This culture has filtered through to our elected chambers, where we still have just 15% female representation in Dáil – & only 100 women have ever held a Dáil seat.
This mildly misogynistic culture was never more evident than in the 2012 budget which is possibly the most misogynistic in years – possibly reflecting the fact we only have 2 women out of 15 in cabinet (both in stereotypical female ministries).
Quotas are going to come in – that is a certainty. My suspicion is (despite being long overdue) their imminent arrival has come far too fast for many ordinary party members.
To overcome this – hand-in-hand with measures now being put in place to get more women involved
- existing members (regardless of gender) need to be educated & consulted on quota implementation within parties to ensure such concerns can be addressed.
Most importantly of all…
- it’s vital that selection conventions still happen – democratically choosing the best possible candidates based on ability – cognisant of new rules that apply, including quotas.
“The end justifies the means” and a lack of concern for individual rights.
Wow. That’s practically a summary of the kind of politics that was so successful in the 20th century and the kind of politics that I hope we’ll someday move beyond. I thought we were getting there.
Apparently not quickly.
The part about the quotas being a temporary measure sounds good to me and I wish they’d have done the same in the Kenyan constitution.
Otherwise I am , and will always be opposed to any type of leadership quotas for women. These quotas encourage the patriarchal idea that “leader” means “man”, and I am shocked that this idea is still persistent even in Europe!
At 50% of the population, its actually an abuse to all intelligent women to be regarded as minorities who can only thrive on affirmative action!
Women fought for, and won full suffrage rights, and I believe they have the numerical strength to get more than 50% representation in elective positions. I have a project encouraging women to vote for women.
That is – IMHO – missing the point entirely.
The money (i) exists and (ii) will be conditional.
Very well said Alan, thanks for your feedback and support.
Thanks D.J. and i was writing my piece with all parties in mind not just the one we share (Fianna Fáil). Whether we call them quotas or not, the reality is, even using OMOV, we apply quotas of a type anyway e.g. here in my home constituency of Cork East we would tend to impose a geographic quota to ensure there is one candidate from northern end of constituency and one from the southern end, we may not call these quotas but in effect they are the same thing!
As far as I’m aware if/when quotas come in no additional money will be made available to parties in fact the opposite will happen if they don’t implement them!
If the corrupting effects of fundraising were a problem then we could have prohibited it. We don’t have to replace it with taxpayer money. Since you’re in a party I’m sure you’re happy to see the parties getting taxpayer money. That seems self evident.
Again, if the parties are institutionally sexist then why should taxpayer money be given to them? You say they have institutionally sexist cultures developed over decades. I say that the quota measure is simply a protectionist measure to ensure that the parties continue their domination of Irish political life.
If they can’t do it with corruption and “donations” they’ll do it with our own money.
If a party decides, of its own volition, to have quotas then more power to it. The parties are free to impose quotas on themselves at any time. Off ye go. Nothing is stopping you. Nothing. Up to now nothing was stopping formation of a party which had a policy of nominating 100% women. Up to now.
However, for the law to impose sexist quotas is another matter entirely. For the law to reward parties with taxpayer money for complying with government policy is another matter entirely.
These quotas are a cynical move by the parties to protect themselves. This law is damaging to freedom and democracy.
Agree with this wholeheartedly. I was similarly against quotas for a long time until I realised that the end, for me, entirely justifies the means. The fact that the numbers aren’t moving up as fast as they should be (if at all), the trailing sense of misogyny and nepotism in political dynasties, the fact that we are seeing how the gender imbalance is affecting party policy, this is all cause for concern. And at current rates, by the time I have children we still won’t have equal representation.
And for people who complain about the negative effect on individuals running for office, I would say that if you’re more concerned about the individual effects of something rather than the overall benefit to society then you shouldn’t be in politics.
Good, well-written blog Ken. But it fails to mention the point that Selection conventions hitherto (in Fianna Fail anyway) were “Delegate” conventions, which were much easier for incumbents to control and manipulate. Quotas – of any kind – ARE incompatible with a One Member One Vote system, as they serve to restrict the choices available to ordinary party members – male and female – in all parties.
The more money parties get from state the less dependent they are on fundraising and donations which were at the root of many problems in the past, so I’m more than happy to see parties getting state funding.
As for parties being institutionally sexist to an extent that’s accurate, due to a culture developed over many decades. Hopefully the introduction of quotas will be a real catalysis for change in that institutional mindset, this has to happen if women are to achieve the level of representation that even the opponents of quotas believe they should achieve!
Let me get this right.
Ireland’s political parties are institutionally sexist, so we’re going to continue to give them taxpayer money and they’ll promise to be good?