by David McCarthy, CEO of MadPride Ireland, director of McCarthy Consulting, campaign director @ David Norris for President – tweets as @mccthyconsulting
Gender Quotas – A blunt instrument but maybe just the catalyst needed to start a wider conversation on social policy?
I am a big believer in Logic, I like to think things through & come to decisions that make sense. Sometimes however life doesn’t allow you to rely on sense as a guide. Sometimes (more often than not) politics does not allow you to rely on sense – politics is most definitely not the bedfellow of Logic.
We live in a Republic…
or, as some would argue, a Representative Democracy. In either case, our public representatives should reflect a cross section of our society based on gender, age, socio-economic background & (in modern Ireland) ethnicity.
The 31st Dáil therefore is in no way reflective of our society.
Is this unique to Ireland? Not at all, but where we are similar to other states in this, we are poles apart with our approach to social policy & equal treatment in nearly all other aspects of our society.
Let’s take a non gender specific issue – but one that’s dealt with in a gender-biased manner in Ireland – parental leave, with particular attention to paternity leave.
Let’s look at how we deal with it in comparison to Sweden, a progressive social democracy.
In Ireland…
non self-employed working fathers are entitled to no paternity leave. Some employers may offer time at their own discretion. Those who work in the Civil Service are allowed a paltry 3 days on the birth or adoption of a new baby.
This, in 2012, in a supposed modern democracy, with an oft-proclaimed social conscience, is simply a disgrace.
Now let’s look at Sweden…
16 months parental leave with the cost shared by both State & employer. Parental leave is the law & has to be taken.
It is not that simple though… Look at how they frame the legislation: a minimum of 2 months of 16 most be taken by the ‘minority parent’. They do not look at parental responsibility as a gender issue they simply see it as a parental issue.
In practice, this system works because it applies to all equally. Employers do not discriminate against you for taking the time, your career progression is not hampered – whether you’re male or female. Does this sound like anything we know of here in Ireland?
It is common place here to see women’s careers come to a halt at the birth of a child – because their employers now look at them differently. They see them as ‘less’ than what they were before. This perpetuates the patriarchal bent to Irish society.
So back to the original question:
Will Gender Quotas solve all these problems? Probably not, but what I am hoping they will do is open up wider conversation as to what we want our Republic to be.
Do we want to remain in the denial some of us live in – that we are a forward thinking & modern nation – or would we prefer to aspire to more, to a better society that works for all its citizens equally – not based on gender, age or background?
I know the Ireland I want & I for one will keep fighting to achieve it. I just hope we as a nation are willing to join the fight as this is a Republic worth fighting for.
Funny that David claims that “the electorate still gets the opportunity to choose”.
Yet the proposal being put through the senate is seeing an amendment which says that this sexist funding of the parties will be maintained until the;
“number of women elected to Dáil reaches at least 40% of total number of TDs elected in one general election, & remains at that level following next 2 general elections”.
So, the electorate can chose, but unless they chose right this sexist measure to copper-fasten the funding of the current Four Parties of the Apocalypse will continue.
Logic, flattened with a roller coaster.
As for wider reforms on how we elect, I absolutely agree. Why then should I – or anyone else – support a measure designed to solidify the grip of the existing parties on our democracy?
Hugh, I said having spoken on Twitter we should try it in a new forum… If you look at my piece you will see that my respect for logic is strong enough to realise it has no place in politics, which I say in the post.
Democracy is not impacted here the electorate still get the opportunity to choose, if they decide not to elect any of the women offered then that is their right.
The current system could be argued as un-democaratic also as we allow a small network of people within political party’s, in the main, to choose who we as an electorate get to vote for. So by making those choices more representative of wider society is it not probable that democracy will be enhanced?
I think your issue as you mentioned on Twitter is a wider funding argument and an argument with the party/electoral system and I would agree it is heavily flawed. We need to look at wider and sweeping reforms of how we elect. If we were for example to adopt a list, or similar form, system then we would see that many issues such as ‘gender’ representation would be naturally dealt with.
It is a long road Hugh…
The author writes about how logic is important.
Ehm…it’s a democracy. Our elected representatives should be the people that get most votes. That may or may not be the same as the author’s pious and potentially admirable notion that they “should reflect a cross section of our society based on gender, age, socio-economic background & (in modern Ireland) ethnicity.” So, logic is forgotten right off the bat.
Next, genderquotas are supposedly going to cause the introduction of more sensible parental leave arrangements. Logic? How about introducing the parental leave law and leaving our democracy alone?
The author needs to re-examine his respect for logic.