No place for women in Cam-Clegg’s “new politics”

As David Cameron announces his final ministerial line-up, one must ask: Where are all the women?

As David Cameron announces his final ministerial line-up, I have found myself asking the same question as during the latter months of Gordon Brown’s premiership: Where are all the women? Not much more than a year ago, David Cameron had said:

“If elected, by the end of our first Parliament I want a third of all my ministers to be female.”

His four female cabinet ministers are a start, but only represent only 14 per cent of ministers allowed to attend cabinet, and their positions are lower than their male counterparts, with the exception of home secretary Theresa May. In recent elections, record numbers of women stood as parliamentary candidates: rising from 8% in 1979 to 21% in 2010. According to the Centre for Women and Equality:

• The Green Party had the highest percentage of women candidates (33%) followed by Labour (30%), the Conservative Party (24%) and the Liberal Democrats (21%).

• We now have 142 female MPs sitting in the commons.

• Women representing the main three parties include: 81 for the Labour Party (dropping from the 101 elected in 1997), 48 for the Conservative Party, and seven for the Liberal Democrats.

Throughout their election campaign, the Conservative Party offered us a binding contract for all sorts of manifesto commitments, saying:

“If we do not deliver on our side of the bargain, then vote us out in five years time.”

The contract calls for a closing of the gender pay gap (currently at 16.4%), family-friendly and flexible working policies, ending violence against women and an increase in the number of women in enterprise.

They also promised that:

A Conservative government would bring change to Britain’s corporate boardrooms, introducing new rules to increase the proportion of female directors, and creating new opportunities for women to rise to the top.

“We will require the long list for directorship appointments to include 50 per cent female candidates. This will help ensure that companies recruit from a diverse pool of candidates. It will apply to executive directors as well as non-executive directors.”

So with 55 women to choose from in this coalition government, David Cameron has chosen just four women to represent half of those living in the UK. With their promise of 50 per cent of candidates in FTSE 100 directorship positions to be female, it is a wonder why only four women sit in the cabinet: the directorship of the country?

37 Responses to “No place for women in Cam-Clegg’s “new politics””

  1. SadButMadLad

    Talking about tiny groups and assuming that they have to have the same proportions as a large group just don’t work. Bell curves and ratios come from studying such groups. Making the groups fit the curves and ratios is the wrong way round. Especially with small groups where changing the make up of one makes a huge difference in the percentages.

    If you want more women and minorities represented in the government start from the bottom. Work out why they aren’t entering politics. Positive selection doesn’t provide the answer because you want people who will represent their constituents and not because they fit the positive selection critera. Also, you want to keep the unrepresented coming into politics and you can’t always have positive selection. When you have worked out why, then you can work out the how – if necessary. Sometimes the answer might not be the one you are looking for. The how then gives the answer in encouraging the unrepresented group to get involved. Each group will have different requirements and needs. Also be prepared to take a long time. Society doesn’t change in an instant even though rolling 24/7 news seems to make people think it does. Society takes generations to change properly.

  2. Tory

    No justification for an argument against the lack of women in the newly appointed cabinet. We live in a meritocracy, not a society in which we fudge the natural order of things to bring about fixed and unnatural outcomes.

    Don’t forget, best Prime Minister we ever had was a lady, Maragaret Thatcher!

    Oh wait you guys don’t like her do you – then stop complaining or you might see another one

  3. Anon E Mouse

    Will – I have to take issue with your description of Yvette Cooper – talented at what? Frowning, looking earnest, nodding her head and going on and on and on…

    We don’t want Cooper, Balls, Harman or any other of those backward deceitful dinosaurs. There’s a new show in town and we need a Miliband….

  4. Elaine

    Almost every reputable study shows that women still have to be be super-qualified/over qualified in terms of formal qualifications and experience to get a senior job.
    On the other hand, the culture of ‘gentlemenly amateurism’ still has power: ‘A gentleman from Oxford or Cambridge can turn his hand to anything’ – eg George Osborne.

  5. Our obvious shame « Chrisjw133's Blog

    […] Posted by chrisjw133 on May 20, 2010 · Leave a Comment  Whilst I was at university studying politics it became obvious that amongst my classes there was a slight majority of female students as opposed to male. I don’t think many male students had any objection to this but it does strike an interesting point. If politics at university level attracts so many women, then why are so few women in parliament/high up in parliament? […]

Comments are closed.