The propensity of the Labor Party to rewrite history was on clear display yesterday with the triumphal chest beating of Labor women ministers at the expense of the Liberal Party. How wrong they are!
On Sunday, along with Malcolm Turnbull, I launched Margaret Fitzherbert’s book, So Many Firsts, describing the rise and rise of Liberal women from Menzies to the present.
In 2006, I held a dinner to raise money to tell this story of the many ground-breaking achievements and quite remarkable contribution of Liberal women to Australian politics.
The idea for the book came to me in 2006 when the Howard government marked its 10th anniversary. Women had done well during the Howard era, despite disparaging media references to white picket fences and a 1950s view of the world.
As the leader of the Opposition, John Howard managed to attract a record number of women who gained preselection and who were then elected to the Parliament in 1996 — 15 new Liberal women politicians in addition to the 10 already in the Parliament.
That year, the Liberal Party had succeeded in electing 12 more women than Labor, and this milestone was achieved without any formal or informal quotas or affirmative action of any kind. No ALP Emily’s list for us!
At the time of the cabinet dinner in 2006, we were celebrating the milestone of 10 women who had served in the federal cabinet since Federation. Seven of these 10 were Liberal women and five of those seven had been appointed under Howard’s leadership.
Of course, the Senate’s first female president, Margaret Reid, was also elected in 1996 — and a Liberal.
Speaking of the Senate, if the Liberal Party is, as Labor suggests, “gagging” its female colleagues, the tactic is failing miserably in the Upper House.
The statistics give the lie to Labor’s crowing:
| 42nd Parliament Senate Question Time | ||
| COALITION WOMEN | TOTAL | % |
| 10 women | 36 Senators | 27.03% |
| 106 questions | 434 questions | 24.2% |
| Top questioners in the Senate | |||
| 1. | HELEN COONAN | Finance | 27 |
| 2. | NICK MINCHIN | Leader | 4 |
| 3. | ERIC ABETZ | Deputy Leader | 23 |
| 4. | BRETT MASON | Education | 20 |
| 5. | GEORGE BRANDIS | Attorney General | 18 |
| 9. | MARY-JO FISHER | 15 | |
| 11. | CORY BERNARDI | 12 | |
| 12. | CONCETTA FIERRAVANTI-WELLS | Immigration | 11 |
| 12. | MARISE PAYNE | Pacific IslandsHousing | 11 |
| 12. | FIONA NASH | 11 | |
| Others | |||
| SUE BOYCE | 8 | ||
| MICHAELIA CASH | 7 | ||
| JUDITH TROETH | 6 | ||
| JUDITH ADAMS | 5 | ||
| HELEN KROGER | 5 | ||
Turnbull is gender blind with women given prominent positions in his line-up.
In fact, it is the Australian Labor Party that feels women need special treatment in order to even get to the barrier and be preselected, with their requirement for women to fill a quota of their preselections to “ensure fair representation”.
The women of the Liberal Party and their achievements are the product of their own individual merit. Liberal women are not in Parliament to fill a feel-good party quota.
But the Liberal Party must not waste the opportunity of Opposition to renew and recruit able women for our backbenches and our frontbench.
Although facts never get in the way of a good Labor attack, on this occasion there are no grounds for such an ignorant ill-informed and unjustified assault.
I hate to say this, chaps, but she’s right.
How poignant that we should hear from Helen Coonan (the ex minister for communication) at this period of Telstra splitting. We never heard from her when she did have the job. She really is a girly who was promoted to a position which she had no knowledge of and didn’t bother trying to learn, sorry what was this article about. Oh get real. So what if the liberals did all that why would anyone remember if she is a reflection of this. BTW I’m Adam’s other half.
I am sorry Adam’s other half…have you forgotten where we were in 2007 regarding broadband? (see: http://www.shareswatch.com.au/blog/opinion/the-national-broadband-debacle-all-hail-to-senator-conroy/)
Helen Coonan was managing to look after her portfolio without getting the nation into billions of dollars of debt so on this measure alone, I would put her well ahead of Senator “let’s filter the internet” Conroy.
She is right about women in the Liberal Party it seems, and I think we will have a few billion reasons to wish we had stayed the course with the former Government’s broadband plans as well.
Well of course the Liberals have one view for those they consider the ‘real’ people, and another for the rest of us. When it comes to the policies for the ‘ordinary’ women in the country, their policies were sexist, and did portray Howard’s “1950’s ” attitude to women. Whether it was taxation policies or women with children, particularly sole parents, the Howard policies were ruthless in the extreme. Obviously, people’s memory of those women who didn’t accept a job (any job?) regardless of whether they had transport or child care before and after school, could be penalized for up to 8 weeks with either total or partial removal of their benefits – how this fits in to the esteemed attitude towards “traditional family values” escapes me.
Then, there was the locking up of asylum seekers, who of course hadn’t committed any crime by entering Australia seeking asylum from tyranny, oppression and in too many cases jail, torture and death. These women, particularly if they were pregnant or mothers of young children were locked up, having to go through the humiliation each month of even asking for tampons etc. The provision of suitable meal times and schedules was not adequate for young children. Some pregnant women had procedures such as caesarian sections, even when they didn’t give permission, and I recall the young (very) pregnant woman from China who begged to be able to give birth before she was forcibly deported – this was rejected, even though many people including myself interceded on her behalf. She was sent back to China and her almost full term pregnancy was terminated. I don’t recall hearing your voice Helen, nor any of your women colleagues, or the champion of “traditional family values” Howard, or the “right to life” protector, Abbott! The silence was deafening!
Oh yes, some of us recall only too well, the ‘wonderful’ attitudes of the Howard years towards women. Couples with only one outside worker (usually the male) were rewarded for keeping it that way – the 1950’s attitude to womens’ work. The more hours the woman partner worked the more tax they had to pay. This was a national disgrace?
Monies set aside for educational purposes; to stop the appalling statistics of violence towards women, were instead used for sending out frig magnets to protect us from ‘terrorism’? The Howard Govt closed down the separate department for women, and a wonderful program set aside one summer, focusing on young women, was ‘canned’ as the message did not comply with the males (Howard)view, that apparently, only women who were killed by their partners, were victims of domestic violence. I recall that very well, and still have the video of that disgraceful situation making the news. The important message that emphasized the young womens’ power and right to assert herself was not ‘appropriate’?
Yes, Helen, there are women in this country, with equal rights, and the right to stand on an equal footing with men, and then there’s the ‘un-women’ those with very little rights at all, in comparison to the well-off priviledged! If you care to read Anne Summer’s book, ‘The End of Equality’, you’ll find lots more examples of theattitude to women during the disgraceful Howard years!
Lies, damned lies and Helen Coonan…
There are a few holes in Coonan’s analysis – 10 women out of 36 Coalition senators = 27.8%, not 27.03% as she quoted; 108 out of 434 questions =24.4%, not 24.2% as she quoted. I worry about a spokesperson for Finance who can’t add up. But even by her own statistics, women asked fewer questions than their representation: Coonan seems to be the only exception, and what an impact she’s had!
According to the Senate website, at June 2008 women accounted for 35.5% of the senate – luckily the Greens (60%) and the ALP (43.8%) have much higher representation of women.