Most Australians want to see more women in politics. But not just any women. Research by not-for-profit organisation Women for Election Australia found they want honest, intelligent, empathetic and transparent politicians.
But after the release of sex discrimination commissioner Kake Jenkins’ damning report into parliamentary workplace culture, support for former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian’s running for federal politics even before the outcome of an investigation into potential corruption is known, and years of lies and rorts, it seems Australians aren’t getting what they want.
But it’s not all bad news: the WEA says there is an influx of women looking to join politics to change the culture from the inside.
What did the study find?
The data, which has been seen by Crikey but not yet publicly released, found 63% of Australians wanted to see more women in politics and 69% believed greater diversity in politics would lead to better outcomes for all Australians. Two in three believe politicians don’t accurately represent Australia’s diverse population.
Surveying 1017 people with a 50-50 gender split, WEA found that along with honesty, empathy, transparency and intelligence, Australians ranked experience, organisational skills and decisiveness as qualities for an ideal political representative. Ranked lowest was self-interest, being a smooth talker and ambition.
In stark contrast, those surveyed believe politicians in power had the opposite traits of what they wanted — they are perceived as being ambitious, confident, self-interested smooth talkers.
How does Australia track for representation?
Australia ranks 57th out of 200 countries when it comes to the percentage of women in federal Parliament, with women making up only 38% of members. The Senate has 53% women compared with the House of Representatives’ 31%. In the lower house, Labor has 43% women compared with the Liberals 21%; the Nationals have just two female MPs. Women make up just 23% of Liberal MPs across state and federal parliaments.
Australia also ranks 50 in the World Economic Forum’s 2021 Global Gender Gap Index, sliding six places from 2020. The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey, released today, also found that although women’s participation in the workforce has increased from 53% in 2001 to 60%, women work fewer hours for less pay and complete 48.7 hours of unpaid work a week compared with 27.8 hours for men.
What does this say about Australian politics?
The Jenkins report, Set the Standard, found gender disparity and power dynamics were a driver for abuse in Parliament House; one in three people experienced sexual harassment at work.
WEA’s CEO Licia Heath tells Crikey the results of her organisation’s study were powerful.
“Given the survey was national, with some states such as Victoria nearing gender parity in politics, and half the respondents were men, 63% of people wanting more women in politics is heartening,” she said.
The survey was completed before the Jenkins’ report was tabled, but the results link up with some of the report’s recommendations, such as more diversity in Parliament and gender quotas.
“If everyone sitting in a parliamentary chamber is between the age of 55 and 63 and white and had a similar life, those homogenous skills and lived experience just end up being homogenous policy outcomes,” Heath said.
Despite several high-profile women leaving politics in recent years — such as former Liberal MPs Julia Banks and Julia Bishop — and some MPs leaving their party to run as independents — such as former NSW Liberal Natalie Baini — Heath says there were many more women looking to join politics.
“Our organisation has had to spend much less time in the last 18 months inspiring them to run and more on training them, while we have more women coming to take courses with [Women for Election Australia] than we’re able to service,” she said.
“The work we do is nonpartisan … and a lot of the training is about mobilising women, teaching them to hear one another’s point of view, prosecute a case and maybe reach a compromise, and create a powerful network.”
“Bishop”? Misled parliament over Man Monis’ letter to Brandis?
Arranged “business” with venues where her West Coast Eagles were playing away – so she could claim the “necessary” travel on us?
Travelled to India with Cousin Jethro and Gambaro, on the arm of Gina Rinehart – for a wedding and contract signing – to show off what pull Rinehart has on the Coalition? Sticking us with the bill for her $3445 flight home to Perth from Hyderabad, after her “study tour”?
Acted on behalf of CSR against claims brought by Peter Heys and Stephen Barrow against CSR asbestos – after CSR Chair Norman Irving sent out a memo with “Even if the workers die like flies, they will never be able to pin anything on CSR,” in April 1977?
“Banks” – the independently affluent/entitled Liberal member for Chisholm – taunted those expressing their distress at having to exist, having to struggle to make ends meet, on Newstart – under the government she was part of – with “I could live on 40 bucks a day knowing that the Government is supporting me with Newstart looking for employment,” …. Did she take up Sherri Prendergast’s challenge?
…. Any more?
…. “Gladys Shredderjiklian”?
Minister for Women and “Judas Goat” Marise Payne :-
“Come along Bridget dearie, Poppa Scott and Uncle Josh just want to straighten you out. There’ll be plenty of time to compose yourself after…… Thatta girl….. walk this way….. it won’t hurt a bit.”
Never forget the first Minister for Women, post 2013.
I haven’t.
“Honesty, empathy, transparency and intelligence”? Cash, Reynolds, Stoker, McMahon (in her empathy with anti-vaxers), Ruston, Henderson (“Would you like one pool or two with your Corangamite FFWSS pork-barrel? One for Torquay and one for Bellarine”?), Ruston, Ley/Price/Landry (“Pass me another coal mine”), McMahon (in her empathy with anti-vaxers) …..Banks, Bishop (take your pick) …..back further, Newman, Vanstone, Mirrabella, Fiona Nash (with her “Furnival of conflicts of interest”)? …… The parties of “Robodebt”; “Stultified, coal donor-first Anti-Environment/emissions” polices?
“Experience, organisational skills and decisiveness”? Hume (wants to spread your industry super over her retail super donors), McKenzie, Reynolds, Cash, Ruston, Ley/Price/Landry, Nash, Vanstone? “Robodebt”, “Stultified, coal donor-first Anti-Environment/emissions” polices?
Where’s the equivalency of disappointment in Labor or The Greens?
Maybe the ‘fault’ lies much deeper in the ethos and ideology of the Coalition parties?
And again thanks to Klewso for the effort to redirect a largely non partisan article into a criticism of the LNP.
Like “Banks and Bishop” pictured and named in the article?
“Our Glad”, Morrison’s captain’s pick, in all the news.
And “Minister for Women” Payne – after her cameo last week?
Helicopter Bishop.
Shotgun Bridget
Cackles Cash
It’s funny, but more often than not it’s the Liberal Party used to illustrate ‘the need for more women’ – but when you look at their examples already there, their history, chosen by selection committees to represent the party, how do they get “better”?
I looked, and it was not in the least pleasant, some of the females in the Liberal party are must as bad if not worse than the men. Of course, they are NOT what the electorate want to be in politics.
Funny too watching these “+/-” votes?
At one stage they were running at something like “4/1/3” for my first 3 posts – then suddenly they were wiped, all to “0” – and sat there for a several passes, neither moving to +ve nor -ve territory, just sat there in equilibrium, “perfectly negated” at ‘0’ – then suddenly they’re ‘back’ …..aint nature grand.
True equality will have been achieved when women can be as crap awful as men and still sail on the remuneratively High Seas.
Sadly, that will never happen. The system has ways and means. Look at how 6 brilliant young women got tossed from their career paths in the High Court. Six who spoke up that is.Just look at the number of women speaking out about all the violence they experience at the hands of men ( in all its forms). And people say things are changing. Its 2021 and men don’t care. If they did, it would have all been changed decades or centuries ago and women wouldn’t always be the ones demanding change. Women are being lulled.
Really Amber, what planet are you on? Even worse to have a photo of these two as your lead, it proves your argument to be nonsense. Yes we want integrity, honesty, empathy, intelligence. There is no guarantee you’ll get a lick more of that if the candidate is female. My reckoning O’Grady the past would say that generally speaking past female MPs have been as good or as bad as their male counterparts on about the same distribution. That is, appalling!
politics is a power game, that’s how it’s played. As such it attracts all of the wrong people. I’m not interested in gender equity or regional representation. I think we might be better off electing parliaments with representation based proportionally on income or social status or skill sets. We look at our government and we see the poor or low income workers not represented, or the disabled or teachers or scientists or social workers or bloody train drivers and postmen. We see solicitors and party hacks, the occasional union rep, quite a lot of doctors, some very dodgy businessmen and an assortment of ideologues and fake Christian’s you wouldn’t invite to a bbq
One issue which is not addressed is the “Staffers” working in the MP’s offices in Canberra and in the electorate offices. They are usually made up of party hacks who are looking to be noticed and then “Groomed” for future roles as MP’s or senior policy advisers.
The poor behaviours that have been spotlighted recently by MP’s and “Staffers” are being and will continue to be perpetuated through the generations. Further with the Public Service being so hollowed out that it is incapable of giving any advice let alone fearless advice and combined with political appointments as Department Secretaries the system our forefathers set up is broken.
Perhaps a way out of this would be that all Staffers, Senior Managers and Secretaries should be appointed by a separate independent body through the Public Service under control of the House Speakers; so no one is appointed by and hence can not be intimidated by the politicians with ‘Big Swinging Dicks’. The body could have a section which is what HR departments cover with a performance, review and promotion with little direct input from the MP’s. If a complaint is made by anyone including MP’s then this is subject to investigation and reported to the Speaker of the respective house who is then compelled to publicly release the report with any disciplinary action.
While I think more representation of women would be a good thing in and of itself, right here and now I would settle for honest and transparent.
Like Clover Moore…really good value.
That’s all most of us want (their quid-pro-quo donor/mates would be aggrieved), and no less than we deserve – “honesty and transparency” (throw in ethical and integrity) have no gender.
I do wish the medja would just STOP discussing Bishop’s departure from Canberra with that of Banks as if they were one-and-the-same. Bishop was one of the original ‘deserting rats’. She decided that the Libs (and therefore her political future) were toast with the coming election, and actioned one of her long-held contingency plans to ‘retire’ gracefully. When in office, she loved nothing more than strutting the world stage with her constant ‘superstar’ makeup and hair assistance and her exquisitely-chosen taxpayer-funded wardrobe. But how did she ever show us that she was a stateswoman? A useful representative? How? How?
Politics, despite the enormous complexities of the job, requires no experience, training or education. Anyone can have a go. In fact, the more partisan, the less interested in facts, and the ability to appeal to emotions are all traits of successful politicians.
So why not staff the treasury and opposition benches with conscripts and do away with elections? Instead we have the big draw.
Anyone can nominate. All the nominated names per electorate go into a barrel, and a name gets pulled out. That person is then conscripted to be a MHR for the next cycle for that electorate. Do that for every electorate.
Makes as much sense as what we already have.