Yesterday Scott Morrison tried to stick a Band-Aid on the Coalition’s increasingly large and well-documented gender problem by raising the prospect of quotas.
Long considered toxic by many Liberals, the prime minister’s support for gender-based quotas was tepid though. He was “open to the idea” but made no firm commitment.
Only a quarter of all Coalition MPs across federal and state parliaments are women. Labor, which has had quotas since 1994, is nearly at parity.
With the government unable to shake the perception that it doesn’t really care that much about sexual assault, and facing a historic gendered voting gap, Morrison had to look like he was doing something. But any push to introduce gender quotas would have to come at the state level of the party. And that’s where things get tricky.
Who supports quotas?
After Morrison’s press conference there was some cautious support among female MPs — or at least support for starting the conversation. Industry Minister Karen Andrews, once an opponent, now says she’s “open to a debate”. Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne and Defence Industry Minister Melissa Price both appeared to support a discussion.
Recent history suggests the gender quotas conversation is one Liberals have in times of crisis. The only state division that’s made positive moves is Victoria, where the party started considering affirmative action after a 2018 state election drubbing that returned just nine Liberal women.
But there hasn’t been much progress since. And one of the (surprising) biggest backers, conservative power-broker Michael Bastiaan, has resigned from the party over branch-stacking allegations.
At a press conference this afternoon, Victorian Liberal leader Michael O’Brien appeared to offer some support for quotas.
“Am I open to quotas, yes I am, I’m open to anything that will achieve the outcome of more women voting Liberal,” he said.
The barriers
Any push to implement quotas runs up against a rusted-on Liberal narrative about “merit-based” appointments, which has seen the party fail to get close to gender parity and continue to promote a succession of woefully incompetent men.
That narrative is strongly held among Liberal men and women. A Menzies Research Centre report last year co-written by Nicolle Flint, the MP who called out misogyny on her recent way out the door, rejected the “undemocratic path” of quotas.
Yesterday it was on display again, as Social Services Minister Anne Ruston, claiming to speak on behalf of the South Australian party, refused to back quotas.
And it’s well-entrenched at a state level too, where most of the critical work needs to be done.
Don’t expect positive moves out of Queensland, where the Liberal-National Party is being infiltrated by the Christian right. The LNP explicitly rules out quotas on its website:
One of the great values of the LNP is that all positions, whether organisational or parliamentary, are elected on merit. Unlike the Labor Party that has specific quotas for electing women, the LNP believes in choosing the best person for the job, regardless of gender.
In Western Australia, the party also seems lukewarm. Ahead of the recent election, former leader Zak Kirkup defended only one-third of preselected candidates being female, and rejected Labor’s “box-ticking exercise”, claiming the Liberals were about “finding the best possible candidates”.
He then proceeded to lead the party to a generational electoral annihilation.
A spokesperson for the NSW Liberals did not explicitly support or reject quotas, but pointed to support, training and mentoring initiatives for women in the party, including the Liberal Women’s Council.
“The NSW Liberal Party supports the Prime Minister’s commitment to increasing the number of Liberal women in our parliaments, and has been making progress in our representation but we recognise that more needs to be done,” they said.
But the Liberal Women’s Council’s website stresses what it’s achieved “rather than using quotas,” and how it helps equip women “with an understanding of the rules and procedures and an opportunity to gain the skills and experience required to stand for selection and win in their own right”.
If Morrison’s desire to introduce quotas is sincere, he faces an uphill battle. And it’ll be a test of just how much he really wants to change the Liberal Party’s culture.
*Note: this story has been updated to include comments from Michael O’Brien and the NSW Liberals
Do you think the Libs should introduce gender quotas? Write to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say section.
As recently as this week the speaker of the Tasmanian parliament has been told that she will not be re indorsed by the liberals for the next state election. It seems her misdemeanors are many – but the most egregious is speaking clearly about problems in this state and displaying that most uncommon trait of using common sense.
Last year when there was a lot of publicity about the state of some of the state’s public housing she was photographed in overalls and rubber gloves (together with a male) cleaning out some of the disgusting places where people are supposed to be able to live. And it was not a photo op – she had hired a skip with her own money and worked all day – maybe several days. Oh for more politicians like her from any party.
MERIT is always the best way to choose. You know, Male, Educated at the right private school, Religiously appropriate, In with the right crowd, Terribly conservative. Once you’ve met those criteria, well, no matter who you are, you’re in!
The problem might be that elite private girls schools teach their students to think, whereas elite private boys schools teach their students to think with their dicks!
Reminds me of that old joke about men having enough blood to operate their dick and their brain, but not at the same time.
There is not much chance of the Liberals changing for a very long time. Nearly all the senior figures have been required to show they oppose quotas. The women in particular are chosen and promoted only if they are implacably hostile to quotas or any other policy helpful to women; this accounts for the truly outstanding obeisance and solidarity they display to the ascendancy of the party patriarchs. When the party talks of selection on merit, merit is demonstrated by, among other things, opposing quotas. Any exceptions who get to state or federal parliament merely prove the rule, since they are treated as delinquents or outcasts.
It is their very concept of merit that is the problem, as you point out. Being against quotas is part of the ‘merit’ assessment, but there is nothing intrinsically in the philosophy of the right that is against quotas, it is a policy position that was just grafted on to their party platform.
They make twisted arguments about big government, big brother etc to justify their position, but any organisation and corporation is free to take on gender equality as a statement of their philosophy without it being forced on them by government.
That such a reduced percentage of women make it to parliament means that there are intrinsic processes and policies that weed out women before they get there. It doesn’t have to be parity, but anything over 40% would pass the pub test. They aren’t even close, and look at the quality of the men they have in parliament. Not exactly meritorious.
“Victorian Liberal leader Michael O’Brien appeared to offer some support for quotas.
“Am I open to quotas, yes I am, I’m open to anything that will achieve the outcome of more women voting Liberal,” he said.
He could have said, Women will bring a different perspective to the party, but no, what he really said was, I really don’t give a shit about Women’s issues, but if more Women in the party means more votes I’m all for it, after all, votes are the only thing that matters!
When the discussion about representative quotas comes up, the LNP keep repeating their mantra that merit gives up the best candidates. If the best the LNP can come up with is the likes of Christiansen, Kelly, Joyce, Taylor, Abetz et al, you have to wonder about the quality of the field! This alone should deflate their so-called merit arguments.