We should be blind to gender when electing our politicians

FOR the next general election, at least 30 per cent of all candidates fielded by political parties must be female. If this is not done then there will be financial consequences for the State funding paid by the taxpayer to the party.

I have already heard rumours suggesting that some parties are proposing to add weaker,

‘sweeper’ female candidates where a strong male candidate is to run in a general election constituency. Circumvention could be the order of the day where we will see token women candidates, not expected to be elected, fielded around the country.

The legislation, in my view, is completely misconceived and will result in the worst type of tokenistic patronisation of women.

I am of course in favour of women candidates and would, for example, have been a supporter of Mary Fitzpatrick, initially as our group leader on Dublin City Council and as a candidate for the Dáil and Europe.

Mary Fitzpatrick, to my mind, represents all that is good about a politician: energetic, intelligent, articulate, full of integrity. Most of all, she brings to the table experience of family life, business and languages – all with a great sense of humour.

She achieved what she has achieved in politics in the face of internal party opposition, as has been well documented elsewhere. She is a very talented woman and did not need the patronisation of tokenistic legislation to get her to where she is. She got there because she wanted to.

The Garda Commissioner, the DPP, the Chief State Solicitor, the Chief Justice and the Attorney General are all women who got to the top of their professions because they wanted to, not because they were patronised by men.

I’m certain that no woman serious about advancing herself in the political world (or in any other calling) would want to be told that she only got there because of the legislation. Could you imagine Mary McAleese needing a quota to help her along the road?

The legislative idea, slavishly grabbed from overseas, is in my view underpinned by a false premise that positive discrimination is in order. Discrimination in decision making on the basis of gender is wrong and has always been wrong. To turn it against men is another wrong as there will no doubt be women on tickets around the country who will be there at the expense of men. That is the practical reality at constituency level. It is equally egregious for a new set of rules to be implemented that discriminates against the other gender.

Yes, there should be women candidates and lots of them; in an ideal world up to 50 per cent. But setting up a glass ceiling against men and thereby stifling male talent, simply on the basis of gender, is utterly perverse and fundamentally anti-democratic.

In my opinion, the legislation is unconstitutional in the sense that the principle of equality before the law is offended. This is compounded by the fact that the legislation only applies to political parties and not to Independents.

If this legislation goes unchecked and unchallenged, down the road we will see political parties compelled to run candidates on the basis of their ethnic origin; their religion; their sexual orientation; because of their membership of the travelling community etc.

We will have 30 per cent women candidates; five per cent gay or lesbian candidates; two per cent Travellers – the percentocracy or prescriptocracy will reign supreme over our democracy and will change it utterly.

I contrast this to last year’s local elections where women candidates of every political hue and creed and none were plentiful, with many of them very successful. The electorate have a collective intelligence about who they want to elect and we should leave it to them.

We should want real women with real life experience of the education system, the workplace, childbirth, child care, managing money in tight situations and general life.

Rather than force the unwilling on the job in a patronising way, we should collectively be taking positive steps to make politics a job that is worthwhile; that has rewards; and most of all, allows politicians of all genders to enjoy the achievements of politics for the community but while allowing some semblance of family life to blossom.

Instead of this, we are going to penalise political parties for not being tokenistic or patronising. The women who succeed will be those without families. They will not be representative of the majority of women and will be no more representative than what has gone before.

In this way we tackle the symptoms but not the problem itself. Long-term, I believe this legislative project will fail in its ambitions.

I agree that men in politics over the centuries have not exactly covered themselves in glory. But if we are to learn any lessons from the recent past, we need to get the very best candidates and politicians; those of more substance than image.

We need to look beyond and be blind to gender.

Tom Brabazon is a Dublin City Councillor for Fianna Fáil in the Donaghmede-Beaumont ward.