Women into Parliament (Hansard, 14 July 1993)

§ Mrs. Teresa Gorman (Billericay)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Representation of the People Acts with a view to increasing the number of women elected to Parliament; and for connected purposes. By great good fortune, and with the co-operation of the people who arrange ten-minute Bills, today is the birthday of Emmeline Pankhurst—and this year marks the 75th anniversary of women's suffrage. A group of women Members of Parliament from all parties have got together to commemorate those great events to stage an exhibition in the House called "Women into Politics"—which you, Madam Speaker, graciously opened on Monday.

Today, Lady Thatcher, our first woman Prime Minister, unveiled a plaque to suffragettes in St. Stephen's hall. It is the first time that suffragettes have been commemorated in the House.

Since 1918, only 163 women have been elected to Parliament, compared with 3,986 men. Almost half that number of women were in Parliament for only one Session, because they were given marginal seats to fight or were elected at by-elections, and therefore did not spend more than a couple of years here.

Perhaps it is not surprising that there have only been 10 women Cabinet members, while 388 men have served in the Cabinets. One fifth of all women Cabinet Ministers are in office today, and there are still 17 Government Departments without a woman politician, or which have never had a woman politician in them. Women have a view on every subject. How can their views be reflected in legislation if they are not in the room when key decisions about legislation are made?

Things are getting a little better. At the last general election, 60 women were elected—the largest number ever—but they still account for less than 10 per cent. of the membership of the House. It is not true that women do not come forward as candidates. It is just much harder for them to be adopted for safe seats. You, Madam Speaker, tried for 16 years before being elected, and many of us got here almost by a lucky fluke.

Throughout the history of our democracy, women have had to battle for recognition. Until recently, they did not have property rights or the right to their earnings if they were married, and had to fight for a university education and to be accepted into the professions. The suffragettes were not militant feminists, but Christian women who believed that democracy was part of the Christian message, which taught that women were equal to men.

Parliament is still very much a man's world. If women are to make a contribution in their own style, men must accept the need for structures to change. In my time as a Member of Parliament, the need for changing working conditions has been debated but nothing has come of it.

Even the few women who made it to the House have effected profound changes in respect of care of the elderly, children, maternity services and health. Such topics were not considered suitable topics for Parliament to debate before women arrived. They were laughed at or thought too embarrassing to discuss. Women such as Margaret Bondfield, the first woman Cabinet Minister, Eleanor Rathbone, Irene Ward, Megan Lloyd-George and Barbara Castle battled to make this a more caring country.

986 In the past, Parliament met to raise money to fight the king's wars. Today it meets to raise taxes that are mainly spent on social services and social structures. Those areas are second nature to women because of their upbringing and experience, and ones in which they can make a key contribution to the deliberations of the House.

Historically, Parliament has always been refreshed by the injection of people from different backgrounds. It was once dominated by merchants and landowners. Now, small business men and trade unionists take their place here. Surely now is the time for that trust to extend to the inclusion of far more women in our deliberations. There needs to be a critical mass of women for the priorities in this place to change.

Parliament is broadened by the insights and energies of these newcomers. No one is detracting from existing Members, or the contributions made by men, but stating that women have a key economic role to play, not just outside but inside this building. It is time for us to encourage more women into the House.

Women have all the qualities necessary to be Members of Parliament—not that those qualities are exceptional—and we will know that women have really reached their place in our political community when they are allowed to be as mediocre as some of the men who occupy these Benches.

There is not a level playing field between men and women when it comes to selection for parliamentary seats. If there were, there would be no need for my Bill. Different parties address the matter in different ways. Some parties consider the possibility of quotas, others proportional representation, and still others may—like Bernard Shaw—recommend a coupled vote.

A Parliament with more women would be more equitable, and would more fairly reflect the changes that have taken place in society, particularly in the lives and status of women. I urge hon. Members on both sides of the House to support the principles that I have outlined in my Bill, and I commend it to the House.

§ Mrs. Ann Winterton (Congleton)

It is with some diffidence that I oppose the motion moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay (Mrs. Gorman).

I sympathise with much of what my hon. Friend and her supporters seek to achieve, but I disagree fundamentally with the method that they have chosen to achieve those objectives—that of tinkering with our present electoral system, which is epitomised in the Representation of the People Acts.

One of the greatest strengths of our democratic system is the single-member constituency. I have always opposed any suggestion of introducing proportional representation. It would divide the electorate, so that, for example, Conservative voters would approach a Conservative Member of Parliament to deal with their problems, socialist voters would approach a socialist Member of Parliament and Liberal voters would approach a Liberal Member of Parliament.

A secondary result would be that even more power would be put in the hands of the party hierarchy over the selection of candidates, and that centre of decision-making would be taken away from where it should rightly be, at grass-roots level in the constituencies. The people who live 987 in an area should have the freedom to choose an individual to represent them, whether that individual be male or female.

Our existing arrangements for electoral representation have worked well, and have not debarred women from coming forward as candidates. Women Members have made a considerable contribution to the House, to the political life of the country and to society as a whole. With you in the Chair, Madam Speaker, hon. Members are continually reminded that it is possible for women to achieve the highest and most influential of offices, and to fulfil the ensuing responsibilities with great distinction.

I remind the House that the Head of State and the head of the established Church in this country is a woman. Until relatively recently, we had our first woman Prime Minister, who was outstanding in terms of both leadership and intellect. Currently, two members of the Cabinet are women, seven members of the Government are women and 59 right hon. and hon. Members are women. The leaders of countless county borough and parish councils are women. The hard-working grass-roots majority of the membership, certainly of the Conservative party, are women.

If we consider the gradual manner in which our parliamentary democracy came into being over a period of centuries and the way in which the franchise was extended from a limited number to include all adults, we see that the speed with which women have, in the last few decades, alone, seized the initiative is truly remarkable. The enthusiasm of my hon. Friend further to hasten this process by any form of positive discrimination should not be allowed to undermine the progress which has been made, or to alter the Representation of the People Acts, which are one of the foundation stones upon which our system of free elections is based.

I support 100 per cent. any attempt to encourage more women Members into this House of Commons, but I completely oppose any attempt to change the rules, to fiddle the rules, to enable them so to do.