Good to see more women at the cabinet table but it should have happened sooner
|
Version 0 of 1. On Monday evening, as the first part of David Cameron's reshuffle got under way (leaving glum-faced sacked ministers in its wake), I bumped into a woman MP tipped for promotion. She appeared genuine when she said she knew nothing about what was to come. Next morning she and female colleagues walked up Downing Street and into government positions more senior than we had imagined, even given predictions about women rising through the ranks. Labour might criticise the changes, but given the position the prime minister was starting from it was pretty significant. If it weren't for the all-male Lib Dems bringing down the average, a third of those attending cabinet would now be female. Next day an email arrived in my inbox from a senior woman editor to a group of female journalists suggesting we tweet about the newspaper coverage, which she described as a "parody". One "catwalk" spread, devoted entirely to matters of fashion, particularly grated, although it was not the only one to follow that route. The implication was that these women had been chosen for all the wrong reasons. It followed a tweet (pre-reshuffle) from Tory peer Lord Ashcroft that the changes would be more about "optics" than "ability" – an annoying intervention because the new ministers are eminently able. In 2012 I drew up what I called an "all-female fantasy cabinet" for Mr Cameron. The point I was making was that some of the most impressive new Tory MPs were women. Given last week's finding from the all-party parliamentary group on women in parliament – that 67% of female MPs faced discrimination during their selections – it is perhaps not surprising that the women who do make it are very impressive. As one female MP (another political riser) said to me last week, it's harder to get here as a woman, so those who have succeeded are among the best. Yet there is some truth in the argument about optics. A final reshuffle, four years into a five-year electoral cycle, is clearly largely about perception. After all, the policymaking is long done; the next stage is the sales pitch. And that is where this reshuffle falls down. Not that it failed to promote talented women, but that it came so late. Perception is important. But the biggest advantage of a more mixed cabinet is that it makes for better policy; women bring a different set of experiences and priorities to the table. It is a shame, but the reality is that when I attend conferences or meetings about policies such as maternity rights, equal pay or childcare they are disproportionately attended by women. And that's why female MPs fight hardest for them. That is not to stereotype. Financial services minister Andrea Leadsom brings years of experience in the City, but also a wealth of knowledge about parent-child bonding through her work in charity. Nicky Morgan and Elizabeth Truss will focus on their departments while also bringing the perspective of motherhood. Which leads me to another concern. The prime minister had the benefit of drawing from the massive overhaul of MPs in 2010 with many more women. There will be no such revamp in 2015 and, disappointingly, the safe seats that exist are being snapped up by men. Even senior Tories are murmuring about all-women shortlists. Perhaps radical action is the only way to provide a pipeline for future cabinets. |