“Women are not interested politics Kelly, that’s why I voted against it.”
So said a member of my CLP, when explaining why he voted against an AWS (All Women’s Shortlist) motion. Of course, this comment was no surprise to me. Years as a political activist have shown me time and time again that, for many, the idea that women do not belong in politics persists.
When the first women entered Parliament, beginning with Nancy Astor in 1919, The Palace of Westminster was not designed for women at all. The only women’s toilet was a quarter of a mile from the debating chamber and a small staff room in the basement, known as ‘the dungeon’ was designated The Lady’s Members Room.
Women were expected to use this as an office, changing room and everything else. Meanwhile men had access to baths, dining rooms and a smoking room. Things have largely continued in the same vein- with women expected to adapt to the political system, as it is, with little thought given to how it could change to incorporate the realities of womens’ lives.
This surely, is one main reason why women remain so underrepresented in all layers of government.
Take maternity: in 1976 Labour MP Helene Hayman became the first sitting MP to give birth. When her son was 10 days old she asked the Conservative Whip if she could be paired in order to miss a vote, and received a negative response. Labour Whips refused her the time off so she came, baby in tow, forced to breastfeed the child in the only suitable place, which happened to be Shirley Williams office. A senior Conservative called the police when she left the baby with his nanny in the Ladies Members room while she voted.
And so things continued like this until last year, Liberal Democrat Jo Swinson was ‘furious’ after Tory Barndon Lewis, who she was paired with, voted in a Brexit vote while she was on maternity leave. This led to Labour MP Tulip Siddiq, delaying a planned caesarean, in case the same thing happened to her. The outcry over this led to a temporary standing order being introduced to allow new parents to vote by proxy, with Tulip making history when Vicky Foxworthy voted in her behalf in January.
In 2010 a nursery was put in the Palace of Westminster. Predictably, a complaint followed – about the loss of the bar, about the ‘waste of money’ and, of course, that this was a ‘perk for women.’
The numerous bars which adorn the building are apparently not a perk worthy of comment. The fact is the changeable nature of Parliamentary debates, with urgent questions and the like, make planning childcare incredibly difficult, for staff as well as Members and a nursery helps.
Last week Parliament debated making the place more family friendly and accessible.
Ellie Reeves said:
“If Parliament is to be truly representative of these we seek to serve, we must continue to look at ways to break down barriers for those who might consider putting themselves forward for public office.”
Why have we not done this already?
This week MP Stella Creasy announced her pregnancy. At the same time she bravely told of her experiences of suffering miscarriages and having to continue with her work as an MP while bleeding and in pain. MPs from all parties have commented in support of her campaign for maternity leave for MPs.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) regulates the pay of MPs and authorised the budgets they claim for their work. It does not ‘recognise’ that MPs may go on maternity leave and so bears no responsibility to make provision for any paid cover for what they do outside the parliamentary chamber like campaigns and constituency casework.
In Denmark a member of the national parliament would have a substitute MP appointed. Stella said she felt “forced to choose between being a mum and an MP.”
How many great people are we missing out on because Parliament does not account for the simple fact women have babies?
Why is all the responsibility on the mother, rather than on the structure which is oppressive in penalising parents who wish to serve?
Then there is council, where women and people under 60 continue to be poorly represented, which is a shame because councils should be representative of all groups within the community.
I know that when my children were under 5 I knew much more about local provisions for preschoolers, what was available and what was missing than I do now. That’s not to say I don’t try to be an effective voice for mums battling with services I no longer use, as I will for anyone, but there is no doubt that councils benefit from people with a broad range of experiences – and at the moment that is rare.
I could not have dreamt of standing for council when my children (now ages 12 and 9) were younger as I could not possibly have been attending committees within days of their births, or managed bath time routines around late meetings, or canvassed while breastfeeding.
Being a councillor and a mum is difficult: late meetings, casework, reports to read, but I love it. Representing my community is what I always wanted and I am sure there are many other women like me who dare not put themselves forward because the systems are not in place to support them.
It may surprise people to learn that there is no expectation of time off for anyone who has recently given birth, from council work. Only around 5% of councils have baby leave policies. I’ve heard female councillors being told they must attend meetings within weeks of giving birth and feeling shamed for not ‘pulling their weight.’ This is not good for them, and frankly it is not good for our society.
Until we act to change things we will continue to exclude people from standing and will not get the representation we need.
Labour LGA Parental Leave Motion for Councils:
Petition for Maternity Leave for MPs:
The Avenger 