The intention is good, but the formula that has been proposed is not.
On Tuesday, the government announced that the number of women in the Maltese parliament is to be increased by a maximum of 12 as from the next legislature so as to generate a better representation of the sexes in the House of Representatives.
The government has been saying for quite a while that it is the most feminist ever, although there's a huge gap between what is said and what is done. For example, the number of women on government boards has decreased under this administration, and so it is clear that the government is not practising what it preaches.
But, in this case, the government seems set to give women the opportunity to take up extra parliamentary seats to make up for the discrepancy in numbers. The only thing is that it is doing it in the wrong way.
For one thing, it should have taken note of the efforts that both the Labour Party and Nationalist Party have been doing these past years – that is their initiatives to encourage more women to participate in political life. The government should have allowed the next election to give a clearer picture as to whether these measures have been successful – and if the Maltese electorate responded by given women a better representation – before embarking on what is definitely a complicated move.
As things stand now, Malta has one of the largest House of Representatives, per capita, in the European Union. We have 67 MPs and, if another 12 were to be added, there might not even be space to fit them in considering that the current availability in the Renzo Piano building is 77. We're sure that an extra two places will not be difficult to fit in, but at the same time this scenario shows a lack of forward planning.
An extra 12 MPs would also add to the costs of Parliament through the honoraria payments, not to mention the fact that many backbenchers on the government side are then given additional jobs through headships of government boards or authorities. This would mean that the costs of sustaining the House of Representatives would considerably grow.
But, apart from the numeral and financial considerations, each so-called positive discrimination idea inevitably has its negative discrimination side. What the government is proposing will give women candidates the chance to earn a seat in Parliament to the detriment of male candidates who obtain more votes. Is it right that a male candidate does not get a seat which is instead taken up by a woman who obtained fewer votes but will be in Parliament simply because she is a woman?
Added to this, the system as explained on Tuesday seems to be tailor-made for a two-party presence in Parliament when we all know that the last election saw the emergence of a third party in the House. What will happen if more than two parties are represented in Parliament next time too? Will the extra 12 women MPs idea come crashing down before it is even implemented?
There is then the other argument that is always brought up when gender considerations are being made. Women should earn their place through their value and contribution, rather than by receiving favours.
And the Maltese electorate has already shown that it is capable of choosing women over men without there being any systems in place to give women an advantage. In the last election for the European Parliament, four of the six MEP who were elected were women: Miriam Dalli, Marlene Mizzi, Roberta Metsola and Therese Comodini Cachia, before the latter relinquished her seat to take a place in the Maltese Parliament.
The proposals made by the government are now open to a public consultation exercise which, we hope, will lead to a better formula.
from The Malta Independent https://ift.tt/2CKEwBp
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment