The Lodge and the House: a gender paradox?

It looks unlikely that women will be any more well-represented in parliament after this month’s election, writes Tony Smith TWO WEEKS before the federal election on 21 August 2010, Prime Minister Julia Gillard attended a fundraising dinner in Sydney. The Catholic Church was raising funds to send people to Rome for the canonisation of Mother Mary MacKillop, founder of the Sisters of Saint Joseph. The openly atheist Ms Gillard might have been bemused that the church whose lay membership is dominated by women would elevate a woman to sainthood while refusing to ordain women. If she remains prime minister after 21 August, however, Ms Gillard might note parallels with Australian politics. A woman can hold the most senior position in government and probably attract a clear majority of support among women voters, but still lead a party and a parliament that resist the election of female MPs. In the current parliament, there are 110 men among the 150 members of the House of Representatives, or about 73 per cent, and 49 men among the 76 senators, or about 64 per cent. These figures represent slight decreases historically, over a period in which we’ve seen small increases in the number of women in parliament as a whole. So what are the prospects for a better gender balance after the 2010 election? In the House elections, despite some strong polling by the Greens, only Labor or Coalition candidates are likely to be elected in 147 seats (with the possible exception of the seat of Melbourne). Three others are held by independents, all of them men. If safe seats are held, then the 2010 election will return at least 40 men and 13 women to the House of Representatives. Predictions are possible in other seats where there are female–female or male–male contests. When these are added, men should win 91 seats and women 18. The remaining 41 seats involve contests between male and female candidates.  Female candidates must gain 22 of these remaining 41 seats if they are to match their total of 40 in the 42nd parliament. This seems unlikely given normal ratios, and in the results I’ve predicted for 109 seats, men would hold some 83 per cent, much higher than the 73 per cent held before the election. Of the 40 senators whose terms end in 2011, 14 are female. The positions of women on party tickets should ensure that the gender ratios remain similar. The territories should return one woman and one man each. Assuming that the major parties each take two of the six seats on offer in each state, then another 17 men and 7 women will be successful. This leaves two seats per state to be contested by Green, Labor and Coalition candidates and possibly Family First in Victoria. Greens women could be favoured in Western Australia and Tasmania where they are incumbents and in New South Wales, bringing the female count to 12. If the incumbent Family First man in Victoria succeeds, then male numbers would rise to 20. The remaining eight spots present many possibilities. Seventeen women and 14 men could be in the running, depending upon the national swing. History might be made on 21 August if Julia Gillard leads the Labor Party to victory. This might suggest that Australian political culture is no longer male-dominated. Should the number of female MPs in the House fall, however, then that suggestion will be difficult to accept. A woman in the Lodge hardly balances a House full of blokes. •Tony Smith is a Bathurst-based writer. A more detailed discussion of these issues appears in his Democratic Audit of Australia discussion paper, Candidate Gender in the 2010 Australian Federal Election. Photo: Justin Knol/ Flick