Hannah DEASY

Chair of Labour Women, and Director of Member Communications with Fórsa trade union. She previously worked with Women for Election and the Party of European Socialists.

A record number of women contested this election, the third since gender quotas were introduced. While there was a marginal increase in the number of women elected, a significant shift in the total number of women elected to Dáil Éireann did not materialise. 

In 2016 Ireland held its first ever general election with gender quotas in operation. The legislation was brought in following a commitment to do so in the programme for government negotiated between Labour and Fine Gael in 2011, and at the time it was not without controversy.

Radio debates in the run-up to the election questioned the validity of the quota, with contributors asking if it was an insult to women or a way to enhance the quality of representative democracy. Eight years on the quota is largely accepted, and it has risen from 30 per cent to 40 per cent. If a political party does not present 40 per cent female candidates, it will be fined – and, as is so often the case, money sharpens minds: all the parties met the quota. As a result, 246 women ran for election in this year’s general election, the highest number ever. Now 44 have been elected to Dáil Éireann, again the highest number ever. But when we consider the picture in percentage terms the good news dries up. The percentage of women in the Irish parliament has crept up from 22 per cent to 25 per cent, more of a crawl towards gender equality rather than a leap.

Sinn Féin has the highest number of female TDs at 15, followed by Fine Gael with 10 women, while Fianna Fáil has seven, the Independents have five, the Social Democrats have four, Labour has two, and one for Solidarity-People Before Profit. So, while all the main parties ran 40 per cent female candidates, none has come close to electing 40 per cent women to their parliamentary party. Speaking on national radio this week, Rachel Coyle of the National Women’s Council said: “This is not the seismic shift that we need. Changing political culture takes time. This election proves gender quotas work, but they can’t be in isolation”.

So, what can be done?

The research which informed the introduction of Ireland’s gender quota legislation led by then senator, and current leader of the Labour Party, Ivana Bacik, identified the five Cs as the main barriers to female representation. These are: cash, childcare, culture, candidate selection and confidence. Gender quotas address political culture and candidate selection to an extent, but they remain a blunt instrument. More needs to be done to build up the pool of experienced women in parties so that when the next general election comes around qualified and experienced women candidates are ready to go. 

Training and fundraising must be enhanced within political parties to address the challenges of cash and confidence. Organisations like Women for Election and See Her Elected have developed impressive training programmes for candidates, and often political parties will cover any costs associated with such trainings. But is that really enough? Arguably training a candidate is not sufficient, their team must also receive support and training, given the success of a campaign relies not just on the candidate, but also on their team. Progressive parties must invest in training campaign managers and developing support structures like mentoring programmes. 

Next, money. Election campaigns cost money and while women remain more often in low-paid, part-time or precarious work than men, how can we expect them to take on an expensive and risky financial venture such as running for election without additional support? Ring-fenced fundraising initiatives for female candidates are sorely needed. For example, Labour Women operates a Candidate Support Fund with the explicit purpose of supporting women candidates. We fundraise for this fund and appoint a committee to allocate the funds during campaigns. Confidence should no longer be viewed as a challenge merely about one’s capacity as a candidate, it should now also be seen through the lens of personal security. Over the past year in Ireland there has been much discussion of the ‘chilling effect’ that stops women from running for public office. Online abuse, as well as threats and incidents of real-life violence, have undoubtedly increased. 

Regarding online hate, the Pandora’s box that has been opened will be hard to shut, but that doesn’t mean nothing can be done. Stronger EU regulation of online platforms is essential, and in Ireland, it is time to remove the practice of including candidates’ home addresses on ballot papers. Party headquarters or a registered place of business must be the only addresses allowed on ballot papers. Currently, it is up to the candidates to choose, but in a country that prides itself on knowing its politicians personally, not using your home address can be seen as evasive. Including addresses is a cultural norm that will not change unless the rules are changed. 

Greater pressure needs to be put on political parties to ensure they run women candidates in winnable seats, rather than merely adding women candidates to tickets in places where it is unlikely a candidate from the given party will be successful. All of the evidence demonstrates that candidates running in national elections do better if they have already been active in local politics. Extending the quota to cover local authority elections could have a significant impact. We know local politics is a clear pipeline to national politics, a fact which has been resoundingly demonstrated last week with 52 councillors elected. Parties must now strongly consider co-opting female replacements onto local councils wherever viable. 

Extending the gender quota to the local level, combined with the measures outlined above, would create the conditions for the seismic shift in the representation of women in Ireland’s parliament that sadly didn’t happen this time. And why does all this matter? It matters because a representative democracy represented by a majority of people that do not share the lived experience of over half its population will continually fail to truly represent the people it aims to serve. 

Photo credits: Shutterstock.com/Simon Roughneen