Monday, February 05, 2007
Paucity of women candidates amongst Unionist parties…
Suzanne Breen’s been adding up the figures on the gender cuts in the four main parties. Tthe SDLP is ahead of Sinn Fein on the selection of women candidates. The two Unionist party’s trail badly, with four (though three are actually sitting MLAs). The UUs come bottom of the league, where, in North Down, one older woman candidate (early blogger, Marion Smith) replaces the previous, younger one (Diane Peacock):
...the gender deficit remains, particularly in unionist politics. The UUP has one woman, Marion Smith, out of 37 Assembly candidates so far selected. Only four of 42 DUP candidates picked at this stage are women. Sinn Féin is running 11 women out of 37 candidates and the SDLP 13 out of 36.
Mick Fealty @ 01:44 PM
Does this not say more about Irish Catholic men and their over bearing bolshi women ?
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 02:20 PM^---------^
Nice sectarian jibe. I think it says more about the fact that there is more equality within the nationalist tradition. With women being furthered in sport and education at every opportunity, unlike the boy’s clubs on unionism- the Orange Order anyone?
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 02:33 PM“in North Down, one older woman candidate (early blogger, Marion Smith) replaces the previous, younger one (Diane Peacock)”
Now there’s a story ;)
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 02:47 PMWhy don’t you ring up Diane Peacock and ask her why she wasn’t selected to run?
There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye!!
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 02:53 PMDigging in to the detail of Suzanne’s predictions, there’s a definite green tinge here; she continually underestimates the DUP, for example.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:02 PMShould a candidate not be selected do to his or her merit and not on age, sex, gender etc?
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:07 PMThe Clockwoman
Exactly. Similarly, if the electorate decide to elect a local MP as their Assembly member, or councillor, it is entirely their perogative to do so.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:12 PMTC,
Up to a point, that’s true. But come on, one woman candidate in 37? Whilst I hope that’s not the final figure, it looks like little effort has been made to find and promote female talent.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:12 PMThe Sparrow
Why was the fragrant Diana not selected again?
Too Holywood centric? Served red wine with fish at a dinner party? What reason could there be for the UU’s dropping a female candidate under forty who was runner-up last time out?
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:19 PMMick
It is the final figure. Look at Cllr. Smith’s blog - one of her qualifications is that she is the sole UUP woman selected to go forward for Stormont. Shocking.
At least the four DUP women selected are in clearly winnable seats. Marion will be lucky to come through in North Down, with Cree and McFarland on the ticket and only 2 UU seats.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:24 PMI was trying to figure out who TC was Mick lol. What do you suggest Mick a weighted vote / positive discrimination? Maybe women feel frustrated due to the merry-go-round of what-a-bout bigotry, lack of real politicking, old school tie network, etc etc. Maybe there is more to life!
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:31 PMPercival
“Why was the fragrant Diana not selected again?”
Indeed.
“What reason could there be for the UU’s dropping a female candidate under forty who was runner-up last time out?”
I suspect that is a post watershed discussion.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:32 PMTC
Ahh, you had me agreeing with you until you start spouting this WC-style cr*p.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:32 PM1 Unionist parties have a smaller number of activists to draw upon so are dipping in a smaller pool.
2 The general demonisation of Unionism as nothing but sectarianism has succeeded in putting off the middle classes and professionals especially - a key source for candidates in particular women.
3 They don’t have the resources to invest in the development programmes or promotional campaigns needed to address this glaring under-representation. The UUP is financially dodgy and the DUP while not as bad is far from rosy either.
4. They do not have as positive a relationship with the community sector and hence attract less candidates from it. SF has found this a good pool to draw candidates from.On this and other issues the Unionist community has to start expecting more from its parties. The general attitude seems to be as long as NI is still in the UK they don’t really care what condition the parties are in or who the representatives are. However, showing concern should go beyond starting to complain about the deficiences but offering the time and money modern political parties need.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:33 PMBonar Law
I always thought she came across as a bit light-weight, but I can’t think of anything she has done to merit not be given another shot at it. My only thinking could be that Lady S has withdrawn her support. Why?
Is there a time-bomb ticking?
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:34 PMI see from the BBC Web that the DUP are considering water tight contracts for their MLAs if they stray of message.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6332169.stm
Looks like Ulster is not the only entity at a crossroads....
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:36 PMHermon has backed Smith, Peacock did not run for selection.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:38 PMPercival
I suppose the workings of a selection meeting are akin to those of a jury room- a mystery to all outside the door.
But looking at the UUPs’ shallow pool of talent in North Down one would have thought that all bar a major potential embarassmnet would have allowed Ms P to go through.
That said, maybe she’s saving herself for the super council.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:43 PMClockwoman,
Sounds like a good idea to me if they want to avoid doing a “Trimble” (or a Turdle as Karl might say)Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 03:46 PMYep agreed. I think we have all concluded it is not a question of if but when the implosion happens. It may be a drip drip affair or something more spectacular but when you consider most grassroots of the DUP are country FPs who follow the old ideology and the city DUP now follow the new DUP then a new contract is the least of their worries.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 04:01 PMWhilst unionists in general aren’t running as many female candidates as they should at least when they do win a seat they generally hang around for a while.
SF do seem to get a fair share of female candidates - but how many of them survive for more than one term? What’s the point of bringing forward women if they just get dropped in 4 years.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 04:03 PMAlthough the selection of talented female candidates is clearly essential is the pursuit of representative and diverse democracy, that in itself is only part of the story. It’s one thing for a woman to run for election, but its quite another to find herself in a position of actual decison-making power within a party.
Regardless of the amount of female candidates selected (whether large in number or small), it is a sad fact that women are practically absent from the key strategic and directional decision-mkaing organs within the main parties. It seems that while parties may ‘pounce’ on any woman that comes within 20 yard radius of a local meeting to convince them to run, there is a much greater reticence to ‘allow’ women into more managerial or directorial roles within parties. As such, females, and indeed others such as young people (and don’t even mention ethnic minorities) have to do a lot more to ‘prove themselves’ in contrast to the omnipotent middle-aged, grey-haired males that dominate such power structures. Until this much larger issue is addressed, having women standing for election will only do so much in redressing the balance.
(Likewise, parties and commentators note the lack of interest expressed by the general public at politics, yet don’t seem to realise that this may be in part because those who define the direction and modus operandi of said parties are drawn from a very narrow segment of society- after all, you ain’t gonna attract women and young people if you come across like a grumpy old man!)
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 04:05 PMIf women have to be selected because they’re wimmin, and not because they’re any good, then you’ll end up with not very good politicians, who on top of that happen to be women. What, exactly, is the gain in that?
Apropos the DUP ‘resignation letter’ - utterly unenforcable (the only person who can resign from stormont is the elected MLA - nobody else can resign [sic] him on his behalf, whatever scrap of extorted paper they might later try to wave at Bell). Control freak dickishness: a stupid move.
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 04:18 PMWhat happened to the Women’s Coalition and what does that tell us about what the NI electorate want?
Pity for the wee lassies, but it just goes to show need to field their best players to get a result at the end of the day
Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 04:22 PMDawn Purvis.
PUP leader and Assembly candidate.
Not everyone lives in the 19th century.Posted by on Feb 05, 2007 @ 04:32 PM
