On Saturday the 17th September, the Liberal Democrat conference passed a motion on the reform of the House of Lords. One of the amendments in particular is very relevant to increasing the numbers of women the UK Houses of Parliament.
The Lib Dems favour a fully elected second chamber, a substantial change from the entirely appointed system we currently have, a system which has produced only 20% female members of the House of Lords. Given the real possibility for reform of the second chamber two Liberal Democrat members, Dinti Batstone and Jo Shaw, decided to put gender balance at the heart of the Lib Dems policy.
Jo Shaw says:
"House of Lords reform offers a once in lifetime opportunity to turn the father of discrimination into the mother of all parliaments. If we don't seize this chance to bring about gender balance, when will we?"
When indeed?
The amendment centered on four points:
"With specific regard to gender balance, Conference calls on Liberal Democrat parliamentarians to:
i) ensure the reformed House begins its mandate with in-built gender balance
ii) pilot modern flexible working practices in the reformed House
iii) ensure any further interim appointments mitigate, rather than perpetuate, the current gender imbalance, and, if an appointed element is retained,
iv) press for a transparent skills and competency based approach to new appointments."
This is a bold move from the Liberal Democrats, not particularly known for their gender balance. Only seven of their tiny number of 59 MPs are women. The party has tried to increase the percentage of female MPs through training, mentoring and placing women in 50% of the safest seats the Lib Dems have, all to no avail. Finally they are starting to realize that embracing a more substantial measure or quota system is going to be what it takes.
Writing for Lib Dem Voice, one the amendments' authors Dinti Batstone writes:
"In an ideal world we wouldn't need these kinds of measures. But with just 12% women in our House of Commons parliamentary group, Liberal Democrats urgently need a gender game-changer at Westminster."
There seems to be more appetite for interventions of this sort from within the party. At a Guardian fringe event on Monday, Paddy Ashdown stated his support for all-women shortlists if the new Leadership Programme didn't deliver gender balance in the House of Commons election. Though the party almost booed when he said it, I can see this having to happen in the not too distant future and the party will have to ask itself if it wants to see diversity in parliament more than it wants to hold onto an impractical ideal.
Regarding the House of Lords reform proposals, if implemented, these changes could be radical for the Lib Dems and the country, particularly if the House of Lords can lead the way on piloting 'family friendly' policies, like job sharing. Dinti Batstone says:
"Parliamentary job-sharing is about empowering people to participate in politics in a way that fits the reality of their lives- what could be more liberal and democratic than that? The Westminster village has been guilty of breathtaking double standards in mandating flexible working for other people's workplaces while failing to practice what it preaches".
Ms Batstone has led the way in the party for job sharing, having proposed it for several years and hosting a successful fringe event this conference with Working Families and The Fawcett Society. Far from being a pie in the sky proposal, now that conference has passed the amendment to the motion, we might see the Liberal Democrats leading the way on something that could potentially be taken on by the House of Commons, making the job of MP that much more appealing to parents and people with caring responsibilities.
Jo Shaw and Dinti Batstone deserve credit for presenting these measures in a way that the party batted through without the blink of an eyelid. Let's see what it will take to ensure that the proposals are implemented.