Sunday, July 11, 2010

Just how representative should parliament be?

I’ve been thinking about the whole 50% of the shadow cabinet must be women quota thing.  I am against quotas/all [trait] lists etc. Lazy people tend to blame this on the fact that I am a white man. 





There is obviously no way I could match the marvellous (and probably magical) Charlotte Gore's take ("Positively discriminate this"), and it would be pointless and embarrassing to try.  Edit: In an amazing coincidence Robstick has posted on the same topic this morning ("A Question of Equality")

So instead I thought I'd ask “What would make parliament a truly accurate reflection of the population?”

It’s true that parliament has a wildly different ratio to the UK as a whole:

Party
Sex
Percentage of population
Theoretical number of MPs
Actual Number of MPs
Actual % of MPs
Difference
Absolute % Difference
Total Parliament
Male
49.50%
322
509
78.3%
187
29%
Female
50.50%
328
141
21.7%
-187
-29%
Total

650



Conservative
Male
49.50%
151
265
86.6%
114
37%
Female
50.50%
155
41
13.4%
-114
-37%
Total


306



Labour
Male
49.50%
128
177
68.6%
49
19%
Female
50.50%
130
81
31.4%
-49
-19%
Total


258



Liberal Democrats
Male
49.50%
28
50
87.7%
22
38%
Female
50.50%
29
7
12.3%
-22
-38%
Total


57




But is the solution forcing the issue? Interestingly 47% of Welsh Assembly Members are women (at the last election), so it’s much closer here.  As far as I know Plaid are the only ones with a policy of positive discrimination which has lead to some controversy (see last link).

Party
Sex
Percentage of population
Theoretical number of AMs
Actual Number of AMs
Actual % of AMs
Difference
% Difference
Total
Male
49.50%
30
32
53.3%
2
4%
Female
50.50%
30
28
46.7%
-2
-4%
Total

60
60



Conservative
Male
49.50%
6
11
91.7%
5
42%
Female
50.50%
6
1
8.3%
-5
-42%
Total

12
12



Labour
Male
49.50%
13
10
38.5%
-3
-11%
Female
50.50%
13
16
61.5%
3
11%
Total

26
26



Liberal Democrats
Male
49.50%
3
3
50.0%
0
1%
Female
50.50%
3
3
50.0%
0
-1%
Total

6
6



Plaid Cymru
Male
49.50%
7
8
53.3%
1
4%
Female
50.50%
8
7
46.7%
-1
-4%
Total

15
15




Ethnicity

Parliament is actually much closer to an accurate reflection of ethnicity than of sex, but only because the numbers are so small:

Party
% of population
Theoretical number of MPs
Actual % of MPs
Difference
Absolute % Difference
Total
White
92%
599
623
96%
24
4%
BME
8%
51
27
4%
-24
-4%
Total

650
650



Conservative
White
92%
282
295
96%
13
4%
BME
8%
24
11
4%
-13
-4%
Total

306
306



Labour
White
92%
238
242
94%
4
2%
BME
8%
20
16
6%
-4
-2%
Total

258
258



Liberal Democrats
White
92%
52
57
100.0%
5
8%
BME
8%
5
0
0.0%
-5
-8%
Total

57
57




But again I am not sure that forcing the issue is the answer. Not only that, but there are large variations in the demographics across the country from 29% of the population on London to 2% of the North East and South West (both in 2001).  Should a quota apply across the country or just in areas such as London? The North East has 29 seats and the South West has 55. For an accurate reflection the South West should have one BME MP and the North East none.  London’s 73 seats should have 21 of the theoretical 51 BME MPs.

Don’t get me wrong, I would be delighted with a representative parliament – different perspectives would improve it no end.  I wholeheartedly support the efforts of the many people working to increase the diversity of the various parties.  There are many barriers to getting involved and standing for election and for many groups these are, or appear to be, insurmountable.  Anything that breaks down these barriers is likely to be a good thing for parliament and democracy.  My difficulty is that if you go down the quota route, where do you stop?

Religion

It’s remarkably difficult to find details of MPs’ religion – particularly given the monitoring forms that everyone else has to fill in.  Should religion be a factor?  Mehdi Hasan appears to think it is important.  Should we try to ensure that there are 101 MPs with no religion, 465 Christian etc?  If so, which of the 24 Jewish MPs should be kicked out since (if you want to go down the quota route) they are clearly over-represented?

Percentage of population
Theoretical
Number of MPs
Actual Number of MPs
Difference
Christian
72%
465


No religion
16%
101


Muslim
2.7%
18
8
-10
Hindu
1%
7


Sikh
0.6%
4


Jewish
0.5%
3
24
+21
Buddhist
0.3%
2


Other Religion
0.3%
2


Not Answered
7.3%
48



Disability

How about disabilities?  If gender, ethnicity and religion are important enough to warrant quotas (and arguments have been advanced elsewhere for all of them) surely disability is too?  

Percentage of population
Theoretical
Number of MPs
All Disabled
18
115
Mobility
10
68
lifting, carrying
10
64
manual dexterity
4
29
continence
2
16
communication
3
21
memory/concentration/ learning
4
23
recognising when in danger
1
7
physical co-ordination
4
26
other
6
37

Sexuality

8.4% of men (=27 MPs) and 9.7% of women (=32 MPs) have had a same sex encounter.  2.6% have had a same sex partner in the last 5 years.  Accurate figures for homosexuality are hard to come by, but the general one used seems to be 3%. This would give 20 MPs.

Other

And then what about other traits?  97 MPs should be binge drinkers, 26 should be alcohol dependent, 150 should have mental health issues, should have used illicit drugs within the last month (and 455 should support the legalisation of cannabis) and 3 should be paedophiles. While obviously all unrelated, each of these would give a different outlook and set of experiences.  Should we ignore that or legislate for all of them?

Of course, the other problem with these quotas is, as mentioned above in the section on ethnicity, there is wide variation across the country.  As such any quota would presumably have to be on the basis of proportional representation.  If we’re having that...

Percentage of vote
Theoretical
Number of MPs
Actual Number of MPs
Difference
Conservative
36.1
235
306
+71
Labour
29
189
258
+69
Lib Dem
23
150
57
-93

I doubt the delightful Ms Harman will be advocating giving the Lib Dems an extra 93 MPs though.


2 comments:

  1. Don't worry. I'm a woman and I can't stand all women shortlists and quotas. Find them patronising.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Rosalind. It's a pleasant surprise that the first comment is supportive :)

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for your comments. I would really rather not have anonymous comments, please give a name even if it is made up.

Please try to keep it reasonably polite, it's mainly a blog for grown ups but good manners are always welcome.

Thanks again