When I read this article I wondered if this woman understands what democracy is all about. Does she realy believe this is the best way to get rid of white male dominated politics, as if that is a noble profession to strive for. Any thoughts on this? Maybe next year we should require all published authors to be at least 30% of visible minority, 40% women, 25% disabled. I'm glad I live in Alberta.
Is Jack Layton up to something in B.C?
Is the federal NDP leader using the province that lost to the Saskatchewan Roughriders as a testing ground for giving Canadians a more chromosome-balanced political scene?
Are he and Carole James, the provincial NDP leader, engaged in a conspiracy to get more women into provincial and federal politics?
I hope so.
In a Canadian political first, the NDP recently passed a requirement at its Vancouver convention that will see women nominated in at least 30% of seats not currently held by NDP incumbents.
Moreover, women will fill any seats vacated by retiring MLAs. Themove guarantees at least 23 female candidates and five from visible minorities in the 2009 B.C. election.
Awesome. And here's why. The present makeup of the B.C. legislature looks like this: there are 17 women (seven NDP and 10 Liberal) out of the 79 members. That's about 21%. Federally, the percentage is almost the same.
I, like many other Canadian women, am tired of waiting for the political scene (we'll talk about the NHL, the boardrooms of the nation and car sales some other time) to sort itself out. If time were the answer, we'd be somewhere near, maybe, 40% - maybe 47% - by now.
Instead, we're at 21%. Dreadful, if not so two centuries ago.
Of course there were sputterings of outrage the minute the NDP decision hit the airways, from inside and outside the party.
"The party is starting down an undemocratic road," said Joe Barrett (son of former NDP premier Dave Barrett). Let me tell you what's undemocratic, Joe. It's looking at a government, year after year, comprised of far too many men, mostly white. If I am a woman, an aboriginal, a disabled person, a black or a Muslim, I want to see myself represented in my government.
Another delegate, Stephen Phillips said: "I think this could create some real difficulties."
Of course it could, Steve. And will. Change always does. Especially when a group that expects to be served 79% of the pie by virtue of its gender, skin colour or religion finds out it will have to settle for 70%.
That's right. Under the new NDP rule, men will still be able to get 70% of the nominations, while women are guaranteed only 30%. Talk about treading lightly.
I'd like to go for 50%. Immediately. But 30% is a reasonable start.
Not according to some callers to a CBC phone-in show. Caller after caller insisted that the NDP move "deprived" men of running in some 25 ridings. And that this undemocratic move would not give us the "best candidate."
Snore. There are a couple of assumptions here that make my eczema much worse. First, anyone who thinks nomination contests of the past have always been fair, or produced the best candidate, deserves to get eczema. And second, there is a none too subtle inference here that the "best" candidate is, of course, going to be male.
Some things have to be legislated. Women would not have gotten the vote in Canada when they did if the right to vote had not been made mandatory. Quotas on Jews in some Canadian universities would not have been dropped without a formal policy change. Black students in the United States would not have been allowed into previously white schools and universities without a change in the law. And often a police escort.
And while I'm on the topic of the United States, if one more commentator gets on my TV and poses the question: "Is the United States ready for a woman president?" I shall do an Elvis and shoot my TV.
Ready or not, it's time.
Anyway, I hope you're in on this, Jack. It's a concept that ought to spread across Canada. It's too good an idea to let B.C. hog it. After all, they did lose to Saskatchewan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail Lyn Cockburn at cockburn@canoemail.com.
Letters to the editor should be sent to mailbag@edmsun.com.
Is Jack Layton up to something in B.C?
Is the federal NDP leader using the province that lost to the Saskatchewan Roughriders as a testing ground for giving Canadians a more chromosome-balanced political scene?
Are he and Carole James, the provincial NDP leader, engaged in a conspiracy to get more women into provincial and federal politics?
I hope so.
In a Canadian political first, the NDP recently passed a requirement at its Vancouver convention that will see women nominated in at least 30% of seats not currently held by NDP incumbents.
Moreover, women will fill any seats vacated by retiring MLAs. Themove guarantees at least 23 female candidates and five from visible minorities in the 2009 B.C. election.
Awesome. And here's why. The present makeup of the B.C. legislature looks like this: there are 17 women (seven NDP and 10 Liberal) out of the 79 members. That's about 21%. Federally, the percentage is almost the same.
I, like many other Canadian women, am tired of waiting for the political scene (we'll talk about the NHL, the boardrooms of the nation and car sales some other time) to sort itself out. If time were the answer, we'd be somewhere near, maybe, 40% - maybe 47% - by now.
Instead, we're at 21%. Dreadful, if not so two centuries ago.
Of course there were sputterings of outrage the minute the NDP decision hit the airways, from inside and outside the party.
"The party is starting down an undemocratic road," said Joe Barrett (son of former NDP premier Dave Barrett). Let me tell you what's undemocratic, Joe. It's looking at a government, year after year, comprised of far too many men, mostly white. If I am a woman, an aboriginal, a disabled person, a black or a Muslim, I want to see myself represented in my government.
Another delegate, Stephen Phillips said: "I think this could create some real difficulties."
Of course it could, Steve. And will. Change always does. Especially when a group that expects to be served 79% of the pie by virtue of its gender, skin colour or religion finds out it will have to settle for 70%.
That's right. Under the new NDP rule, men will still be able to get 70% of the nominations, while women are guaranteed only 30%. Talk about treading lightly.
I'd like to go for 50%. Immediately. But 30% is a reasonable start.
Not according to some callers to a CBC phone-in show. Caller after caller insisted that the NDP move "deprived" men of running in some 25 ridings. And that this undemocratic move would not give us the "best candidate."
Snore. There are a couple of assumptions here that make my eczema much worse. First, anyone who thinks nomination contests of the past have always been fair, or produced the best candidate, deserves to get eczema. And second, there is a none too subtle inference here that the "best" candidate is, of course, going to be male.
Some things have to be legislated. Women would not have gotten the vote in Canada when they did if the right to vote had not been made mandatory. Quotas on Jews in some Canadian universities would not have been dropped without a formal policy change. Black students in the United States would not have been allowed into previously white schools and universities without a change in the law. And often a police escort.
And while I'm on the topic of the United States, if one more commentator gets on my TV and poses the question: "Is the United States ready for a woman president?" I shall do an Elvis and shoot my TV.
Ready or not, it's time.
Anyway, I hope you're in on this, Jack. It's a concept that ought to spread across Canada. It's too good an idea to let B.C. hog it. After all, they did lose to Saskatchewan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail Lyn Cockburn at cockburn@canoemail.com.
Letters to the editor should be sent to mailbag@edmsun.com.
