Level the playing field for female candidates
Jan. 8, 2006. 01:00 AM. Source: Toronto Star.

How many women are running for Parliament in the Jan. 23 election for the four major parties?

Precisely 245, in a field of 999 candidates. That's just under 25 per cent, not great representation to begin with. Women comprise more than half the population. More should be nominated.

Worse, some women who do run don't stand a chance of being elected. That's because women are somewhat more likely than men to be put forward in ridings their parties are fated to lose.

In the June 2004 election, the percentage of women candidates was 23 per cent, while 21 per cent of those elected were women. Not a big difference, but every MP counts.

Nationally, none of the major federalist parties is running a slate split evenly between women and men. The New Democrats come closest, at 35 per cent; the Liberals are running 26 per cent; and the Conservatives a dismal 12 per cent.

And, as one might expect, the Tories are running a lot of women in Quebec, where the party was shut out in the June 2004 election. The Liberals are fielding a bunch in Alberta, where they took just two seats. And New Democrats stand the least chance of being elected.

What does this combination of too few women candidates, with less than equal chances of being elected, tell us about our political leaders' attitudes?

Nothing good.

The barriers to Parliament remain unacceptably high in this country. It's time the playing field was levelled.

Paul Martin, Stephen Harper, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe must do some hard thinking about lowering those barriers.

Let's have some pledges on the campaign trail to put forward a larger percentage of women candidates next time, and to run them in ridings where they stand a fighting chance.

"The first step is to nominate women and have women run, but you need to elect them as well," says Vicky Smallman, vice-chair of the National Capital Region chapter of Equal Voice.

Let's break out of the old boys' network style of thinking, and recruit more women.

Let's also look at more imaginative ways to help women shoulder the high cost of running a campaign.

It's not all bleak.

The forward-looking New Democrats, for example, now require ridings to actively seek out women, as well as minority candidates, before holding nomination meetings.

And the Liberals deserve credit for providing extra campaign financing for women.

Going the extra mile to make Parliament more representative makes good sense.

Women, though not all alike in their outlook, experience some issues very differently than men. Women's groups have lobbied for better child care and employment equity, to cite two progressive agendas.

If women had more political clout in Ottawa, important issues like child poverty might be on the front burner.

And Parliament is no different than any other organization, in the sense that it can benefit from wider input.

It's a scandal that in an era when most institutions, from businesses to bureaucracies, are making an effort to be more inclusive, elected positions remain out of reach for so many.

Despite the political parties' fledgling efforts to remedy this long-standing imbalance, there's more to do.

Women are only marginally better represented in this campaign than in the last one.

When Parliament was dissolved, women accounted for just 65 of 308 MPs. That's one in five.

That gave Canada the dubious distinction of ranking 43rd in the world, behind countries like Rwanda and Afghanistan.

We can do better. We must.