Quotas for Women! The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002
| Date | 01 March 2006 |
| Author | Aileen McHarg |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2006.00352.x |
| Published date | 01 March 2006 |
JOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIETY
VOLUME 33, NUMBER 1, MARCH 2006
ISSN: 0263-323X, pp. 141±59
Quotas for Women! The Sex Discrimination
(Election Candidates) Act 2002
Aileen McHarg*
The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002 is unusual in
two respects. First, it is a rare example of the permissible (though not
mandatory) use of affirmative action in the United Kingdom, in this
case to reduce gender inequality in the selection of election candidates.
Secondly, the Act contains a sunset clause and will expire in 2015
unless extended. This article examines the background to the legis-
lation, the forms of affirmative action it permits, and the use so far
made of it by political parties. It also considers the justifications for
affirmative action to increase women's political representation, asking
what sets this apart from other contexts in which women are under-
represented, and whether the temporary nature of the legislation is
appropriate.
INTRODUCTION
The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002 (hereafter SDECA)
is a doubly unusual piece of legislation. First, it represents a rare ± and in
relation to gender, unique ± departure from the United Kingdom's typical
`symmetrical' approach to anti-discrimination law, its purpose being to
remove doubts about the legality of positive action, including reverse
discrimination, to reduce gender inequality in the selection of election
candidates. Although affirmative action is normally highly controversial,
SDECA was nonetheless enacted remarkably easily. All parties, except the
Ulster Unionists, officially supported the Bill in the House of Commons, and
there was so little opposition in the Lords that it was not even debated after
its second reading. However, given that all speakers, including the few
opponents, agreed that increasing women's political representation was an
important objective, it is perhaps unsurprising that most were prepared to
141
ß2006 The Author. Journal Compilation ß2006 Cardiff University Law School. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
* School of Law, University of Glasgow, Stair Building, 8 The Square,
Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland
a.mcharg@law.gla.ac.uk
contemplate special measures, since this is an area in which simply removing
legal obstacles has clearly been insufficient to ensure real equality. Although
one of the earliest contexts in which formal sex equality was achieved ±
women gained the right to stand for Parliament in 1918
1
and even earlier for
local government
2
± they still constitute a mere fifth of MPs (see table).
Moreover, even that figure has only been reached because of the `all-woman
shortlists' (AWS) policy adopted by the Labour Party for the 1997 and 2005
elections. Women constitute a similarly low proportion of United Kingdom
MEPs, local councillors and Northern Ireland Assembly members. Whilst
much higher in the Scottish Parliament and National Assembly for Wales
(NAW) (the latter in fact being the only elected body in the world to have
achieved gender parity), these too are achievements which are partly
attributable to affirmative action.
3
British experience thus confirms evidence
from abroad that significant levels of female electoral representation are
almost impossible to achieve without special measures.
45
142
2 Gradually extended between 1870 and 1907.
3 The absence of an `incumbent effect' in these new institutions was also crucial.
4 See, for example, J. Squires and M. Wickham-Jones, Women in Parliament: a
Comparative Analysis (2001) 13. The type of electoral system used is also an
important determinant ± see further below.
5
The most recent year for which figures are available. Source: Fawcett Society, Women's
Representation in British Politics, available at .
Women's Political Representation in the UK
Institution Most Number of Number of Percentage of
Recent Members Female Female
Election Members Members
United Kingdom
Parliament May 2005 646 127 19.7%
Scottish
Parliament May 2003 129 51 39.5%
Welsh Assembly May 2003 60 30 50.0%
Northern Ireland
Assembly November 2003 108 17 15.7%
United Kingdom
MEPs June 2004 78 19 24.4%
London Assembly June 2004 25 9 36.0%
Local government
(excl. N. Ire) 2001
5
± ± 25.5%
ß2006 The Author. Journal Compilation ß2006 Cardiff University Law School
To continue reading
Request your trial