Women Representatives Acting for Women: Sex and the Signing of Early Day Motions in the 1997 British Parliament
| Author | Sarah Childs,Julie Withey |
| Published date | 01 October 2004 |
| Date | 01 October 2004 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2004.00495.x |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Women Representatives Acting for
Women: Sex and the Signing of
Early Day Motions in the 1997
British Parliament
Sarah Childs
University of Bristol
Julie Withey
Centre for Comparative European Survey Data
The return of 101 Labour women MPs in 1997 generated an expectation that their presence would
enhance women’s substantive representation. And many of Labour’s new women MPs claim to
have acted for women since their election. Yet demonstrating the difference that MPs make is not
easy. Much of what goes on in the chamber of the Commons reflects party identity, and much of
what goes on elsewhere in parliament is hidden. Studying sex differences in the signing of early
day motions (EDMs) provides one way of testing whether Labour’s women MPs are acting for
women. Analysis of all the EDMs in the 1997 parliament, some 5,000 motions, establishes that
they are more likely than Labour’s men to sign ‘women’s’ and especially feminist ‘women’s’ EDMs.
There is clear evidence of behavioural differences between Labour’s women and men MPs,
strengthening arguments that women’s political presence is important because of the substantive
difference they can make.
The return of 101 Labour women MPs in 1997 was accompanied by a widely held
expectation that they would make a feminised difference – that the Commons
would reflect, to a greater extent than before, women’s concerns. This expectation
is an articulation, in everyday terms, of the feminist claim that women’s descrip-
tive and substantive representation are linked – that when present in politics,
women representatives act for women (Phillips, 1995, 1998; Mansbridge, 1999).
The potential for Labour’s women MPs to act for women is clear (Lovenduski, 1997;
Lovenduski and Norris, 2003). Attitudinal differences between women and men
MPs have long been established in the UK. Both the British Candidate Studies
(1987 and 1992) and the British Representation Studies (1997 and 2001) have
consistently found that, within political parties, women are more liberal than men
and ‘more likely to take a pro-woman line than men’.1In addition, interview-based
research amongst half of Labour’s women MPs who were first elected in 1997 sug-
gests that these attitudinal differences inform parliamentary behaviour, with many
of the women claiming to have acted for women since their election (Childs, 2004).
Yet Labour’s women MPs, and especially those first elected in 1997, have been
repeatedly depicted not as champions of women and women’s concerns, but
as having failed women – the ‘proof’ being their failure to rebel against the
POLITICAL STUDIES: 2004 VOL 52, 552–564
© Political Studies Association, 2004.
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
To continue reading
Request your trial