Observations on women’s equality

When it comes to inequality, it takes only a quick glance at the World Economic Forum's Gender Gap Index, published this month, to see that women are much worse off in political life than they are in any other area.

The index measures political representation as well as the difference between men's and women's salaries, health and access to education. And while the findings show women to be disadvantaged in every category to some degree, the political gender gap sticks out from the rest like a particularly swollen thumb. This disparity does not, however, receive anything like the press attention that the gap between men's and women's pay attracts.

To be fair, at 42 per cent, the global gap in pay between the sexes reported in the study is pretty appalling. The UK figure is better - 30 per cent - but still not exactly impressive. Two other reports on pay disparity in the UK were published around the same time, returning similarly bad results, so it's not surprising that inequality in salaries has had the lion's share of the coverage. But this pales in comparison to the political power gap. Measured by the ratio of men to women in parliament and in ministerial jobs, the gap stands at a shocking 86 per cent.

This global figure isn't a meaningless average: the political gender gap is significant across the board. Even in the Nordic countries which top the index - Sweden, Norway and Finland - the gap stands at about 50 per cent, and the UK is lagging well behind.

With just one in five UK parliamentary seats filled by a woman, our gap stands at 70 per cent. Even worse, the UK has lost two places in the overall rankings since 2006 - we now rank 11th rather than ninth - as other countries have done more to close their gender gap. Thanks in part to the increasing numbers of women in the Spanish and Irish parliaments, both countries have overtaken the UK.

Despite these figures, the index's authors publicised the economic rather than the political findings. Although the index doesn't take into account overall development, the countries that score best tend to be the rich ones, ranking high in the WEF's Global Competitiveness Report. One of the authors of the index, Laura Tyson, suggests that this points to a general financial advantage conferred by equal rights. "Our work shows a strong correlation between competitiveness and the gender gap scores," she notes, suggesting that "countries that do not capitalise effectively on one-half of their human resources run the risk of undermining their competitive potential".

This makes sense, but it's a shame she didn't point out that there is also a strong correlation between a high rating for competitiveness and fair parliamentary representation. An unrepresentative parliament disadvantages everyone, as Katherine Rake, director of the Fawcett Society, which campaigns for equal rights, pointed out.

"It's not just that talented women face difficulties in breaking through the glass ceiling - a lack of diversity of perspective affects the whole populace." She estimates that it will take another 200 years to achieve parity unless efforts to redress the gender balance in UK politics are stepped up.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website