PBW: The urgent need for quotas

I was always opposed to the idea of quotas for women in Parliament. I operated under the delusion, not so much that selection on merit was a better idea, but that selection on merit could actually occur. Given the selection processes for the major parties, this was always a tenuous notion. But the revelation in Parliament over the past couple of weeks are so disturbing that it is no longer an option to be blind to the reality, and it can no longer be argued that the situation will correct itself through the good offices and goodwill of the parties, factions and people involved.

Accordingly, it is time for definite proposals for quotas for women in Parliament. Clearly, the necessary changes will not take place overnight, but ambitious targets are required. With sufficient will, the current parlous situation of Parliament can be corrected over the course of three Parliamentary terms. For maximum effectiveness the first opportunity must be seized: that is the next Federal election.

At the next election, I propose a quota of 25% of winnable seats to be allocated for women. At the following election, that should be 17.5%, and at the one after, 10%. More than any other conceivable measure, this would fix the current toxic environment in Federal Parliament. These are tough goals, but if respect for Parliament is to increased from its present lows, they are essential.

This entry was posted in Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to PBW: The urgent need for quotas

  1. cuckoo says:

    Sorry, I was looking for Catallaxy Files, must have wandered in the wrong door, don’t worry, I’ll see myself out…

  2. Scotty says:

    Satire, surely. Very droll. Well done.

  3. Texas Jack says:

    Why stop at only 25%? I’m sure Morrison and Albanese move aside immediately.

    Oh, and if anyone is interested in a helpful definition of gaslighting….

  4. mh says:

    More women need to be exposed to the delights of homosexual staffers coming on their work desks.

  5. BrettW says:

    As Bolt says the three seniors who dealt with Higgins were female and yet she is saying they did not deal with her properly.

    Not saying that I believe her.

    Anybody impressed with Marisse Payne ? Almost the invisible minister. What has she even announced in relation to women’s matters considering she has been the Minister for Women for quite a while ?

  6. Bar Beach Swimmer says:

    I was looking for the punchline, but couldn’t find it.

  7. Buccaneer says:

    Why not mandate 25% of male mps wear a dress? Since gender only seems to matter for parliament but not for the sporting fields, change rooms and rest rooms of the nation? Why stop at quotas for gender? Perhaps we could have a quota for people attracted to inanimate objects? The only category we don’t seem to need a quota to fill is narcissist.

  8. duncanm says:

    Oh dear… Many of you didn’t get the joke.

  9. MACK says:

    You forgot about the need for a 6pm curfew on men. https://twitter.com/greenjennyjones/status/1369781660401758209

  10. notafan says:

    We also need quotas for narcissistic Aristotle’s* and useless dropkick.

    *j’dore autocorrelation

  11. John of Mel says:

    A weak effort.
    Should have gone all the way to 0%. Why stop at 10?

  12. Damon says:

    A woman working in a professional (?) job complains that she was photographed because she was immodestly dressed? Men are gently reminded that their fly is undone, and I haven’t heard of any being photographed. Maybe, when the balance is redressed, more will carry cameras.

  13. Jannie says:

    What kind of argument, or discussion is this?

    it can no longer be argued that the situation will correct itself through the good offices and goodwill of the parties, factions and people involved

    What situation?

    More than any other conceivable measure, this would fix the current toxic environment in Federal Parliament

    Any evidence?

  14. tombell says:

    C’mon people. Lighten up. This is taking the p*ss. Some of you are giving conservatives a bad name.

  15. bradd says:

    I think this is sarcasm. If so, it is another reminder that sarcasm in print does not work very well.

  16. Up The Workers! says:

    Women don’t care much for Parliamentary seats these days…I hear they much prefer Ministerial desks at about 2.00 a.m.

    Doesn’t it make you intensely proud to see just how seriously the Australian Misgovernment takes the Defence of our nation, when two stark-naked drunken bonkers at 2.00am can play “sink-the-sausage” on the very desk of the nation’s Defence Minister?

    China, Russia and the Left’s other various anti-Australian paymasters must be pissing themselves laughing at our woefully pathetic joke “security” in what should without doubt, be THE most secure Office in the whole incompetently-run country.

    Do we also have regular gatherings of drunken winos and plonkos having a flagon and goon-bag-emptying contests in the Federal Defence Ministers’ Office on off-nights? How about some of the A.L.P.’s many druggie and needle-tossing addict, dealer and pusher-pals, the heroin-dealers, Ice addicts, crystal meth and Cocaine dealers all having a white-powder convention in there a couple of times per week after hours?

    Who was standing guard on the door into the Defence Minister’s Office when these two naked drunken bonkers staggered in there for a casual ‘Juicy-Fruit’and dropping of bodily fluids on the Ministers’ desk? Was it that clown who was Gillard’s comical Army Chief in his fishnet stockings, lipstick, rouge, rubber boobs and lurid red high-heels?

    If these clowns are utterly incapable of Defending the Defence Minister’s own desk from being used as a sordid knock-shop flea-sack by two stark-naked drunken bonkers at 2.00 a.m., then how can they assure us that they have the competence to defend the whole nation?

    Maybe Deadly Dan’s renowned “little maaate” hotel quarantine sub/sub/sub/sub-contractors are now running Federal Parliament House “security”? They certainly seem to have a similar standard of competence and performance.

    Any more awesomely bloody incompetent and we’d have to rename the Liberal Party as the “Labor Party”.

  17. strayan drongo says:

    Or they could democratize the selection process and allow the voters to decide who represents them… The LNP is just as factional as the ALP and these factions have way to much power

  18. strayan drongo says:

    I didnt get the joke I’m afraid… LOL

  19. Rex Anger says:

    I didnt get the joke I’m afraid… LOL

    Give the quota mongers what they demand- Good and hard.

    Start with all the non- safe seats, tapering down all the subsequent winnable political seats towards zero. If more seats are desired, then put up candidates who can win.

    Remember that many of the present Parliamentary complainants are in safe little party stringholds, who need only fear zigging when their faction zags.

    And the last Liberal female hounded out of her seat was a marginal. Piled on by an entire media and bugman establishment for the crime of not being a leftist…

  20. Turtle says:

    They’re 51% of the population. Why not just let women have total power. Men can quit for a few years. See how they go. While we’re at it we can stop fixing stuff like computers and machines. See how long that lasts.

  21. egg_ says:

    Wot – no trans quota, you vagina Nazi?!

  22. Spurgeon Monkfish III says:

    The pre-selection process in this country for potential MPs and the concept of “merit” are clearly antithetical and have been for decades.

    As has already been pointed out, there are more women MPs than ever and yet the competence, accountability and behaviour of those elected (and selected, in the case of certain staggeringly mediocre individuals) to our beloved feral legislature is indescribably appalling.

    That inexcusable neo-brutalist windbag shitshop should be [that’s enough of that – Sinc]

  23. stevem says:

    A quota is a wonderful idea. I think you have the wrong players, however. It should be 50% non faction/apparatchik increasing to 75% then 100%.

  24. pbw says:

    For reference:
    Current representation of women in the Federal Parliament as of 2/12/20
    Reps: 31.1% 47/151
    Sen: 51.3% 39/76

  25. Rex Anger says:

    For reference:
    Current representation of women in the Federal Parliament as of 2/12/20
    Reps: 31.1% 47/151
    Sen: 51.3% 39/76

    Oof?

    Why quotas again?

    All I can see is democracy in action?

  26. Damon says:

    Hey sinc, I mentioned Catholic and Muslim in one post and got it deleted. How come?

  27. Epicurious says:

    bradd says:
    March 30, 2021 at 2:10 pm
    I think this is sarcasm. If so, it is another reminder that sarcasm in print does not work very well.

    Too right. Whoever PBW is, should have produced a video clip with monologue, far better than that printed. If “we” want more women in parlerment then more should join the political parties in such numbers that they will control the pre-selection process. Its as simple as that folks. Now ‘youse’ ladies, get on with it and stop whining.

  28. Damon says:

    OK, I know.

  29. Terry says:

    Yeah, “quotas”. Awesome!

    Why not ‘Direct Democracy’ instead? (the ultimate minority is the individual – “quotas” for everyone!).

    We need to:
    1. Replace Prime Minister & Cabinet* with a directly elected Leader (who is responsible for the executive – a “President”, if you like.

    2. Remove all ministries from elected representatives – your job is to review, analyse, critique, hold-to-account. You know…”represent” the views and interests of your constituents. Four-year terms. Limit of two (represent and then, “thank you for your service, now %#&k-off”). No pension/super – that’s not what it is about; and

    3. Remove Senators (but not the Senate function). The role of the Senate to be performed by direct vote – a referendum on every single piece of proposed legislation to gain the assent of the people.

    * That latest list of incompetence released by ‘Scummo’ is embarrassing.
    Why, exactly, is there a “Minister for Women” (Marise Payne) AND a “Minister for Women’s Safety” (Anne Ruston)? Actually, why is this kind of segregation tolerated at all? Utter Bullshit of the highest order.

  30. Rex Anger says:

    @ PBW:

    Any chance of amending your post to pop that statistical citation of yours at the top of your article?

    And, for those who didn’t quite twig the first time, a /sarc tag at the bottom?

    A subtle edit, but it neon-lights the desired punchline… 😉

  31. Fred says:

    I’m in favour of quotas for women.

    50% of safe seats for women and of those 70% should have attended a government school and 30% a private school.

  32. Rex Anger says:

    50% of safe seats for women and of those 70% should have attended a government school and 30% a private school.

    Hasn’t that already been met and exceeded, Fred?

  33. H B Bear says:

    Couldn’t they just leave their balls with Security or a factional warperson?

  34. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    I don’t see what the problem is.
    All that’s necessary is for half of the men in the Libs to identify as women.
    Easily done these days, no op necessary.
    Just borrow the wife’s skirt.
    And they don’t have to divorce, there’s extra woke points for being in a lesbian marriage!

  35. Professor Fred Lenin says:

    How are they going to fit all the 453 different genders into te cabinet ?
    Leaving one of them out could cause unfairness .
    Are there going to be 461 differentt ballot papers for the different genders .?
    Its only fair that all 467 genders are represented fairly
    The different numbers are the result of new gende discoveries as I write .
    Shit !its 474 now .!

  36. PB says:

    “A woman working in a professional (?) job complains that she was photographed because she was immodestly dressed? Men are gently reminded that their fly is undone,”

    The difference lies in intent. Men generally don’t mean to leave their flies undone (unless its Mardi Gras week or in case they see an unattended Parliamentary desk), whereas modern women seem to have their tits ready to perform whenever a camera is around.

  37. the sting says:

    They only want quotas for positions of power ,why not quotas for bricklayers ?

  38. egg_ says:

    For reference:
    Current representation of women in the Federal Parliament as of 2/12/20

    Sen: 51.3% 39/76

    We’re fvcked!
    Stick a fork in it.

  39. calli says:

    Lol. I must have been talking to the guest author last week (assuming it is a he).

    I was told under no uncertain terms that quotas were essential for women to progress. The irony that a man was lecturing a woman that women can’t succeed without a helping hand was lost on him.

    He had a lot of mansplaining to do. 😀

  40. Davey Boy says:

    Bugger quotas (phrasing!), as mentioned elsewhere it’s time to bring back that popular and effective facet of Athenian (the original and best) democracy called Ostracism – the process where the citizens can choose to banish the dickhead of choice for a decade. What’s not to like!

  41. Baa Humbug says:

    Hasn’t the LNP had quotas for decades?
    How is a Deputy PM selected? Did the best man get the foreign and trade office on merit for all those years?
    The Coalition has had predetermined quotas for decades. They can’t whine about it when pressured into other forms of quotas.

    Our problem isn’t politicians. We’re always going to get a large number of dick heads.
    Our problem is that we no longer have the old reliable Commonwealth public service.
    These are the people who should be raining in ministers with good advice.
    In fact, the exact opposite is happening. Activist bureaucrats are leading ministers on.

    Gut the public service, fix the country.

  42. Davey Boy says:

    BTW good luck trying to pin down your local reps (federal or state) for a precise definition of “woman”, watch them duck for cover…

    The Labor Party’s national platform released today (Tuesday 30 March 2021) declares that humans can choose whether they are male or female. Labor will go to the next election on the platform that women aren’t allowed to have female-only sports or facilities.

    Even the Lib reps sh-t themselves when asked to define “what is a woman”.

    FFS

  43. TFX says:

    The current debate to encourage more women into the parliaments of Australia has emphasised the need for quotas for women to be preselected as candidates, and possibly even in various types of seats, such as safe and marginal.
    Winning preselection is a market where the candidates demonstrate their capabilities and knowledge to have the customers (preselectors) vote for them. It is a market but non-financial.
    Markets work on 2 variables, the price and the quantity. The price variable is the number of votes from the people in the market, who are the preselectors. Under current arrangements the price variable (number of votes) determines winners.
    The price variable in preselections is no doubt determined from the presentations of the candidates and their previous history in performance in other roles and no doubt many other attributes specific to their community.
    A quantity variable, and unknown as to which positions or seats would be subject to it, would lead to a higher central authority determining candidates ahead of local decision-makers, if they did not meet the quota requirements. They would have to meet the imposed quota requirements and would not necessarily take into account the local knowledge of the informed residents in specific seats.
    A price variable whereby the votes for a female candidate are increased in value by (as a simple example) 20% of the number of votes actually cast at the preselection would ensure that local judgements of the quality of candidates are still paramount.
    A justification for favouring female candidates is that many have not had the same opportunities as male candidates to demonstrate their abilities and accomplishments as biology has hampered them. Women have to invest so much more of their time and lives as mothers from pregnancy, nurturing babies and supervising children before preschool or school. Biology has put a constraint on the ability of women relative to men to build networks and make other contributions to their community, even if much more capable.

  44. H B Bear says:

    Anyone want to hazard a guess what bucket Chrissy Payne would have been put in?

  45. Herodotus says:

    How about a 50% quota for people who have never been in or near Canberra, and preferably have had ten years experience of the real world.

  46. pbw says:

    Rex,

    Editing is not in my gift, but even if it were, I wouldn’t. I work on the principle that we’re all grown-ups here, and if we’re not, we ought to be!

  47. pbw says:

    Calli,

    I (yes, a man) am disappointed.

  48. Rex Anger says:

    Editing is not in my gift, but even if it were, I wouldn’t. I work on the principle that we’re all grown-ups here, and if we’re not, we ought to be!

    ‘Sall good, mate.

    I thought your previous stats magnified your point, is all…

  49. Tel says:

    I operated under the delusion, not so much that selection on merit was a better idea, but that selection on merit could actually occur.

    If you really believe that (and the ancient Greeks, inventors of Democracy, did come to much the same conclusion) then the only answer is some variant of sortition. After all, the word “ballot” means a small ball, similar to what is used in Kelly Pool to randomly assign numbers. The Greeks devised an allotment machine “kleroterion” to decide jury duty, using jumbled black and white balls, and even today it’s widely accepted that a random jury is the fairest and most representative. Doing the same thing for election candidates would be easy enough and automatically gives guaranteed proportional distribution of opportunity amongst any identity group classification you want to come up with.

    Grab the electoral roll for each ward, and pick out 10 random candidates. Give them 30 days to get aligned with parties if that’s what they want to do else they come up as independent, and allow opt-out (with a good reason) to be replaced with another random selection. I doubt you would get worse leadership than what we already have.

  50. Squirrel says:

    Another vote for stevem’s excellent suggestion at 2.53pm – with the definition of apparatchik to include think tankers (just in case there’s any doubt on that subject).

  51. calli says:

    pbw says:
    March 30, 2021 at 6:01 pm
    Calli,

    I (yes, a man) am disappointed.

    Chuckle. Bless you.

  52. Econocrat says:

    What has she even announced in relation to women’s matters considering she has been the Minister for Women for quite a while ?

    Does the Commonwealth even have constitutional power over women? If not, why is there a minister for it?

  53. I’d like to see 100% of the Parliament selected on merit, but considering the quality of our representatives, it looks like it’s 100% on who you know.

  54. Ubique says:

    How do blokes identifying as women count? And do we just take their word for it, or is there a test? Just asking for a friend.

  55. Igor says:

    Some of the comments here clearly show that some didn’t read the whole thing before commenting.

  56. Entropy says:

    Simplest solution is to ban anyone from working in a Ministers office (or an adviser to a local member) under the age of 45. Kill it utterly as a career option. They are there to serve, not for themselves.
    They must have a career in the real world first, not a moronic graduate of student Union politics. We all knew those types, they were ignored on campus, and now they want their vengeance.

  57. Patrick Kelly says:

    More women = greater choice of targets

  58. Kneel says:

    “…to see 100%…” and others:

    Don’t you know that maths is racist and an expression of white privilege? *
    To create quotas based on a mathematical calculation (percentages) promotes the white patriarchy – this is a big no-no.
    So, sorry, no – no quotas that involve maths are allowed. In fact, even calculating current percentages is racist. So stop it!

    * such is the latest from the Critical Race Theory mob, as it involves both “showing your work” and an “objectively correct” answer. No objective fact are allowed of course.

  59. pbw says:

    Now that everyone has left the building, let me reinforce the main point, which tended to get lost in a lot of automatic hostility to the idea of quotas (which I’m sure Sinc anticipated, and which I’m sure he enjoyed immensely).

    More than any other conceivable measure, this would fix the current toxic environment in Federal Parliament.

    This is true, and the sooner this is appreciated, the better.
    Yes, there was intended drollery and the initial misdirection, but the problem is putting gangs of women into Parliament. See post about Teena McQueen.

Comments are closed.