{"id":228,"date":"2013-02-20T14:38:39","date_gmt":"2013-02-20T14:38:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/?p=228"},"modified":"2013-07-24T11:07:39","modified_gmt":"2013-07-24T11:07:39","slug":"engendering-debate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/engendering-debate\/","title":{"rendered":"Engendering Debate"},"content":{"rendered":"

What could constitutional change mean for gender equality? Cera Murtagh reports from the Women and Constitutional Futures<\/a> seminar
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

The political debate around the Scottish independence referendum could so far be characterised by two opposing constitutional options being trotted out against a backdrop of bickering over procedural issues. Yet what this change \u2013 or status quo \u2013 should deliver, has not been so clearly articulated.\u00a0 A seminar in Edinburgh last week addressed that vacuum, posing the fundamental question: what could a new Scotland look like?<\/p>\n

The event, entitled Women and Constitutional Futures: Gender Equality Matters in a New Scotland<\/em>, held on 14 and 15 February at the Royal Society of Edinburgh, brought together a range of academics, practitioners and activists to discuss what the 2014 referendum could mean for gender equality \u2013 and, critically, the opportunities it presents to advance the agenda.\u00a0 Organised by the University of Edinburgh\u2019s Professor of Politics, Fiona Mackay and Professor of Constitutional Law, Christine Bell, this timely forum explored how women\u2019s voices could be injected into the debate – not only in the run up to the referendum, but in the constitutional negotiations that might follow and, ultimately, the country that will emerge post-2014.\u00a0 Discussions of macro-economic policy, EU membership, or indeed the timing of the poll or wording of the question, were notably absent.\u00a0 Instead participants were invited to take a step back and imagine a new Scotland – one where gender equality matters.<\/p>\n

The sense that Scotland was approaching a \u2018critical juncture\u2019 infused the event.\u00a0 Constitutional change presents an unprecedented opportunity to advance women\u2019s inclusion in society by getting in at the foundations and enshrining its principles in new constitutions, structures and institutions.\u00a0 But that is a time-limited window.\u00a0 Focusing minds, seminar chair Lesley Riddoch reminded the audience that Scotland\u2019s First Minister had committed to a written constitution in an independent Scotland; if gender equality is to be embedded within that, now is the time to act.<\/p>\n

International examples of how human rights and equality have been written into constitutions in countries like South Africa and Columbia, were set out by Georgina Waylen, Professor of Politics at the University of Manchester and Dr Catherine O\u2019Rourke of the Institute for Transitional Justice, University of Ulster.\u00a0 Sketching the opportunities and the pitfalls, they offered some lessons for women aiming to influence constitutional change: organise in advance, intervene early and form alliances.<\/p>\n

The seminar also heard about constitutional developments closer to home.\u00a0 Speakers from Iceland and Ireland explained how the recent economic and political crises in their countries had sparked constitutional reform as the public demanded greater citizen participation in their governance.\u00a0 In the wake of its financial crash a deliberative process was kick started to draw up a new constitution shaped by the people.\u00a0 Thorvaldur Gylfason, Chair of the Icelandic Alliance for a New Constitution, described the process that involved a Constitutional Council, made up of 25 citizens, which obtained the views of the public through its website as well as Facebook and Twitter.\u00a0 This innovative approach has not been without its challenges however.\u00a0 Despite the draft constitution \u2013 which includes greater public control of natural resources – being endorsed in a referendum in October, its ratification now faces opposition both from within Parliament and from special interests, Gylfason said.\u00a0 But, as he reflected: \u201cA good constitution is one that will face serious opposition\u201d.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Professor Yvonne Galligan of Queens University Belfast outlined the Constitutional Convention established in Ireland last year to discuss constitutional amendments \u2013 including proposals to enhance women\u2019s participation in public life \u2013 and made up of one third politicians and two thirds citizens.\u00a0 The professor sounded a note of caution on the use of deliberative democracy, however, warning that deliberation does not always deliver gender equality outcomes.<\/p>\n

Unsurprisingly, women\u2019s political representation was high on the agenda.\u00a0 Dr Meryl Kenny, Research Fellow at the University of New South Wales, painted a picture of regression in the Scottish Parliament, where the proportion of women has fallen from a high of 39.5% in the 2003 elections to 34.8% in 2011, while speakers from Spain and Ireland showed how things might be done differently.\u00a0 Tania Verge, of Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona, shared experiences from Catalonia and Spain where gender quotas have seen women\u2019s representation rise from 5% in the late 1970s to near parity levels in 2011.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, across the water, statutory parliamentary quotas of 30% women candidates on the ballot paper at the next General Election (rising to 40% after seven years) were adopted in Ireland last year.\u00a0 The \u201csystem shock\u201d of recession, according to Fiona Buckley, co-founder of the 50\/50 campaign, provided the \u201ccritical juncture\u201d to address dismal levels of women\u2019s representation \u2013 currently 15%.\u00a0 The lesson to be drawn from the Irish experience, Buckley told delegates, was to, \u201cnever waste a good crisis\u201d.\u00a0 \u201cWomen are not the problem\u201d, she added; institutional barriers are and quotas can begin to address them.<\/p>\n

But discussions of equality went far beyond electoral quotas to social justice in its broadest sense.\u00a0 Kate Higgins, political blogger and member of Women for Independence, challenged her fellow-delegates to recognise that, \u201cwe are privileged women\u201d and beyond those walls economic and social inequalities mark Scottish society. Tackling that injustice is core to why Scotland needs independence, she argued.<\/p>\n

Former Scottish Socialist MSP Carolyn Leckie likewise drew attention back to class inequality, saying that for many women in Scotland a more pressing issue is how they will afford to buy adequate food for their families, and not just \u201chorse burgers\u201d.\u00a0 \u201cI always find myself in class environments talking feminism and in feminist environments talking class,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n

To round off the day delegates were taken back to the dawn of devolution.\u00a0 Speakers from Northern Ireland shared their experiences of having formed an all-women\u2019s party – the Northern Ireland Women\u2019s Coalition – in a bid to influence negotiations in advance of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.\u00a0 Founder member Carmel Roulston recalled how members from nationalist and unionist communities came together to ensure women\u2019s voices were represented in the negotiations.<\/p>\n

Professor Alice Brown, a member of the Consultative Steering Group for the Scottish Parliament and founder member of the Scottish Women\u2019s Coordination Group, reflected on that process and its lessons for the forthcoming campaign.<\/p>\n

\u201cBut what worries me is that this time round there is not that same focus on equal representation,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is political division between the political parties; the debate is quite toxic in some regards. And that means that the broad alliance we were able to achieve in the 90s perhaps is not so possible now.\u201d<\/p>\n

Ending on a more positive note, Brown called on those present to consider establishing a ‘Women\u2019s Constitutional Commission’ or ‘Women\u2019s Futures Commission’.\u00a0 Professor James Mitchell of the University of Strathclyde wholeheartedly backed the proposal, saying women should be “deeply dissatisfied” with the offerings to date of both the Yes Scotland and Better Together campaigns. Around the room, lively debate was sparked about what a body like this might look like – but the enthusiasm for some such initiative was palpable.<\/p>\n

The day drew to a close with a sense of possibility – and a recognition that the time to realise those possibilities is now.<\/p>\n

Cera Murtagh is a PhD Candidate in Politics at the University of Edinburgh researching cross-community political parties in divided societies
\n<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What could constitutional change mean for gender equality? Cera Murtagh reports from the Women and Constitutional Futures seminar The political debate around the Scottish independence referendum could so far be characterised by two opposing constitutional options being trotted out against … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=228"}],"version-history":[{"count":15,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":237,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228\/revisions\/237"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=228"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=228"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk\/referendum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=228"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}