Failure Of Women As British Politicians

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28492, 23 January 1958, Page 2

Failure Of Women As British Politicians

[By

EVELYN HUNTLEY]

At .least one woman is not excited at the prospect of peeresses in a reformed House of Lords. The Government’s Life Peerages Bill does not stir any feminist feelings in my breast ! I fear that women will make as little impact on the Upper Chamber as they have in almost four decades in the House of Commons. The poor showing of women in Parliaments sinpe 1918 has been one of the greatest disappointments in the history of politics. And they have certainly not earned the right to sit in the House of Lords. . With a few notable exceptions. Britain has produced no outstanding woman political leader. And the feminine voters—who have been in the majority on the electoral rolls for a generation—have shown chiefly disinterest towards members of their own sex in politics.

Look at the record. Britain now has 27 women M.P.’s in the Commons—out of a total of 830. In 39 years, only 70 women have been elected to Parliament. The dream of the Suffragettes that women M.P.’s would usher in a new era of common sense ano humanity in politics has faded. In fact, it is ironical to note that the proposal that women should sit in the Lords is really just a chivalrous gesture by the men. The decision to create peeresses with a vote in the Upper House is’ a victory for femininity —not for feminism. 1 share my disappointment in women M.P.’s with many othei members of my sex. My lack ot enthusiasm for the proposed band of life peeresses is fairly general feeling among the British women who show any interest in national affairs. For example, there is Mrs Helena Norman ton, the first British woman to be appointed a ’•Queen’s” Counsel. She once said bitterly of women M.P.’s: “They come and they go—but what do they do? They go after the little worth things, but they will not concentrate on the great major issues. “We women earned the vote and won it, but I do not think that we have made the best use of it. When British women do make the best use of their vote, it will be a blessing to the whole world.” Block Vote Feared The great feaa of the men in those far-off days, of course, was that women would constitute a vast, unpredictable block vote with the power to swamp Parliament with members of their own capricious choice.

How relieved they were when it became clear that most women seemed to vote as their husbands did, according to class, age and income group. Since 1918 (when women over 30 got the vote) and 1928 (when the age limit wgs lowered to 21) women would presumably have supported candidates of their own sex—if they had been impressed by them. But the lesson to be drawn from these four decades of peace and war. good times and bad. is that the feminine voters have neither looked for. nor supported, women for Parliament. Ask the party organisers in almost any constituency. Most will tell you they are. wary of women as candidates. As a general rule, they do not inspire confidence in male or female voters. Many are chosen to fight forlorn battles in constituencies often, one imagines, just to make up an impressive number of “women candidates” at Party headquarters. Among the major Parties, half the women ho have stood for Parliament since 1918 have represented Labour, with the other half fairly equally divided among the Conservative and Liberal Parties. But a rather higher percentage of Conservative women have succeeded at the polls. Of the women who have sat in the House, 10 have reached ministerial rank, sometimes more than, once, three have entered the Cabinet and four have been made Privy Councillors. These figures can hardly be taken as indicating that women

t have “set the Thames on fire” at - Westminister. There are, however, f many good' laws on the Statute i Book which owe their existence f to feminine insight, ability and perseverance. s Women M.P.’s have been re- - sponsible for numerous social : security, pension, child care and - women’s welfare reforms over the years. But on neither side I of the House, after all these years, i is there a female politician who . can speak with real authority on . the great foreign, Commonwealth t and domestic affairs of the day. Greatness Not Achieved Male prejudice is only partially . responsible for this. The real fact ■ is that women at Westminster 1 have just not achieved Parlia- ! mentary greatness. Many have shown great dilig--5 ence, tenacity, charm and in- > dustry in their (usually minor) i ministerial posts or on the floor of the House. But the few women i M.P.’s who . have hit the headlines J have usually done so through their idiosyncrasies, their good looks, or ! their outrageous sayings and doings. And there has been a depressing number who have entered the chamber with the help of a great father’s name, or gained sentimental backing by standing in the constituency represented by their late husband. A decade has passed since World War II and the number of women in the House looks like settling down permanently in the midtwenties. The men are more relaxed, more indulgent and more courteous to- 1 wards them than they have ever been. They can afford to be patronising—no real petticoat com- 1 petition is likely. ’ Perhaps all this will change ; with the introduction of women in the Lords. It is ironical that com- . petition between the parties may result in more women in the 1 Upper House than would be ! elected there by the free vote of ] an electorate containing a 1 majority of their own sex. Perhaps ... but I can detect little confidence among members of either sex. Neither, so far as I can see, is there much real interest in the whole business of peeresses in the Lords—which would have been a white-hot issue a generation ago.