Should Burnham commit to 50% female cabinet ministers?

[JoyousOpalLemur]

The Women's Parliamentary Labour Party, which members of Andy Burnham's team are members of, has said the next government must be 50% male and 50% female.

They are particularly concerned that sacking Rachel Reeves will feed into a Labour culture of misogyny if she is not replaced with a woman, or if other senior posts currently held by men are not given to women.

Do you think this is a good idea?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn07ew5n2jro

No, they should commit to getting the very best people for the role. If that means 70% women and 30% men then so be it.

No. No time for box-ticking. The country is in a mess, we need the best people for the jobs.

No, he should focus on the best people for the jobs.

No, if his ideology supports equality, he should choose people who share his values and goals for the country. Eventually, this strive towards equality will be reflected in all leadership positions. We would get to a place where even if a leadership team seems to be dominated by one demographic, we would know that they value the right things. Some of a good bunch rather than the best of a bad bunch.

Nope. Appoint the best people for the roles. If 100% of these are men, that is the right choice.

I think the cabinet should reflect the country and needs to be made of competent people.

So I don't want to see another cabinet and a list of advisors made up of a majority of white, privately educated men or women from privileged backgrounds who have never had a proper job beside politics and know nothing about real life.

We need diversity with people (not just women) from various backgrounds who can do the job, bring different life skills and experience and better represent the country as a whole.

Only if he can identify women! But agree the country has more important issues and best person for the job should be the only consideration!

Best people for the job that’s it, if they are women then great if they are not then no. Labour spend most of their time tripping over all their inclusivity policies and getting wrapped up with right think and in fighting. It’s just bloody ridiculous.

No we need the best people for the important job of running the country regardless of sex. We don't need a box ticking, performative process. It's ironic that so many in Labour won't truthfully define what a woman is.

No, the best person for each position should be chosen, even if that's 100% men, or 100% women. One's sex shouldn't come into it.

I think I agree with all the points made so far, including the irony that the WPLP believes men are women if they say they are!

I'm not convinced that Lucy Powell and Louise Haigh really are the best people for top government jobs.

In fact I don't understand how Haigh is still even an MP given that her fraudulent past came to light during this parliament.

He should choose the best person for each role, and not assume that the best person will be a man.

I think that's the real issue. I've been involved with the Labour Party for over 40 years, and still find it misogynistic.

@Rubyslipperswitch That’s not available within the Labour Party though. Of course they cannot represent everyone when they only got 33% of the vote. They clearly cannot even represent Labour voters adequately. He should have the best people for the jobs and they are short on the ground.

No.
He should appoint the most suitable people.
Sadly there is no guarantee that female ministers will make policies and decisions that are positive for women and children.

No. If he could try and match experience/suitability for the role to the person that would be helpful, although there is rarely a perfect fit.

First post nails it.

This. 100%

We should have a society where women, people from minority groups and disabled people have an equal chance to become the right person for the job. Sadly we don't. As long as educational and employment opportunities are unequal, we will struggle to have enough people reaching suitability and carry on with more of the same. The focus needs to be on improving opportunities for people to get there. But that is more expensive and less easy to evidence success than slapping a quota on something.

So which overwhelmingly majority white constituencies must not have MPs that represent the majority of their constituents in order to meet your diversity target?

I think sex based and class based discrimination get in the way of election and selection for cabinet.

People code certain accents/ vocabulary and characteristics as being indicative of intelligence and reason - those typically found in privately educated males. In addition, these men have often been socialised to believe they belong in powerful positions, whilst others haven’t, so don’t necessarily pursue them.

Effectiveness in politics requires capacity to be cognisant of one’s own life experiences and how they shape and influence one’s own thoughts and reasoning. It involves the capacity to actively seek to understand the experiences of people from different backgrounds and attend to all of this information in their work.

Female, working class politicians who are guided by critical theory have no interest in developing a better understanding of the life experiences of middle class people or people with family wealth. They conceptualise swathes of people as ‘oppressors’ and feel justified in overlooking their needs and experiences because they belong to groups that have had unfair advantage for a long time.

I don’t have a problem with it as a loose aim. There are enough competent women in the country to provide a suitable pool of candidates. The trouble comes with convincing them to accept media intrusion and public hatred.
Perhaps setting up a better pipeline of female candidates would yield more natural results.But that would require planning and structure.

Obviously he should choose on merit not gender.

Louise Haigh who I think stole and Rachel Reeves who lied on her CV show that gender does not automatically give us better outcomes.

I'd like to see more able women in decision making but the only one who I admire right now who is bossing it is Kemi. And she's the opposition.

Only if they are the best person for the role.

There are only 165 female Labour MPs. And a parliamentary Labour Party so devoid of real talent that rather than find a new leader within the ranks of those who stood for election at the GE on their manifesto, they have decided to parachute in someone who seems to feel no need to consider the manifesto the Labour Party got their majority on the back of.

No