It is another exciting day in the Canadian political landscape, and if that isn’t the most exciting opening sentence I have ever written, I don’t know what is. Today is the day that our new (and yes, handsome) Prime Minister is sworn in to office along with his chosen Cabinet. I am trying to decide why I have been particularly excited about this over the past few days. I don’t get to go vote or set up a fun, kid-friendly voting booth at home or watch in anticipation to see what our country will decide. That’s some proper exciting drama right there. But swearing in day?
Maybe I am excited because I have been quite impressed with our Prime Minister-designate since election night. I know most of what I’ve seen has been optics, but the optics have been good (and I don’t mean all those boxing pictures floating around). I admit that I wasn’t expecting much from Trudeau, noting that even a little change would be a welcome change from the previous administration. But so far, I’m seeing lots of things that impress me. Still, I don’t think my newfound appreciation of Justin Trudeau is what is making me excited for today.
The truth is, I’m really excited to see who will be in Cabinet. (Yup, another riveting sentence right there).
Prime Minister-designate Justin Trudeau has promised gender parity in his Cabinet. That means he will be appointing just as many women as men to these prime positions of power in our government.
Let that sink in for a minute.
If that doesn’t get your heart fluttering, then maybe you need to consider your privilege. I don’t mean that offensively. I just mean that maybe you are so far rooted within an disproportionate society that prefers one type of person over others that you are blind to it.
Despite my elation over this gender parity that I will be able to watch unfold in an hour from when I write this (and immediately upon publication), I have been so disheartened about the narrative that has developed as our country discusses gender equality in Cabinet. I first noticed it on Saturday as I was listening to CBC Radio’s The House. They were predicting and discussing issues that Justin Trudeau would be considering while choosing his Cabinet and one of the talking heads mentioned that gender parity was well and good but Trudeau needs to make sure he picks competent people for each file.
Hold up. What did he just say?
Since hearing that, I have noticed other prominent media personalities broadcasting the same sentiment and people – friends even – sharing it.
Pardon my French, but we are a bilingual country: WTF?!
I know. On the surface it sounds quite reasonable. We really need competent people in the most powerful positions in our government. Sure. That makes sense.
Except, you realize that this language has never been used before, right? We have never questioned the competency of potential Cabinet choices before, not until more women began to fill those roles. But here’s the crazy part. If you really listen carefully you’ll notice that no one is expecting competency from the men that Trudeau will be choosing. Only the women.
Here are the key points that I keep hearing from almost every political discussion concerning the upcoming Cabinet in our media:
- Trudeau is creating a smaller Cabinet. There are only approximately 28 expected Cabinet positions.
- Trudeau has a lot of good people to choose from, including long-time loyal Liberals. (Notice how in this case we would be choosing Cabinet ministers based on loyalty and time of service, not meritocracy.)
- Trudeau will also want new faces because of his brand (again, the discussion is not mentioning competency)
- Trudeau wants to achieve gender parity. And BAM. Here is where we start discussing competency and needing to choose the right person for the job.
Do you see the institutionalized sexism yet? It is in our government. It is in the media (even the liberal media). It is in your Facebook feeds.
There are so many things wrong with talking about competency and meritocracy in the same breath as discussing gender parity. Once you scratch the surface you realize that what we’re really doing is questioning the abilities not of all our members of parliament, but just the women. We are making the false assumption that there is only one person right for any job, when the reality is that there are likely many incredible individual people who would fit the requirements and succeed.
What we fail to realize is that it isn’t necessarily the right man who makes it to political office but the one who is the most connected and who has the most money. It is the man with the right name (Trudeau). When women make it to this point, they have often faced many more personal and institutional barriers and they have surpassed them all. I would argue that in many cases, a woman has actually proven herself incredibly competent by the time she has been voted in to our federal government.
The entire system that our federal government was built on was created to make it easier for rich white men to be successful, and yet it is so entirely normal to it us now that we are completely blind to it. Fixing it requires women and men who can see the problems within the government to change the system and this is why I am so excited that this Cabinet will have an equal number of men and women. It is a step, and an incredibly important one, to increase diversity in our government. Without diversity, our government cannot properly represent an incredibly diverse society because experiences and realities are different. People who are marginalized understand that those who aren’t cannot possibly understand their issues like they do.
Half of twenty-eight is 14. If you honestly think that Trudeau cannot find 14 competent people within the 50 Liberal women elected then you might want to move, because you must not trust your neighbours enough to vote for competent people and you might want to find somewhere that has less female representation in government since likely the idea of a women in a leadership role is upsetting to you. That will be hard though, because Canada actually ranks 50th out of 190 countries on proportion of national-level female politicians. I realize this sounds harsh and blunt, but this is what is underneath those calls for a meritocracy and the questions of competency. Consider the power in your words and your social shares.
And let’s celebrate this gender-equal Cabinet.
I think more important than a gender equal cabinet is a fully competent and best qualified individuals. Yes gender equality is great but if, say, 20 of the 28 elected individuals were the best in our country at what they do..and they were all men or all women then to me, thats more important then equality…though im sure all elected individuals today will be quite competent I’d hate to see anyone miss an amazing opportunity just because of their sex male or female.
Catherine recently posted..The Positive Effects of Paying Debt Off
Of course we all prioritize competency in these position, but do you honestly believe that after going through the entire vetting process and voting process that get people to this point that most people in our government would not be competent? That Trudeau couldn’t find 15 out of 50 female MPs be just as competent as any man to run a file? That there is only ONE person ideal for any file? The whole fact that we are talking about competency is a major problem, especially when we’re discussing a group of people who have clearly proven their competency.
Laura O’Rourke recently posted..Pardon my French: Why a Gender-Equal Cabinet is Important
In this instance, I’m not even beginning to suggest these women aren’t more than qualified and competent, its kind of obvious we can rule the world, in any situation though as long as the best person for the job regardless of sex is doing it I dont care. I just hate that in 2015 we’re still using gender as any sort of label. If a female gets elected as MP it’s pointed out that shes a female in a role…a male gets elected theres no identifying his sex…annoying.
Catherine recently posted..The Positive Effects of Paying Debt Off
It will continue to be noticed until the disparity is gone.
Laura O’Rourke recently posted..Pardon my French: Why a Gender-Equal Cabinet is Important
I have NOTHING, but love for this post! :D
I have nothing, but HOPE in my heart for Canada!
Honest to goodness! I am elated!
I won’t pretend to not be thrilled because you know what? I *am* thrilled!!
Beautiful post! Onward we go!
Peady @ Tempered With Kindness recently posted..We Like The Moon! (‘Cause It Is Close To Us.)
We are so used to the disparity, that we don’t even NOTICE it sometimes when people make those comments. It’s second nature for some people to start talking about competency when the subject of gender equality comes up. But you’re right – no one would make those comments if it was assumed that the roles would be filled with mostly men.
Leigh Ann recently posted..shopping is torture
I love this post. I absolutely agree with everything you’ve said.
I don’t mind the 50-50 split because, quite frankly, most ministers are so-so and they tend to rely on an experienced staff to do the real work. Traditionally cabinet ministers have been chosen for their loyalty because that’s what party politics is all about – the PM has to be sure that his cabinet ministers are on the same page and will take instruction. I have no doubt that women can play the crony as well as any man. However, I can understand how the men might be feeling a little cheesed off. It’s the maths.
If there are 50 liberal seats occupied by women then there are 134 liberal seats occupied by (often ambitious and competative) men. As a woman, an MP has a 1 in 3.6 chance of landing in cabinet but as a man only a 1 in 9.6 – so a female MP is about 3 times more likely to get a cabinet post.
To make this actually fair we would have to have an equal (or close to equal) number of female MPs and male MPs. This would require an equal number of females running in winnable ridings as males and it would require them being voted for and winning. That’s where the actual problem is.
I agree with Catherine in some respects because I would not want to see someone who is at the top of their game be refused a position of great responsibility if they are a good fit for it regardless of gender. Many MPs switch ministries over the course of a government in shuffles so there are more chances for revisions later on. I agree with most of this post except the part that says no one is expecting competency from the men that Trudeau will be choosing. I expect to see competency from all the MPs and I’m hoping that the equal gender cabinet will help achieve that.
So happy to read this today. The competency topic is a joke. I’ve read the bios of the cabinet ministers. I think they all bring a new kind of experience to their portfolios. Trudeau is right, it is 2015. This should be a no-brainer and not even something worth talking about. It’s sad that we need to.
Instead, we should be celebrating that we (finally) have a defence minister who has seen combat first hand. No – been hands on in combat. Or that the minister of Veteran’s Affairs is also the Associate minister of defence. Or that we have a minister for Innovation, Science and Economic Development (imagine! a minister for science! Innovation. Be still my beating heart!!)A minster for democratic institutions…
Excellent post, Laura. I was ridiculously excited to tell my son about the fact that Canada’s government has 15 women and 15 men in Cabinet. That each of the members had promised to do their best for our country. When I told him that some people thought women couldn’t do the job, he said, “That’s silly, because you could do it, right Mama?” I don’t know that I’d make a good cabinet minister, but it’s nice when your kid has that much faith in you.
Have faith, Canada.
I love this post. It’s not often that I see a young woman so fired up about an election (although, with the friends I’ve chosen, is probably more than some). I wish we were more like you Canadians.
Greta recently posted..Through the Lens Thursday: Bright
I’m a bit on the fence with the gender parity issue in cabinet.
On one hand, having equal gender representation is important since it reflects society.
On the other hand, out of 184 seats the Liberals took home, 50 of those are held by women. That means women make up 27% of the party’s seats, but are getting 50% of the cabinet positions. Statistically this is appointment for a specific advantage, and this is usually called Affirmative Action. They are purposely choosing women, people of visible minorities, or people who have disabilities, for cabinet positions, much like workplaces now manage their hiring practices.
I just don’t see WHY we need to do this. It’s 2015, can’t we just treat everyone equally, and perhaps strip off the name/gender/info of the candidate, and just appoint the right MP to the right portfolio? Maybe the big push for 50% cabinet is so that in the future, they won’t need a “quota” because the seats would basically be 50-50% for elected MPs in the first place.