Sisters in high office, like their brothers, we presume, should “sing for their supper” (“Sing out sistuh”, April 23).
But to suggest, as you did, that until women in decision-making prove themselves worthy there should be no further push for equal representation is as flawed as white minority regimes of old arguing that blacks should only be fairly represented when they “prove” that they are capable.
Of course, every public official, male and female, must be held accountable.
But equal representation by women, or any other interest group, in a democracy is not some coveted prize. It is a democratic right.
Campaigning for women’s equal representation and insisting that they perform are not oil and water. Getting the numbers right is as much a part of accountability as tracking performance. Countless studies, including Gender Links’s recent comparative study of the impact of women in decision-making in six Southern African countries, shows that the ability of women to bring different qualities to governance is linked to their numbers in these bodies.
Globally, there is a strong correlation between levels of women’s representation in decision-making and the extent to which systems of governance respond to the needs of all members of society. World Bank research has gone so far as to suggest that having a higher proportion of women in governance increases levels of transparency and reduces corruption.
This is not to say there are not individual women who do not perform or who are not gender sensitive, or conversely that there are not men who can be more gender sensitive than women.
It means that for women as a group to have an impact, they need to be represented in significant strengths.
Men, of course, have never had to demonstrate that they make a difference to have the right of entry into high office.
In an ideal future world, where the playing fields have been levelled, it will be possible for women and men, freed of the prejudices of society, to find their space in all areas and at all levels without resorting to number crunching.
President Thabo Mbeki has generally demonstrated a sophisticated and enlightened view of gender in his appointments.
The last Cabinet reshuffle witnessed a number of “gender benders” that paid off handsomely.
A male minister of public service was deployed to social development and vice versa, to good effect.
Women found themselves in portfolios such as intelligence and mining, where they performed commendably this year. As the Mail & Guardian rightly points out, not all women ministers have done well — health being the most glaring instance.
But, as the M&G‘s own annual assessments of the Cabinet show, there are as many if not more men in that basket.
Our analysis of these report cards over four years shows that, on average, women ministers have performed better than men by the M&G‘s own, admittedly subjective, yardsticks.
Mbeki is now able to pick his best team, on merit, and still increase the number of women in decision-making, precisely because he has given women the access, helped to level the playing field, and to normalise the idea that the best man for the job may indeed be a woman.
Colleen Lowe Morna is director of Gender Links, a member of the Fifty Fifty campaign, and editor of “Ringing up the Changes: Gender in Southern African Politics”