Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)

As they say in another industry, "Follow that". I applaud Senator Norris for his usual wit and rhetoric and for the valuable contribution he makes to debates such as this.

I first came to this subject in 2001 when I collaborated with a senior research officer in the Houses of the Oireachtas, Maedhbh McNamara. Our collaboration produced a book that is used now as a textbook in our schools and, I am pleased to say, as a reference book worldwide, because it filled a gap. "Women in Parliament" outlined the background and history of Irish women's participation in politics, from Countess Markievicz onwards.

Given that we are having a debate relevant to the Countess, who, inevitably, has been mentioned, I make a plea to the people who produce textbooks, especially for the British educational system, to change a historical inaccuracy. Lady Astor may have been the first woman to sit in the British Houses of Parliament but she certainly was not the first woman elected to that Parliament. That honour fell to Constance Markievicz who not only has that place in history but was also the first woman Minister appointed to any cabinet in Europe. The fact that the then outlawed Irish Government was not recognised by the British Government of the time does not detract from this honour.

There is an interesting quote by Constance Markievicz who even then had to negotiate, as many women have done since, to assert her rights within the political framework of the time, namely, Sinn Féin. She stated to the leadership, which was of course male dominated, that if she was not appointed as a Minister she would join the Labour Party, which seems to have been the worst possible act of treason one could perpetrate in the politics of the time. She got her way and became Labour Minister in the First Dáil.

In one of many articles summing up the status of women in politics it is stated that men "largely dominate the political arena, largely formulate the rules of the political game and often define the standards for evaluation". Furthermore, political life is organised according to male norms and values and, in some cases, male lifestyles, as per remarks made earlier regarding arranging the Order of Business. For example, politics is often based on the idea of winners and losers, competition and confrontation.

Following my experience of the publication of "Women in Parliament" in 2004, which I readily recommend to those present who have an interest in the subject and which we are updating at present, as a member of the Council of Europe delegation from Ireland I was appointed to what was then and may still be called the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men. It will be noted the title was "women and men" rather than "men and women". I was one of a small body of male politicians on that 50 member body and was tasked with preparing a report. I was privileged to do so, on behalf of the committee, and presented the report to the parliamentary assembly where it was unanimously adopted in 2004 under the title Women's Participation in Politics. For those interested, the details are available on the Council of Europe website, listed as Document 10202.

A number of recommendations were made at that time which are still relevant. Before I include those in my contribution, I shall provide another quote. Inevitably, Sweden is mentioned when there is mention of an acceptable percentage of representation of women in national parliaments. Currently its percentage is approximately 45%. Birgitta Dahl, a former Speaker of the Swedish Parliament, put this into context. She stated:

The most interesting aspect of the Swedish Parliament is not that we have 45% representation of women but that a majority of women and men bring relevant social experience to the business of parliament. This is what makes the difference. Men bring with them experience of real life issues of raising children and running a home. They have broad perspectives and greater understanding. Women are allowed to be what we are and to act according to our own unique personality. Neither men nor women have to conform to a traditional role. Women do not have to behave like men to have power. Men do not have to behave like women to be allowed to care for their children. When this pattern becomes the norm then we will see real change.

The differences between men and women with respect to the priorities of decision making are determined by the interests, backgrounds and working patterns of both sexes. Women tend to give priority to societal concerns such as social security, national health care and children's issues. The male-dominated working pattern is further reflected in the parliamentary work schedule, referred to by other speakers, and is often characterised by lack of supportive structures for working mothers in general and for women MPs in particular. In addition to their party and constituency work and service on different committees women parliamentarians are called upon to network within their parties at multi-party levels and with women outside of parliament. Furthermore, they have to play the socially prescribed nurturing roles of mother, wife, sister and grandmother. Most parliamentary programmes and sitting times are not adjusted to take into consideration this dual burden that women carry. Many women MPs struggle to balance family life with the demands of work that often involve late hours, much travelling and few facilities.

In my research for the Council of Europe report, it became apparent to me that it is not merely that this glass ceiling operates within male-dominated political parties throughout Europe but there is a lack of recognition and acknowledgement of the extra burden placed on those women who wished to participate in political life at local, regional or national level. To a large extent, this centres on lack of cash-----