Welsh Government scraps gender-balanced Senedd Bill
Martin Shipton
The Welsh Government has withdrawn a Bill that would have introduced a legal mechanism aimed at ensuring the Senedd was gender-balanced.
Instead it will issue voluntary guidance to political parties in advance of candidate selection for the next Senedd election in 2026.
The decision does not come as a great surprise, given that there were serious doubts about whether enforcing gender balance was within the Senedd’s competence. Laws relating to the policy area of equality are reserved to Westminster.
Presiding Officer Elin Jones refused to issue a statement confirming that the Senedd was empowered to pass the Bill, after receiving legal advice telling her that it wasn’t.
Another matter of contention concerned a section of the Bill that would have allowed anyone to identify as a female. Gender critical feminist groups like the Women’s Rights Network objected to the Bill because of the self-identification section, arguing that it could in theory lead to a situation where 100% of Senedd Members were biologically male.
Timely
A written statement by Jane Hutt, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Chief Whip said: “Members will be aware that the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Act received Royal Assent in June this year, which will deliver a major series of reforms to our institution, including expanding to 96 Members from 2026.
“A separate Bill, the Senedd Cymru (Electoral Candidate Lists) Bill concluded its Stage 1 scrutiny in the Senedd in July, and I am grateful for all the contributions from Members to those proceedings.
“Tomorrow, the First Minister will set out her policy and legislative priorities for the remainder of this Senedd term, indicating those areas where the Welsh Government will now focus its full energy in delivering tangible outcomes for the people of Wales.
“As a result, we are looking across the government at areas where we can implement our policy and legislative objectives in a more practical and timely way.
“Following consideration, we have decided to table a motion to withdraw the Bill from further Senedd consideration, which will be debated and voted on in plenary on September 24.
“During the Stage 1 debate, representatives of all political parties in the Senedd made clear their commitment to the important area of women’s representation in the next Senedd. We remain committed to a gender balanced Senedd and getting more women into politics, but have reflected over the summer and decided the best way we can achieve practical change for the 2026 Senedd election is to address this issue in a different way.
“The withdrawal of this Bill does not prevent political parties considering what action they can implement through their candidate selection processes.
“As Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, I am pleased to report that I will accelerate progress on new guidance for political parties in relation to diversity and inclusion, including representation of women, but also across a broader range of characteristics and circumstances.
“This work is already underway, and we will consult publicly on it shortly. The guidance will therefore be available in advance of candidate selection processes by political parties for the 2026 election.
“I anticipate this approach will assist delivery of practical, tangible outcomes across the political spectrum with the aim of returning a strong and diverse Senedd which can properly represent the whole of Welsh society.”
Bitter disappointment
The decision to withdraw the Bill will come as a bitter disappointment to campaigners who have argued for years in favour of a legal requirement for gender balance. In 2017 an Expert Panel on Assembly Electoral Reform chaired by Professor Laura McAllister of Cardiff University strongly recommended such a move, stating: “[Women] constitute 52% of the adult population and are, therefore, an underrepresented majority.
“International evidence suggests that the use of gender quotas in parliaments across the world is increasing, and over half of the world’s nations use some form of electoral quota.”
However, the expert panel recognised that achieving a gender balanced Assembly could be problematic, and its recommendation on the issue stated: “In order to safeguard the achievements of the Assembly and political parties in Wales in relation to gender-balanced representation, we recommend that a gender quota is integrated within the electoral system put in place for 2021 [the reform was delayed until 2026].
“If this does not happen – whether through lack of political consensus or the limits of the Assembly’s legislative competence -we propose that political parties be expected to take steps to ensure their candidate selection processes support and encourage the election of a gender-balanced parliament for Wales. This should include voluntary adoption by parties of the quotas we have outlined.”
The quotas would involve 50% of a party’s candidates being male and 50% being female, with candidate lists being zipped, alternating female and male candidates.
Cathy Larkman of the Women’s Rights Network in Wales said, “We welcome the scrapping of this critically flawed Bill. It was clear from the very outset that the setting of mandatory ‘gender quotas’ for electoral lists would run into serious trouble and we explained the obvious problems when we gave evidence at the Stage 1 Reform Committee consideration of the Bill earlier this year.
“Legislative competence was always going to be an unassailable hurdle and the Bill would have inevitably failed at the Supreme Court. We were not alone in pointing this fact out to them – the Llywydd did too, and the temporary Counsel General designate also made clear her views on this during the consultation.
“It is a great shame that the Welsh Government, under previous First Ministers Mark Drakeford and Vaughan Gething, did not listen to the warnings from ourselves at the Women’s Rights Network and other groups such as Merched Cymru. In addition, Jane Hutt, the Minister responsible for the Bill, would also not listen to any voices that weren’t uncritically supportive.
“We are glad that the new First Minister does at least appear to be listening now and we congratulate her on that. At least she has now saved the Welsh public any further unnecessary expenditure, and the focus can now turn to more meaningful and productive work that will actually help women take part in political life.
“This Bill, far from helping women, attempted to introduce self-identification into Wales. Any candidate could have announced they were a ‘woman’, without any challenge or repercussion for them whatsoever.
“An earlier version of the Bill, leaked by ourselves, laid bare this scandalous overreach. Men are not women and never will be women. It is an insult to women to pretend otherwise. Self-identification is not the law in the UK and would have negative consequences for the rights of women and girls.
“This has been a chapter in the history of the Welsh Government in which they have not covered themselves in glory. We hope it will not be repeated at any time”.
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
I don’t care if any MS is white/coloured/male/female. We’re in a time of massive governance problems in a senedd with an obvious lack of ability, so we need every position filled by the best possible person.
I kind of agree, because although its a good intention, I can’t see ultimately how it is compatible with democracy to have something other than votes determine who gets elected.
I totally agree. We need the best politicians – I don’t care if the Seneedd is ful of males or females or Martians but I want the best politicians, not tokens to fill quotas.
You can’t necessarily expect the best politicians, after all the voters voted for Boris Johnson, and in West Suffolk 65.8% of people voted for Matt Hancock.
If you want the data, please read the Senedd’s own publication.
https://research.senedd.wales/research-articles/election-2021-how-diverse-is-the-sixth-senedd/
Of course, for some ppl, data will always be subservient to ideology. But at least it’s one thing we can agree on.
Such a great result for women. However no one would oppose a bill on quotas based on biological sex. Now that would promote equality for women.
…and you’d want the same split for ground workers and roofers? Around 80% of nurses are female: we’d need to address that of course. Maybe we can conscript nurses over to building sights.
But nurses, roofers and ground workers aren’t elected members. They don’t have a mandate to represent or speak for anyone. There are good reasons to have more male nurses, for example – but the argument of representation doesn’t apply.
Has Welsh Labour ever heard of something called a meritocracy? You know, the best man or woman for the job. So what if there’s an imbalance. I don’t care so long as it’s the best person for the job. Jane Hutt must realise the world population isn’t a 50/50 split so why pursue something unattainable. So I’d advise her Labour government to stop wasting precious Senedd legislation time with bills passed that are later scrapped. And if she wants to attract more women and ethic minorities into Welsh politics to become the next First Minister, yes be inclusive , make… Read more »
Socialism does not recognise merit: equality of outcome is the Utopian ideal. The bad news is that the plane’s going down, but the good news is…you have a trans pilot.
How is having a pilot with a mental illness good news?
The gender identity hypothesis is scientifically-baseless nonsense anyway, so this idiotic policy was meaningless. As regards sex, if you want a 50/50 balance in the Senedd, or the C-Suite that’s fine, but you’ll also need to do the same on building sites & oil rigs.
Why? No one is elected to work on building sites or oil rigs. No one on a building site is being paid to represent anyone else.
At last a spark of sanity.
I agree it is a good thing this has been scrapped. I’ve nothing against more balanced representation at all, but literally every man, woman and their dogs could see that WG boasting about increasing female elected members at the same time as letting any fella stand as a woman, was laughable. Or it would be, if it wasn’t costing tax payers money. How much has this cost us already? It could all have been stopped sooner if Hutt and co had actually listened to the sensible legal advice they were given instead of cosying up to the usual lobby groups.
I wonder if the gender balance thing was just to get the closed lists system over the line, since the only way that a gender balance could be enforced is to take candidate selection out of the hands of the voters?
I think the two are linked, yes. A democratically regressive move dressed up in the ‘drag’ of progressive gender politics.
I think the closed list system is incredibly dangerous because it means all party candidates are reliant on the party machine not the voters. As we’ve seen with the Greens, their gender ideology has led to unlawful suspensions of elected members. Integrity of candidates means they need public not party support to get elected. Closed lists remove public accountability.
This is great news but was inevitable. Jane Hutt and her useless grifters would have taken it all the way before it was thrown out due to incompetence. The millions already wasted on this ideological clap trap could have been spent on struggling families. They are so intent on making Wales ‘not England’ and the wokest place in Europe they are totally ignoring its citizens. Stop voting them in! Next stop is to get 96 of the money grabbing buffoons in government.