The paradox of voting and reserved seats for women

Again, we are a nation facing the prospects of a parliament on a knife’s edge, a euphemism for uncertainty and difficult times. It’s not like we haven’t experienced this before. We know enough to realize tumultuous times lay ahead.

I am no political commentator, not even an expert. This isn’t yet another commentary pretending to make sense of prevailing political winds. Instead, I wanted to zoom in on something more paradoxical that even our continued, albeit weary, belief in the fairness of our democratic system – voting.

After all, it’s one’s civic duty.

In this year’s election, no woman was elected into parliament although so many capable women contested. The three women in the last parliament were voted out. The people have spoken, I guess. 

If Dame Josephine Abaijah, Dame Carol Kidu and other women can contest against men in an election and win, why are we crying foul over an all-male parliament and pushing for reserved seats?

Instead of crying over spilt milk, losing candidates including women who contested should analyze their campaign strategies, do a little research on how other candidates’ ousted People’s National Congress giants. Politics is a dog-eat-dog game in Papua New Guinea. If you can’t measure up, don’t waste everyone’s precious time.

A lot of the candidates that contested, work in the air-conditioned offices in Port Moresby and only visit home for Christmas. They are not popular in their respective electorates because they haven’t contributed anything of benefit to the people who will be voting them. Just saying you will introduce or implement this and that means nothing to the people in the rural areas. Getting a hundred likes and comments on your article or post won’t win you an election.

Our people in the rural areas are ‘self-interested’ voters. They don’t vote for a party or a policy or how many degrees a candidate has. They vote for material benefits. Suffice to say, our rural people vote for a candidate who gives them money. Like ‘Thomas’, seeing is believing for them.

It took a few hundred years in the West before women were allowed to do men’s work, vote in an election or stand for elections. But in less than forty years, Papua New Guinea has given everything to our women. We have women who are pilots, doctors, engineers, teachers, politicians, departmental heads, pastors, etc. We don’t live in the 80’s or 90’s anymore. Our democracy is indeed unique.

Creating reserved seats in parliament will only take us back to the beginning of the twentieth century when North American and Western European women were treated second class citizens with very limited rights and privileges. Gender equality must be respected and positions must be earned by every citizen. Creating ‘reserved seats’ is not gender equality.

I am also questioning who the twenty two women will represent since every electorate, which includes women, are already represented by their member of parliament. I hope this is not a self-interest driven agenda for women to enjoy the perks and privileges of been in parliament with more-or-less nothing to do. 

In fact, misogyny is not confined to Papua New Guinea alone. We’ve seen the first female Australian Prime Minister, Julia Gillard lashing out at Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott for being a misogynist. She lasted three years and was replaced by Kevin Rudd. It’s unavoidable everywhere. 

That justifies my rational view that we don’t need ‘women’ in parliament. We need leaders. Women need to stop trying to hold parliament at ransom on account of their gender as a sense of entitlement.

I don’t see why Papua New Guinea women seek special considerations. Let’s compete on a level playing field and may the best person win by merit or strategy. Leaders inspire and motivate people. Show me leadership and vision, and you have my vote. Period!

I believe leadership is to be earned, not served freely on a silver platter!