Poll position

Further Reading

---

• To read the full results of the Dods poll, click here

Read the full results of the Dods EU poll here

Margot Wallström

If there are four posts to be filled (if the Lisbon treaty enters into force and we thus create the new post of president of the European council), EU leaders should guarantee that two of the posts are filled by women. I strongly support the European Women Lobby’s 50-50 campaign for democracy, which has as one of its aims to ensure the equal representation of women and men when appointing the top EU posts after next year’s elections.

Studies show that legislation on gender balance leads to better representation of women in political decision-making. Quotas or other legal measures have been introduced in all the top 10 countries in the EU27 in terms of gender balance. I believe that quotas are a way of promoting fairness and equal opportunity. They compensate for the barriers – including the men choosing men phenomenon – that currently prevent women from enjoying equal opportunities and being equally represented. Quotas are thus a legitimate and efficient way of overcoming what is de facto discrimination against women.

Today less than one in three MEPs is female, which does not fairly represent a population that consists of 52 per cent of women. The commission has its highest share of women commissioners ever - 10 out of 27, or 37 per cent - but I believe we could get closer to a 50-50 representation.

Europe’s 50-50 division of women and men should be reflected among the political decision-makers. We need to change the EU’s family photo, and include more female faces among the many suits and ties. One of the problems today is that women feel distanced from European politics, and surely one of the reasons for this is that there are not enough female politicians representing them and their views. By including more women in the decision-making process, we can ensure that issues important to women are brought into the political agenda, and thus the EU would eventually also become more relevant to the women of Europe. Having more women on the electoral lists is potentially also a way to get more European women to vote (and to vote for women candidates), as they are more likely to find a candidate with similar beliefs and priorities.

I would not like to pick just one name [for the EU’s top posts], I would like to see far more female names being put forward. It is important that there is a lively debate and that the names of the many competent female politicians are mentioned.


Monica Frassoni MEP

Looking at the results of the Dods EU poll, one can clearly see that there is more attention focused on the issue of equal opportunities for women on the left side of the political spectrum than on the right. Our group, for example, has the policy of always having two co-presidents of the group, one woman and one man.

The fact that there is a bit more work to do in the new member states does not surprise me.

On positive discrimination, I have to say that when I started my career I didn’t believe in it. But, over the years, I have realised that positive discrimination is in fact a solution to start improving the representation of women in many sectors. Mathematical criteria could be seen as sometimes too rigid, but in my experience, if we don’t push for more women, we will not be well represented and there will not be real equal opportunities.

For example, I think that having a even split of male and female candidates on the electoral list could be a good proposal for the 2009 European parliamentary elections.


Satu Hassi MEP

The results [of the Dods EU poll] express a clear difference between how women and men experience and perceive the fairness or unfairness of the present situation.

I am delighted that a majority of male MEPs, not only majority of female MEPs, support the idea of having at least one woman in a top post. I think this reflects that the idea of equal rights for both women and men is understood among politicians. On the other hand, it is interesting that a majority of all people and men working in the EU institutions disagree. This reflects the fact that the institutions are male dominated and that most men do not see this as a problem.

The difference between the female and male experience about how fair or unfair life is in the institutions is best reflected in the result that 100 per cent of female MEPs agree with the idea that positive discrimination is needed, but 52.8 per cent of male MEPs disagree, as well as 69.9 per cent of all men working in the EU institutions. Positive discrimination does not mean that you should nominate less-qualified people representing the minority sex, it means that when there are several equally qualified candidates, preference is given to those representing the minority sex. De facto, a man who opposes the idea of positive discrimination of the minority sex knows at least unconsciously that there is a lot of hidden discrimination in favour of men in all kinds of career selection processes, in all levels, and at all stages, and they want to keep it this way.

For me, it is not a surprise that there is a difference between political groups about how strongly the members agree or disagree with gender rights issues. This is visible in many contexts. The parties of the right are in general less supportive of measures that empower women. For example, every time there is a mention of sexual and reproductive rights in any draft resolution in the parliament’s plenary, there is a proposal from the right wing to delete these words. However, everybody understands that the first prerequisites for a woman to have any career possibilities are education and the possibility to decide how many children she wants to have, and when.


Catherine Stihler MEP

The replies show the importance of campaigning to ensure that a woman takes up a top EU position and sadly, underline that we have a long way to go in ensuring women's representation in political life.


Anneli Jäättenmaäki MEP

I would like to thank the Dods EU Polling for conducting and publishing this valuable research. It is helpful to know how MEPs and stakeholders feel about these important issues.

I have long been an advocate of gender equality and women’s rights. I am proud that women have been increasingly represented in government roles. But it is clear that the percentages are still not just. The world is half female - in fact, over half the world is female. It is only reasonable that women be represented in government as they are in the actual population. It is also notable that more women are starting to take on leadership roles at the top of government. I hope that this trend continues and that the EU can set an example to member states by having a better gender balance amongst its leadership.

I am pleased to see that a majority of MEPs agree that should the Lisbon treaty be ratified, at least one of the top EU posts should be filled by a woman. It is interesting to learn that among stakeholders, the answer to this question was quite different. It seems that MEPs are much more passionate about the need for gender equality within the EU than are members of trade organisations or lobbying groups. MEPs directly see the need for a more gender balanced legislative body. We work everyday with issues that are best solved by a diverse and representative group.

Thank you again for shedding more light on women’s rights issues. It is clear that more must be done to increase the number of women in EU leadership positions.


Andrew Duff MEP

As a leader of a delegation of four men and seven women, I have some experience of positive discrimination (mostly favourable).

I am delighted that so many people support the idea of gender balanced lists and transnational lists - both part of my current report on the electoral reform of the European parliament.

The matter of nominating candidates for top posts is more complicated. The fact is that without Lisbon there is only one post to speak of - that of president of the commission - and there does not seem to be a vacancy there. The best way to galvanise European political parties is via the transnational lists for the parliament. The European parties will be directly responsible for candidate selection, thus breaking free of the grip of national parties.


Richard Corbett

When we elect our national parliament, most people think in terms of voting for or against the government. When we vote in European parliamentary elections, there is no visible effect on the EU’s executive. If European parties were to nominate their candidates for president of the commission in advance, this would add something to what is at stake in the elections. It is interesting therefore that the results of question 6 - both among MEPs and among wider stakeholders - show overwhelming support for this idea.

The polling shows divided opinion on the issue of transnational lists. This idea would involve a portion of MEPs being elected, not in their own countries or regions, but on the basis of a single Europe-wide constituency. While it might add to the European dimension of the elections and help bring European personalities to the fore across 27 countries, there is a danger that these MEPs would appear to be more remote from citizens than locally elected ones. In any case, such a change would require a treaty amendment duly ratified by every country and is not very likely.


Alexander Alvaro

In a similar poll in June 2007, the campaign for parliamentary reform asked fellow MEPs whether they thought the parliament should decide on its seat and where this seat should be located. In the poll the overwhelming response was that 89.63 per cent of MEPs wanted one seat, and 82 per cent said that seat should be in Brussels.

The results of the present poll are in keeping with the general opinion in the European parliament, where MEPs are more and more frustrated by having to explain to citizens that they are subjected to travelling between seats and that this costs around €200m every year. If the parliament had a say in the matter, the question of its workplace would have been solved by now.


Karin Riis-Jørgensen MEP

I am glad to see that a majority in the parliament agrees that one of the top posts should be filled by a woman. In the EU we already have a balance between member states and political families, and therefore of course we should have a balance between men and women. I think it is important for our democracy that both men and women represent the EU. According to surveys on Euroscepticism, women are often more sceptical about the EU than men. And more men than women vote. Maybe the women need role models.

There are plenty of qualified women who can fill the EU top posts. In the poll, Angela Merkel is the favourite woman for the job. I am not surprised. But I am surprised that in all the talk of candidates, her name seems to have gone missing.


Kathalijne Buitenweg MEP

Campaigners fighting to axe the Strasbourg seat face an uphill battle. Support for the campaign is still relatively limited to mostly British and Dutch MEPs. Those campaigning for parliament to be located permanently in Brussels still need to win over the authorities and business community in the French city. We need to persuade people in Strasbourg that this is a good move. We can do so by ensuring the parliament site is occupied by an important institution, such as a university, so that Strasbourg stays in the spotlight. I readily accept that Strasbourg is symbolically important and for many people has great significance in terms of European integration. Even so, continuing to have two seats in Brussels and Strasbourg does not make sense.