In this blog Lizzie Ville, Senior Policy and Research Officer at the Fawcett Society, shares insights from her recent research project on the experiences of women MPs and what affects their decisions to stay in or leave parliament.
We know that the structural barriers to women entering politics do not vanish once they are elected. Women MPs face abuse which serves to silence them, a system unfit for those with caregiving responsibilities, and a culture of ‘othering’ within the House of Commons. And for Black and minoritised MPs, these issues are uniquely heightened and compounded by racism. Despite all of these challenges, women MPs still express passion and commitment for the role. This is why the Fawcett Society surveyed 100 MPs and interviewed 20 current and former MPs – to better understand these experiences and identify ways in which our political system must change to ensure a truly representative Parliament.
The findings were stark. More than 9 in 10 women MPs reported that online abuse or harassment negatively impacts how they feel about being an MP (compared to 7 in 10 men), as did all of the Black and minoritised MPs who took part in the survey. MPs talked in-depth about the misogynistic and racist nature of the abuse they receive, and about the toll it took on them and the people close to them. One MP described having to put on a ‘fighter face’ but ‘internally it breaks you’, whilst speaking about the experience of her child asking her why she receives so much hate.
What’s more, online abuse is silencing MPs. Our survey saw 73% of women MPs agreeing that they ‘do not speak up on certain issues because of the abusive environment online’, compared to 51% of men. They spoke to us about being ‘deliberately uncontroversial’ or ‘placating’ in their use of social media. Despite its potential as a tool for democratic engagement, many MPs disengage and use it for one-way broadcasts only, if at all. With women and people of colour targeted most, political discourse becomes unfree and unequal among the MPs who represent us all.
In many instances, the abuse involves death threats and threats of sexual violence which translate into the offline world, necessitating constraining safety measures – including women MPs avoiding face to face constituency surgeries, or even avoiding staying alone in their own homes overnight. Gender inequality is clearly entrenched in all parts of our society when women MPs are restricted in carrying out their democratic work, such as engaging with and representing their constituents. Whilst women of all walks of life experience abuse and harassment, or are silenced or forced to adjust their behaviour to avoid threat, so do the most powerful women in the country.
Reducing this harm, ensuring sufficient support is available when abuse does occur, and increasing the accountability of Parliament, parties, and online platforms are all critical steps toward a free and fair democracy. As argued recently on this blog by Sally Patterson, increasing the gender sensitivity of the Online Safety Bill, with an intersectional lens, would work toward increasing the accountability of online platforms. We must also ensure that the Electoral Commission and local police are sufficiently resourced to enforce legal sanctions for intimidating candidates during election periods – when heightened levels of abuse occur.
A second key theme which emerged from our research was a system unfit for anyone with caregiving responsibilities, with one MP describing their role as “completely unsuited to anybody who has a family”. The work is “all-encompassing”, with long – and crucially – unpredictable hours that make it very difficult to plan caregiving. In our survey, those with caring responsibilities were significantly more likely to report a negative impact of the Parliamentary schedule on how they feel about their role – 47%, compared to 37% of those without caring responsibilities.
Again, this reflects the experience of working women from many different sectors and backgrounds, who navigate their working lives whilst continuing to hold the lion’s share of domestic labour and caring responsibilities. But Parliament must be representative of the population, and the structure of the MP role at present makes politics an impossibility for many, risks reducing the tenures of women who do hold office, and limits progression into senior leadership. Sarah Childs’ recommendations in The Good Parliament report to introduce core business hours and a division time for voting would support MPs with caring responsibilities to effectively carry out their roles. Furthermore, while proxy voting has helped MPs with young children we need a proper and formalised parental and carers leave scheme for all MPs.
The failure of these systems supports and feeds into an exclusionary culture in Parliament. 69% of women MPs and 49% of all MPs we surveyed reporting that they had witnessed sexist behaviour in Parliament in the last five years. Some of the MPs we spoke to described inappropriate comments and harassment, whilst others spoke of the use of racist, sexist, or homophobic insults as weapons to attack political opponents, combined with limited leadership to tackle the issue. Just 37% of women MPs we surveyed agreeing that ‘the culture in Parliament is inclusive for people like me’, compared to 55% of men. That is why Fawcett are calling for political parties to commit to clear action plans outlining targets for increasing women’s representation and how to achieve them. Similarly, women must be selected for winnable seats. But while representation matters, Parliament and political parties themselves must be genuinely inclusive and respectful so that there are no barriers to being an MP. This begins with structural changes in the way that Parliament works including business hours, voting and parental leave.
The case for modernising Parliament is clear. The disproportionate levels of abuse, systems, and culture which are embedded in our society affect the most and least powerful women alike – but change begins with leadership. These issues can push MPs, particularly women and minoritised people, to leave Westminster prematurely, and shut many other women’s voices out of politics. This must be avoided – undoubtedly, the presence of women in Parliament has transformed British politics, and those we spoke to reflected with such great passion on the impact they had achieved. The Fawcett Society urges the Government, Parliamentary authorities and political parties to adopt our recommendations, so that together we can create a House for Everyone.