The best female politicians will always rise to the top

There are sound historical reason why quotas are unnecessary.

Linda Reynolds makes some sensible observations on equality for women and quotas (“Liberal Party reform may be slow but it is solid”, 2/1) Women such as Margaret Thatcher, Julia Gillard, Jacinda Ardern, Angela Merkel and Theresa May have reached the top because they have the talent needed for the jobs, not because it was their turn.

If the Liberal Party adopted a quota system, then we would have Julie Bishop as prime minister because it was her turn as a woman. This would have ignored the fact she was not the best candidate.

R. Watson, Sunnybank Hills, Qld

Gender quotas are a nonsense and the misuse of the idea of representation is unfortunate. When someone says women are under-represented in our parliaments, he or she is confused about the democratic notion of representation. All the men and women in our parliaments represent men and women voters equally.

David Morrison, Springwood, NSW

I see Linda Reynolds rose to the rank of brigadier in the army reserve, so why isn’t she included in the defence team, beside Jim Molan and Andrew Hastie? Scott Morrison’s only chance is to shake up the sleepers who hold portfolios beyond their ken. Forget gender quotas — Marise Payne is invisible and she has little life experience before entering parliament.

Besides, Labor’s gender-fluid and degendering policies would soon make a mockery of their much touted balance of the sexes.

Ruth Bonetti, The Gap, Qld

Peter van Onselen presents well-reasoned and logical arguments for the Liberals to introduce quotas (“Liberals’ resistance to female quotas is just plain wrong”, 29/12). But would quotas inspire women’s engagement and involvement?

At a time when respect and trust in the political system is at a low ebb, one wonders whether sensible, sane women would want to become MPs.

Perhaps the Labor Party now represents women’s aspirations and ambitions more than the Liberals.

Furthermore, politics is a hard slog and is not family friendly for women with children, a partner and various domestic demands.

Quotas might work but their introduction would not solve the more profound and problematic issues that riddle the Liberal Party.

Paulyne Pogorelske,
East Melbourne, Vic

Once again Peter van Onselen has drawn our attention to the gender imbalance in parliament and, in particular, within Coalition ranks. There are strong arguments both in favour of quotas and merit hence a suggestion that attains both.

Halve the number of lower house electorates and have each represented by one male and one female. The voters would have two votes — one for each list (male/female). The result would be a lower house with 50-50 representation irrespective of party representation.

A similar change could be made at the same time to the Senate with six seats reserved for females and six for males from each state.

Bill Roy, York, WA

In criticising the Coalition for its stance on gender quotas, as a professor of politics Peter van Onselen is predictable but disappointing in arguing for pragmatism over principle.

Political pragmatism at the expense of ethical principles is the reason that our present lot in all parties on Capital Hill are held in such low esteem by the general electorate.

The culture of broken election promises and outright lies to maintain power makes quotas just another virtue-signalling “level playing field” arrow in the party quiver, to be fired at us mug voters by the pragmatists when they think the timing is right.

Van Onselen is simplistic to equate gender quotas in political parties with the constitutional quota for the number of senators from each state.

For a national referendum question to be successful, under the Constitution, it requires a majority yes vote in all states and territories that are represented equally under the quota principle, then a gender quota in the parliament would logically require a majority of each gender, male and female — and presumably transgender MPs in the future — to vote yes for any proposed legislation to get up. And the absurdity of that notion would make Australia the virtue-signalling parliamentary leaders of the Western world.

John Bell, Heidelberg Heights, Vic