No surprises there. I could never fathom in my time in Nat Country how young women (among others) could justify voting National.

Meg

The occasional outstanding figure like Julia Gillard or Anna Bligh can rise up through the ranks, but it still remains the case that there are a lot more mediocre men than women in Parliament.

If individual parties still have problems with cultural barriers preventing women from getting a fair go, then those parties could take steps internally to address this, such as implementing a policy like that themselves.

Personally I think this is something of a generational issue. It’s just never occurred to me to take gender into consideration when assessing the calibre of a politician, or deciding what I think of them. I assume this is because I’ve grown up in an era where women have held prominent positions – I can remember when Thatcher was in the dying days of her reign as British PM, when Carmen Lawrence and Joan Kirner became our first female Premiers, and Janine Haines, our first female leader of a national political party (well, only vaguely remember her and the 1990 election). Then there was that period after the 1993 election when Bronwyn Bishop was seriously being touted as a future PM. So I’m used to seeing women in power, and have just never thought of women as being any more or less capable than men – I’ve just never taken gender into account when considering whether I think a politician or candidate is good or bad.

Older people who remember a time when there were no women in prominent positions, and when old attitudes about women prevented them from getting recognised on their merits, would naturally see things differently.

Obviously there is still a problem with gender balance in politics, but I don’t think your approach Tom is either a necessary or desirable solution.