women's quota in parliament will it improve to government

Does a quota system enhance women’s participation in weak democracies? One of the key questions addressed in the literature about gender and politics is why there should be more women in politics and to what extent women’s interests are best represented by women.

Why women in politics?

The arguments in favour of increasing women’s participation in politics rely on 3 principles.(by Philips, 1991).

Firstly, on democratic justice,

secondly, on resource utilisation

and thirdly, on interest representation.

The notion of basic justice relies on the notion that women should be included in the political realm, indeed given the overarching significance of politics it is unfair to note that women are not actively engaged in it. Additionally, as women are integrated into more aspects of business and professional life, it seems logical that women should take up their rightful share of political positions. The second principle argues that women would bring a different set of values, experiences and expertise to politics, thereby enriching political life. Finally, the most radical version of this argument states that women and men are in conflict and that it is nonsense to see women as represented by men.

The Quota Debate

the need for a quota system stems from the lack of opportunities for women to perform their potential capabilities. If women do have the capabilities and the power to choose, a quota system is not needed. In favour of a quota scheme implementation are arguments such as the belief that it is the most effective way of translating legal equality between men and women into de facto equality by guaranteeing women’s presence in leadership in the immediate term . It has also been considered as a starting point that could balance women’s participation in various fields because women leaders also function as role models for other women, and serve as evidence that society is inclusive and egalitarian.

Opponents of quotas, who include both men and women, argue that they are discriminatory and that will elevate under-qualified women to power, stigmatize beneficiaries, and that above all, they are unnecessary.

There are also fears that the introduction of a women’s quota will prompt other groups –ethnic minorities, homosexuals, farmers, etc. to demand their own quota.

Despite these criticisms, improved women’s structural position will help to erode discriminatory barriers and will bring about cultural changes in the very long term. In order to reform inherent structures created during the era when discrimination existed, temporary measures as the quota systems are required . Therefore, in order to change the attitude towards women and for women to participate in high level decision making positions in various disciplines, including politics and economics, a new environment has to be formulated so as to allow adequate numbers of women to attain desirable goals.

From above, it can be said that countries which are implementing quotas, are looking for two main objectives. On the one hand, to influence policy towards women interests and on the other hand to gain a greater level of women’s participation in other spheres of society.

Quota Law in Argentina. Implementation and quantitative analysis.

Women number in the Deputies Chamber and percentage, period 1983-1995 Year	Total number of seats	Women	% Total
1983-85	254	13	5.1%
1985-87	254	12	4.7%
1987-89	254	14	5.5%
1989-91	254	16	6.3%
1991-93	257	16	6.2%
1993-95	257	36	14.0%
1995-97	257	71	27.6%

The aim of this section is to show that women were gaining space in politics

Quota in the context of India..

If the Women`s Reservation Bill 2008 is really what it sounds to aim at – providing 33 per cent reservation for women in state legislatures and parliament i.e. seeking around 1,600 of the country`s most powerful 5,000 seats (approx) – there would be no need for the common woman to raise her voice for it. For, any woman who has the financial backing for election campaigns is already more empowered than an average Indian.

what can reservation of parliamentary seats do than empower the already powerful? How can it help the casual women labourer on the road toiling day and night? How does it help the mute women panchayat leaders, who in reality do nothing more than serve tea, during the panchayat meetings presided by their husbands acting as de facto leaders? What about the lakhs of girl children in rural areas who are forced to fight oddities even to get basic education?
If women empowerment is the underlying idea of reservation, then it is more logical to focus on providing basic education for all women, especially in the lower and middle strata of the society.  The focus should be on giving a life of dignity for women of all strata and societies, through education, which can help design our lives.

But again if the activists want to fight for a cause, ideally they should be forcing the government and others to ensure a secure environment for women not only in office but also on the roads. And may be even at home, why not?
If women empowerment is the crux of the issue, then the need here is not any quota or reservation but an attitudinal change among men of all social strata, which is achievable through basic education.
Look at it in another way! When educated women have the freedom to work and choose their career, why do we need a quota to be caught in? In such a scenario, a 33 per cent quota is just another way for men to limit women’s development.

If reservation in parliament is the only way out for upliftment of women, the question is why then limit it to only 33 percent. They say half of the world is filled with women, then why don’t we have 50 per cent reservation?

But honestly, why do we need quota to showcase equality when men and women are born equal. All that we need is basic education for all women.

Have we forgotten the famous words:

 “When you educate a man, you help a family; when you educate a women, you help a society.”