Nationalist MP Claudette Buttigieg will refuse to be elected through the gender-quota mechanism in the next general election because she feels women are being “used as a token” of equality.
“This was a box-ticking exercise, and on a national level, no additional initiatives were taken to encourage more women to contest the coming elections… Come next election, I will definitely refuse to be elected through this mechanism again,” she said.
Buttigieg was elected on her own steam in 2013 and 2017 and then re-elected in 2022 through the gender-quota mechanism.
“I will refuse because I disagree with how women are being used as a token… Male candidates across all parties are spreading the word that ‘you don’t need to vote for women, they will be elected anyway.’ This is working against us and we should fight it, not encourage it,” she said.
The debate about the effectiveness of the mechanism, introduced ahead of the 2022 general election to boost the representation of women in parliament, was rekindled when European Parliament president Roberta Metsola recently said it had failed.
Metsola spoke about the need for a full-time parliament that would encourage more women to get involved and said: “The biggest insult to a woman is when someone looks at you and tells you that you were elected because you were helped.”
Metsola said that while the mechanism “had noble aims” it incentivised a vote against women candidates and acted as a “smokescreen simply to boost the statistical number of women in parliament”.
Gender-corrective mechanism
The quota mechanism, introduced ahead of the 2022 general election, aimed to ensure that at least 40% of parliamentary seats were occupied by women.
Through the mechanism, if this threshold is not met, additional seats (up to 12) are allocated to candidates from the under-represented gender. This would be in place for 20 years and then stop when a momentum is reached.
It came into force after the Labour government set up a technical committee to come up with a solution to correct the dearth of women in parliament in 2019.
The committee, led by Carmen Sammut, made various recommendations, but only the gender-quota mechanism was implemented (apart from a measure ensuring gender balance in the composition of the electoral commission).
Other unimplemented recommendations included: introducing gender-balance ballot lists by encouraging parties to motivate, train and mentor women candidates; emphasising the need for family-friendly policies and structural changes to create a more inclusive environment in parliament; establishing a cross-party women’s caucus (team) to ensure that increased female presence in parliament translates into effective policymaking and legislative drafting.
Let’s improve… not destroy
After the consultation, the Bill went through parliament and was approved by both sides of the House.
Buttigieg voted in favour: “I had my doubts when we passed the law. I voted in favour of it, hoping something would change, but seeing where we stand, I want people to get the message: vote for me if you really want me.”
Sammut, who led the committee, noted that positive measures were applied in 13 EU countries to ensure a greater balance in national elections.
“With a 28% representation in parliament, women are now approaching a critical mass that must present stronger positions for women in our national institution. Let us improve on what we have achieved rather than destroy and retreat,” she said.
During the 2022 general elections, only four women were elected from the initial process: Miriam Dalli, Julia Farrugia Portelli, Alison Zerafa Civelli for the PL; and Graziella Galea for the PN.
During casual elections, another six women were elected: Rosianne Cutajar, Romilda Zarb Baldacchino, Rebecca Buttigieg and Katya De Giovanni for the PL; and Rebekah Borg and Graziella Attard Previ for the PN.
This kicked off the gender-corrective mechanism that led to the election of 12 more women. The six women MPs elected for the Labour Party were: Alicia Bugeja Said, Cressida Galea, Abigail Camilleri, Amanda Spiteri Grech, Naomi Cachia and Davina Sammut Hili. The six MPs elected for the Nationalist Party were: Janice Chetcuti, Paula
Mifsud Bonnici, Julie Zahra, Bernice Bonello, Claudette Buttigieg and Eve Borg Bonello.
So, what do these women think about the quota system?
Not ideal, but necessary
Most of the women elected through the general corrective mechanism said they believed that while this was not ideal, it was a necessary step to boost women’s presence in parliament.
All Labour MPs agreed with the mechanism. Labour’s Bugeja Said, who was nominated Parliamentary Secretariat on Fisheries, Aquaculture and Animal Rights, said: “Currently in parliament we have more women than ever on both sides of the political spectrum… I feel very much involved, and as a technocrat with a doctorate in the field I am responsible for, I strive to provide the best possible contribution day in, day out.”
Camilleri agreed, saying that, for decades there was an under-representation of women in parliament and “more significant intervention was necessary… Ultimately, we aim for a situation where voters choose to elect more women without relying on gender-corrective measures… I am convinced that a greater presence of women… helps to focus attention on issues that may otherwise be neglected.”
Sammut Hili noted that the mechanism was part of a broader plan that included family-friendly policies. It helped boost the presence of women in parliament because “stronger action was necessary – to show that more women in parliament can make a positive difference,” she said. She added that it was surprising how Metsola “who holds one of the highest roles in politics – would speak against this system and undermine the efforts of Maltese women in politics”.
On a similar note, Galea said “it is disappointing to hear a female PN MEP – who holds one of the most prominent political roles in Europe – publicly belittling this mechanism and, by extension, the women it helped elect”.
More time needed
Spiteri Grech said that while she believed women did not need the push, she then faced comments that made her realise the importance of representation of more women in parliament. One voter asked: “So your husband allows you to contest?”
“This mechanism gave a boost to women in parliament, but it does not mean that this is the end of the road… there is room for improvement,” she said.
Cachia, the first female government whip, said criticism surrounding the gender-corrective mechanism was often short-sighted and did not take into account the political, electoral and social context that made the mechanism necessary in the first place.
“We only had 28 women MPs over the course of 70 years, until 2022. Now, we have 23 women MPs in one legislature. Of course, the intention of the mechanism was not only to have a quick fix in terms of numbers, but to increase the visibility and influence of women in parliament. This does not happen overnight and the true test of the success or otherwise of the mechanism should only be fairly evaluated come next election.”
Fruit in future
The Nationalist MPs had mixed reactions, with several mentioning how male counterparts discouraged voters from voting for women because they would get there anyway through the mechanism.
Zahra and Bonello agreed that, while in an ideal world, no such mechanism would be needed, it was a step towards greater gender balance.
Zahra said: “This law is merely a tool to help level the obstacles that women face, because despite the fight for equality, women still carry far more of life’s responsibilities on their shoulders than men do…. this law on its own is not enough. We need to find more ways to encourage more women to enter the world of politics and explore other alternatives.”
Bonello added: “I believe that the positive effects of the gender-quota mechanism will hopefully be felt more significantly in the next general election, once its impact has had time to develop further… we are certainly not there yet and we need to find more ways to encourage more women to enter the world of politics.”
‘I had to work harder for votes’
Mifsud Bonnici recognised that while the mechanism increased the number of women elected to parliament, it “seems to have backfired, as fewer women contested the last general election compared to previous ones, and even fewer were elected on their own merit.” Four were elected compared to eight in the previous election.
While she believed she performed well – getting more votes in her Labour-dominated district compared to elected male colleagues in others – she recalled how she had to work harder to earn votes.
“I still remember knocking on doors during house visits, and people questioning why I was bothering – assuming I would be elected anyway. Others even told me: ‘You’ll get in regardless, so it’s better to vote for a man instead.’”.
Inequality and amateurism
Borg Bonello agreed: “Voters felt their agency was being taken away, so they pushed back. Meanwhile, male candidates were knocking on doors telling voters not to vote for their female competitors because ‘they’ll get elected anyway’ thanks to the quota. Any claim that the quota worked is superficial and short-term”.
She said the mechanism was a box-ticking exercise.
“If we want more women in parliament, we need more women on the ballot. We need to provide equality of opportunity, not impose equality of outcome.
"Let’s have a real debate about child-friendly measures in parliament, the timing of parliamentary sittings, and, if we’re truly serious and truly respect the institution, let’s make parliament a full-time job. It already is a full-time workload and responsibility, so let’s give MPs, both men and women, the actual resources they need to do the job properly.
“The current system breeds not only inequality but amateurism… As for parliament itself, once someone is entrusted with a seat, what they do with it is up to them. Whether you choose to be an active MP or not is your choice. At the end of the day, your colleagues and constituents will judge you by your work throughout the legislature, not your gender,” she said.