Women/Gender Parliamentary Bodies and the Quality of Women’s Substantive Representation: A comparative analysis of UK, Belgium and New Zealand

What constitutes the ‘good’ substantive representation of women? Feminists used to think they knew: women representatives acting for women in a feminist fashion. More recent research suggests that ‘good’ substantive representation is better considered as a process, one which involves debate, deliberation, and contestation over what constitutes the interest of women. Here, we conduct comparative analysis of Belgium, New Zealand and the UK in order to, first, investigate the presence of formal parliamentary bodies ‘for women’, as well as more informal networks and friendship groups. We then examine the extent to which both contribute, either separately or together, to an inclusive, equal and responsive process of women’s substantive representation. Belgium has long established institutionalized gender equality committees, until recently in both of its two chambers and these are considered to be part of the state architecture. In the UK, in contrast, women’s parliamentary bodies are far less formalized and state-oriented. There are two main types: All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) which are informal cross-party groups that have no official status within Parliament and parliamentary party women’s organizations (Labour and Conservative). In New Zealand, the picture is similar; several of the parliamentary parties have women’s caucuses, and several cross-party groups exist, although only one is dedicated specifically to women. For this first three country comparison, our data comes from (1) official parliamentary documents and records; (2) the institution’s website; (3) email correspondence/interviews with institutions’; Chairs/administrators; and (4) news/internet searches. We ask in respect of: Responsiveness, ‘Are the claims included in the process of SRW responsive to women in society?’ Inclusiveness, ‘Is the process of SRW inclusive of all/ a wide variety of claims?’ Equality & egalitarianism, ‘Are all claims included in the process of SRW treated equally and given equal consideration?’ We also examine Capacity. ‘Is the institutional setting such that a process of SRW is secured and in matters for the broader parliamentary decision-making process?’