Since women’s values are aligned with Labour’s, the party’s challenge is to get back their support, says Seema Malhotra
Recently, I joined a fascinating round table discussion on Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour with Tory blogger Iain Dale and Fawcett Society director Ceri Goddard on women’s votes. The event marked the launch of the programme’s “Winning Women’s Votes” campaign.
It is a mark of how far we have come in our political democracy that the issue of women’s votes is now a question of national concern for politicians. Last year, we marked 80 years since women’s equal suffrage and it is 50 years since women were first allowed to be members of the House of Lords. Women are finally at the starting line of the general election and our votes will be increasingly in focus.
But the issue for Labour is not just about winning women’s votes. It is about keeping them. It is widely recognised that the swing of women’s votes to Labour were a major contribution to the party’s general election victories in 1997, 2001 and 2005. Opinion polls have shown that women’s voting intentions have been shifting to the Conservatives, with a growing gender gap. According to polling by MORI in 2005 women of all social groups were more likely than men to vote Labour. If women alone had voted at the 2005 election, Labour’s majority would have been closer to 90.
The picture of women’s votes over the past two years has been fascinating. Before Tony Blair’s departure, women were already moving away from Labour. Initially, women responded positively to Gordon Brown, before moving away from Labour through 2008. The situation now may be too close to call. While polls fluctuate enormously, we seem to have a situation emerging where younger women’s votes in particular are moving away from Labour – not necessarily to the Tories, but to a position of “Don’t know”.
It’s quite likely that the winning party at the 2010 election is going to be the one whose message reaches women, particularly younger women. Currently, the Tories may be ahead in this race – not because they are better for women, but they have begun more effectively to address the softer side of political communications that makes politics seem more engaging for women. An example of this is the care taken with David Cameron’s image. The Tory leader has his own photographer, so that pictures taken show him in the best possible light. His public relations skills should ensure that he is effective at selling his a message – whether or not there is substance to it.
The Tories talk about measures to increase the number of Conservative women MPs. Their party may have fundamental disagreements on any positive action measures, including the stance on all-women shortlists, but at least they are talking about women and that gives the impression of change.
However, scratch deeper and the Tories offer very little to women that will be transformative in terms of their life opportunities and the key issues that affect them. The Tories may have committed to a minister for women, but it is not likely that she will be in the inner circle with real influence or power. Will the Tories address equal pay? Will they give serious support to childcare? Would they extend parents’ options around maternity and paternity pay? What about tackling the major social issue of domestic violence? The marriage tax allowance – about which Cameron is unsure whether to say “I do” or “I don’t” – would simply benefit the most secure relationships, encourage fake marriages and stigmatise many single parents (more than 90 per cent of whom are women), who, often through no fault of their own, are left trying to secure their own future, as well as that of their children.
While the polling statistics may suggest Labour faces a huge challenge, the party can take heart when it comes to women. Research by YouGov for the Fabian Society’s life chances project showed that women more consistently than men think that pensioners should not be in poverty, children from low-income households should have same chance as those from high income ones, that there should be a basic living wage, that everyone should have access to high quality healthcare, that all children should have access to a good local school, that no one should experience discrimination because of their gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, class, religion or race. Women’s values are aligned with Labour’s values – and Labour must fight to make its case.
What more can the party do? Three things can make a big difference in attracting women to vote. First, women are more likely to vote for a female candidate, regardless of political allegiance. So, where there’s a female candidate, she needs to be highly visible. If there is not a woman candidate, it is essential to ensure a strong female presence in the campaign.
Second, we need an inclusive style of politics – one driven by belief and passion, not just fact and argument. Emotional engagement and authenticity play a huge part in engaging women – who tend to be very discerning when it comes to the elections.
Third, politics needs to become personal – about the things that matter to ordinary people. The message to the public cannot be delivered in the language of think-tanks. Political direction and priorities need to be communicated in ways that resonate with people’s everyday lives.
When we understand and share our core values, women are more aligned with Labour. However, the way we engage with women, particularly younger women, needs to be inviting. When talking to a local Fabian Society meeting recently about the women’s vote, I was struck by the existence of another gender gap – the wish is there to engage women in local party activity and political debate in a different and more inclusive way, but the understanding of how to do so is limited. The principles are simple, although the championing of them needs to be far more challenging. It is essential go to where women are, at times and places convenient to them. And don’t just go with something to say. Be prepared to listen.
Image matters. too. It’s no secret that, before the 1997 election, senior men in the Labour Party were “Folletted” – told how to dress better and present themselves by Barbara Follett, who co-founded Emily’s List and the Labour Women’s Network. All the things that Cameron and his team are learning, Labour seems in danger of forgetting. “Folletting” feminised Labour’s style – and the party was a better team for it.
So, as well as taking heart from the strong potential to keep women’s votes, Labour must also take note. A male-dominated campaign that does not give genuine visibility to Labour’s women (and with 98 women MPs compared to the Tories’ 18, Labour should have no trouble) or present policies in ways that seem and feel personal to women, but are delivered in the language of Whitehall and Westminster, could have disastrous consequences. Labour risks getting the argument right but the message wrong – and so risks losing women’s votes. The result would be a huge setback for progress.
As someone who has grown up under “new” Labour, through university years, a private sector career, trade union and community activism, think-tank membership and standing as election candidate, I count myself incredibly lucky to have had a Labour Government and the sense of security for family and society which goes with it. I believe that Labour is the party for women’s interests. But in not making its case in an inclusive, informative and personal political style – with women hearing it from women, as well as from men – Labour could end up snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Seema Malhotra is director of the Fabian Women’s Network
