IN a turbulent session at the Diagnostic Assessment Workshop for Women Candidates and Civil Society Organisations last week, a number of bald accusations were levelled at Community Development Minister Dame Carol Kidu.
“She does not fight for women issues,” one accuser stormed.
Unbeknown to the women, the minister heard it all from the sidelines where she had gone to observe the session.
At one point it was too much and the minister must have become emotional because another lady was comforting her by patting her on the back.
I thought how far from the truth and how so unfair the accusation was, against the only person who has been fighting so hard for a fair share for women, for children, for churches, for sports and the down trodden and underprivileged in the country.
Apparently, something so very important had not been learnt and unless it can, nothing about the pathetic absence of women in the country’s decision making bodies, can be fixed.
Earlier in the week, when the workshop was opened by the Deputy Prime Minister Dr Puka Temu in the company of Dame Carol Kidu, the gathering was told that the Prime Minister had agreed to evoke Section 102 of the Constitution to appoint, not three but four women Members of Parliament.
The women would have all powers and privileges available to their elected brethren in Parliament except participating in motions of no confidence.
“They will be appointed to perform the work of Parliamentarians, not engage in politics,” Dr Temu said.
He put the credit for the change of mind in cabinet squarely at the feet of Dame Carol, who he was quick to point out, was responsible for both the idea and the manner in which it would come about.
Later in the week, Dame Carol gave the women a privileged briefing on the nature of the appointment process and how she envisaged it would come about.
She appeared to have gone into great detail and engaged a lot of time and thought in the process, giving such details as the extra cost to the State.
The news was received well enough by the women leaders, of course, but soon the ugly head of contention reared its head.
Who would be appointed? Who would do the appointing? Would the process be fair? Would women from the rural sector get a fair hearing?
Suddenly, the good news turned sour as the women leaders churned the idea over in their heads.
I could not help wondering that perhaps it is just this kind of reactions that have kept our woman from having a very strong, united voice.
At the same time that the conference was going on, the Speaker of Parliament Jeffrey Nape, himself a member of the Prime Minister’s ruling National Alliance Party told Parliament that he was opposed to appointed women members in Parliament.
Clearly, the Prime Minister’s approval to have appointed women members in Parliament had not been discussed with the NA caucus. From Mr Nape’s announcement, then, the women can expect opposition to the idea from within the ruling party and from within Government.
If the women do not keep a united voice on this issue now, an excellent chance to increase representation in Parliament will go begging and the women will be right back to the drawing board.
This newspaper also last week gave an editorial on the announcement which I could not quite fathom since I had always thought the paper was a great supporter of a fairer hearing for the women of PNG. The editorial did not seem to reflect that attitude at all and I thought that is another case for women to keep their own counsel and strengthen their resolve and make sure that they present a united front.
I feel compelled to congratulate the Prime Minister and his Deputy for the very brave stand they have made on this issue. Yes, there is some sense to what Mr Nape argues about no special treatment for women but they have had it so bad for millenniums and our own culture is so heavily masochistic that a special treatment is not a special favor but a must if we are to see woman advancing into decision making positions in PNG.
As Dame Carol said this was a short-term stop gap measure. Come 2011, it is hoped the laws are changed so that women are given a certain number of seats reserved in Parliament for them. If the regional seats in the country still stand abolished in 2012, then it might be a good idea to turn them into exclusive seats for women. In that way, a woman from each province is represented on the floor of Parliament. But it should be time barred so that after three or four terms of Parliament, that special provision should expire so that both men and women have equal chances to contest for Parliamentary seats. By then, it is hoped that the population would have seen women leaders at work for over 15 years and would be able to pass informed judgment on women leaders.
At the end of the day, women are their own worst enemies. They comprise half the population. There are enough of them educated and holding down good educational qualifications to perform any number of roles. But if they fight among themselves as they seem to do from time to time, they will allow their detractors to always say: “Get your own house in order first, woman!”
And knocking somebody who is really fighting so hard for women, such as Dame Carol is not only unfair, it can derail a lot of good work already done.