On 19 March 2024, the History of Parliament Trust hosted the second in a series of events drawing on their groundbreaking Oral History Project. This event, in partnership with and funded by Keele University, explored women’s experiences in parliament and whether they have changed through time. The event was organised by the project’s research team, Professor Helen Parr (Keele University), Dr Emma Peplow (Head of Oral History, HPT), Dr Shalini Sharma (Keele University), and Dr Grace Heaton (University of Oxford).
Alongside the organisers, a distinguished panel of historians and political scientists, Professors Sarah Childs, (University of Edinburgh), Helen McCarthy (University of Cambridge), and Rainbow Murray (Queen Mary University of London) gathered at Portcullis House to reflect on the changes in the lives of women parliamentarians entering parliament in or just before 1997. Drawing on a range of interviews from the History of Parliament’s Oral History Project, the panel questioned whether the increase in women MPs has altered the culture and working practices of parliament. They also reflected on whether the presence of more women at Westminster has made a difference to how women talk about their lives as parliamentarians.
Dr Grace Heaton looks back on the event and what the new cohort of female MPs might be able to take from their predecessors…
In 2018, the Women and Equalities Committee described parliament as ‘a manly place’. In the 100 years since the first woman, Nancy Astor, took her seat in parliament in 1919, women have never been equally represented.
In the 1979 General Election, in which Margaret Thatcher became Britain’s first female Prime Minister, only 3 per cent of all MPs were women. Prophesising the impact more women MPs would have on parliament, in 1987 Labour MP Clare Short argued in her Briefing for MPs that: ‘Increasing women’s representation in parliament is essential if we are to build a House of Commons which more truly represents the whole population. As more women come into the Commons, the culture will change, the agenda of politics will broaden, and the institution itself will be transformed’. That same year, 41 women were elected to parliament and Diane Abbott became the first Black woman to serve as an MP.
During the 1990s, the Labour Party sought to increase the number of female MPs via the controversial practice of All Women Shortlists for candidates chosen to fight the 1997 General Election. Despite a legal challenge temporarily halting the measure (during which two Labour activists accused their party of sexual discrimination), the increase in women candidates combined with a Labour landslide led to a breakthrough. 120 women MPs (18 per cent of all MPs) were elected in 1997 and began to seriously challenge Westminster’s culture. This number has slowly increased in recent years to 22 per cent in the 2010 General Election, and 34 per cent in 2019. In the 2024 General Election a record-breaking number of female MPs were elected, now sitting at just over 40 percent.
As the History of Parliament Trust’s rich Oral History Project demonstrates, experiences of parliamentary life varied hugely. Yet, when discussing their lives, interviewees touched on remarkably similar themes: of what drew them into politics and how they practically entered politics; how they felt about the Chamber and how they experienced the social life and culture of parliament; and how they combined politics with their lives outside parliament. Led by these testimonies, the panel’s discussion was split into three sections: Becoming an MP; Experiences of Parliament; and Balancing Politics and Family Life.
Becoming an MP:
One of the benefits of the life-story approach used by volunteers working with the History of Parliament Trust is that rich insights are gained into the family backgrounds and political heritages of MPs. These formative years often shaped their decisions to enter politics in later life. As Helen McCarthy noted, family members (and often specific relatives) inspired, taught, and encouraged political engagement.
Ann Cryer, a Labour MP for Keighley 1997-2010, for example, recalled her grandmother’s involvement in the women’s suffrage movement; Baroness Angie Bray, a Conservative MP for Acton and Ealing 2010-2015, reflected on being taught how to debate by her father; and Susan Elan Jones, a Labour MP for Clwyd South recalled taking part in her uncle’s election campaign for the Conway constituency in 1979:
From here, the panel reflected on the controversial practice of All Women Shortlists. As you heard above, All Women Shortlists galvanised contradictory responses.
Susan Elan Jones explained that:
‘Until the time of the All Women Shortlists in Wales, Wales had only ever had four female MPs. It was pathetic. […] It took the women-only shortlists to shake things up a bit in Wales’.
In contrast, Ann Taylor, a Labour MP between 1974-79 and 1987-2005, was less convinced by the impact of All Women Shortlists and others like Sylvia Heal, Labour 1990-92; 1997-2010, changed their opinion on All Women Shortlists over time.
Listening to these testimonies, Sarah Childs encouraged a reframing of the way that All Women Shortlists are conceptualised. She noted that whether you like All Women Shortlists or not is irrelevant, the worldwide evidence suggests that quotas systems provide an effective method for increasing female representation and participation in public life.
Experiences of Parliament:
While a striking level of continuity can be deciphered in the importance of familial networks galvanising political interest, experiences of parliament (and particularly the Chamber) varied significantly.
Jackie Ballard, Liberal Democrat MP 1997-2001, highlighted the sexist comments women MPs endured during her time in parliament; other members, like Baroness Angie Bray and Susan Elan Jones did not mention instances of overt misogyny, but rather focused on the gravity and experience of speaking in the Chamber:
Commenting on these clips, McCarthy drew attention to the emotions which underscored these testimonies. Noting that Jackie Ballard’s use of words like ‘loath’ and ‘detest’, and her visceral ‘ugh’ at the end of the clip, provide immersive insights into the experience of being an MP and how difficult it can be. Drawing on her own research, Rainbow Murray made a fascinating comparison to the spatial dynamics of the French parliament. Murray noted that the physical space of the French parliament was overtly unwelcoming to women – reminding the audience that for a long time the only artwork representing women were the erotic images which adorned the walls of the parliamentary bars.
Family and Political Life:
During the final segment, the panel considered the interactions between political and family life. Alongside balancing the demands of a constituency with commitments in Westminster, many female parliamentarians also had to navigate being the primary care giver in their families.
Olga Maitland, Conservative 1992-1997, recalled campaigning for the 1983 election and balancing her familial duties; Sylvia Heal acknowledged the sense of guilt that was also very prominent among female parliamentarians; Ann Taylor, Labour 1974-83; 1987-2005, was adamant that parliament should be a place where women, from whatever familial situation, can easily work:
Reflecting on these testimonies, Rainbow Murray highlighted three coping mechanisms women frequently adopt whilst trying to navigate parliamentary and home life: 1. You don’t get pregnant. 2. You wait until your children have grown to stand as a parliamentary candidate. 3. You delegate childcare – often to other women e.g. your own mother. Murray therefore urged that to address gender inequality in parliament, it is vital to address gender inequality in the home.
As the dust settles on a new parliament, with a record-breaking number of female Members, questions posed by Sarah Childs during the ‘A Manly Place?’ event provide us with much food for thought: Are MPs making a difference? Is the institution changing or are MPs changing? Do we want to change the institution based on what MPs want? When change does happen, which changes stick? And has parliament, in the aftermath of the referendum on Brexit and the pandemic, experienced a ‘remasculinisation’?
After a stimulating discussion, the event closed with the words of Jackie Ballard:
‘Less than a thousand woman have been Members of Parliament. It is an incredibly privileged thing to have done, isn’t it? As a woman, you’ve made, you know, some impact and some mark, and you hope that over generations people are not still sitting here saying how few mothers have been Members of Parliament or something because it’s more commonplace.[…] Being a woman who comes to prominence is important, and I wasn’t a woman from a privileged background, I wasn’t a woman who had a nanny, or a husband even. So, I think it’s important’.
G.H.
Further Reading
Karen Celis and Sarah Childs, Feminist Democratic Representation (Oxford, 2020).
Helen McCarthy, Double Lives: A History of Working Motherhood (London, 2020).
Rainbow Murray, ‘Linear Trajectories or Vicious Circles? The Causes and Consquences of Gendered Career Paths in the National Assembly’, Modern and Contemporary France, 18:4 (2010), pp. 445-459.
Emma Peplow and Priscila Privatto, The Political Lives of Postwar MPs: An Oral History of Parliament (London, 2020), Chapter 8.
