Thirty percent women for the sake of a target may not be enough

As the countdown to the 2004 elections advances, there is a flurry of activity throughout Botswana as political parties organise to make their presence felt by the electorate. The upcoming elections provide a golden opportunity for Botswana to meet the 1997 SADC Gender and Development Declaration commitment of a minimum of 30 percent women in positions of power and decision making by 2005.

As the countdown to the 2004 elections advances, there is a flurry of activity throughout Botswana as political parties organise to make their presence felt by the electorate. The upcoming elections provide a golden opportunity for Botswana to meet the 1997 SADC Gender and Development Declaration commitment of a minimum of 30 percent women in positions of power and decision making by 2005.

Women now constitute 27 percent of Cabinet Ministers, 16.7 percent of Assistant Ministers, 18 percent of Parliamentarians and 22.8 percent of local government councillors. These figures improve in the public service, but are not so good in the private sector and in parastatals.

But is increasing the number of women in governance structures enough? Reflecting on women’s contributions in the past five years, the score cards show no significant push towards gender equality to transform the life of the ordinary Motswana.

Other than activities at the operational and technical level, and the sterling work of Joy Phumaphi, former Minister of Health, in the area of MTCT, HIV and AIDS testing for pregnant women, and the provision of antiretroviral drugs and treatment, one is hard pressed to find examples of transformative activities that have been influenced by the participation of the 18 percent women in Parliament.

There are numerous examples of changes that have taken place in Parliaments of other SADC countries that can be clearly linked to the presence and participation of women. These examples abound in countries like South Africa, Namibia, Tanzania, Zambia, and even such low performing countries in terms of numbers as Zimbabwe and Mauritius. Information at the SADC Gender Unit attests to this.

Yet for Botswana, there have been no debates on issues such as domestic violence, marital rape, unfair inheritance practices and women’s equal access to own resources, to mention but a few.  Women and men leaders also have remained mute on the payment of value added tax on food, medicines, health and banking facilities, which directly impacts on poor women and men.

One would expect women leaders, like some of the men in Parliament, to raise the plight and living conditions of the rural people and of those in the urban high-density settlements like Old Naledi in Gaborone, Somerset in Francistown, and Botshabelo in Selibe Phikwe. There are even worse settlements scattered all over the country. The majority of the people living in these appalling conditions are women.

What have our women representatives in the past five years done, or said, about the masses of school leavers who roam our streets and are unemployed? What about the street children and adults that are such a sore sight on every street of our cities? All of this in “the land of plenty” that Botswana is perceived to be internationally.

There is no disputing that Botswana is an example of good economic performance in our region and the world, but how do we justify the large pockets of abject poverty that are found along side this prosperity and provision of services? How do all these escape the sharp eye and senses of women who often are sensitive to them in their own families? And who is better placed to lead campaigns against these ills than our women leaders?

While processes were started before the last elections to engender laws found to be insensitive, none of the women in Parliament have made it their business to facilitate the passage of those laws by Parliament.

A number of our women leaders have made strong statements that they did not come to power because they are women. But this does not mean that they should not work for the improvement of the lives of other women, and men, particularly those that are disadvantaged.

Women leaders need to give the electorate reasons to elect them. Those that came in through the advocacy for the increase of women, whether this is accepted by them or not, can only be re-elected because of what they have done in the last term of office. If this is not very obvious, no amount of shouting from gender equality advocates, and no level of commitment by the Head of State will enable us to reach the 30 percent target. The electorate may not be willing to bring people back just because they are women, or because a thirty percent quota needs to be filled.

Moipone Hadu is a gender activist and freelance writer.

 This article is part of the GEM Opinion and Commentary Service that provides views and perspectives on current events.