Has Diversity Finally Reached UK Politics?

In its entire political history, the UK has seen only three black women Members of Parliament: Diane Abbott (1987); Oona King (1997); Dawn Butler (2005).

Dianne Abbott has come of age in political terms, as earlier this year she celebrated 21 years of being an MP. Oona King’s reign, on the other hand, ended after seven years when she lost her seat in 2005. In that same year Dawn Butler was elected by the people of Brent South and she seems destined or could it be determined to go places. In 2006 Ms Butler was elected as Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Youth Affairs by a cross party delegation of MP's. The following year she was promoted by the Prime Minister as Vice Chair of the Labour Party with a remit on Youth. In 2008, her seemingly annual promotion continues as she has become the first elected black woman to gain ministerial office; she is currently Assistant Government Whip.

This impressive (and motivational) rise has however been fraught with head-on encounters of racism and sexism, as white male colleagues more used to seeing black women cleaners and cooks than MPs in the Commons, are confused by her presence. One white Tory MP upon finding out that Ms Butler was an MP was heard to remark "they're letting anybody in nowadays". Sadly those encounters and comments appear to be commonplace in politics and is not just the preserve of Conservative politicians. Dianne Abbott remembers being asked by a fellow Labour MP if Christmas was celebrated in Jamaica. Was that ignorance; illiteracy or racism? Whichever way, it does not bode well for us citizens if these are the people in charge.

Dawn Butler believes a strong complaint process and diversity awareness training is essential to educate MPs and influence behaviour. The cynics among us might say this will only teach them not to state feelings out loud and that it will require a lot more to entice black women into dip their toes into the mire - if you will excuse the mixed metaphors. Others suggest the introduction of all women, all black shortlists, but there is still fierce resistance to this approach from many quarters.

Nevertheless, no-one can deny the importance of the black female vote and the effect that having gender and ethnicity reflected in political candidates might have on it. Political parties must sex up their recruitment and retention process. David Cameron and the Tories are trying to woo black women on both sides of the electorate by setting up an A list of candidates to be fast tracked into winnable Tory seats. Helen Grant, a lawyer from Kent is one such woman, also making history as the first black woman selected to defend a Tory Seat. One can only wait to see how successful this scheme will be for the Conservative Party. But in the meantime, the UK political arena is arguably still the same racist, sexist province of white, middle-class male that it has always been.

Are black male leaders really that threatened by their female counterparts?

In a world where racism is still rife, albeit slightly more underground, it is astounding that there is so much division amongst the ranks of our black leaders. It was not surprising that in the USA the Democrats grappled with the gender vs. race issue in selecting their presidential nomination. But somewhat more worrying is that in Jamaica, a country of black people, the underlying themes of the recently contested PNP leadership battle still revolve around skin colour, class and gender i.e. the brown-skinned, academic man (Dr Peter Phillips) vs. the dark-skinned, grassroots female (Ms Portia Simpson-Miller). Not content with losing that same race two years ago, Phillips egged on by his supporters decided to launch a campaign for the leadership position, despite there being no vacancy – a strategy that is tantamount to mutiny. The results of the election should settle the debate: Ms Simpson-Miller trounced Dr Phillips, winning nearly 60% of delegate votes.

It is, nevertheless, soul destroying to watch the prejudices at work. The dissenters seemed intent on dividing the People’s National Party rather than focus on uniting the party to (i) provide a convincing alternative to the JLP and (ii) prepare to form the next Jamaican government. Phillips and his team suggest that somehow Simpson-Miller is not academically qualified for the top job. But on what premise is this argument built?

On the one hand, Dr Phillips boasts several degrees including a Doctorate whilst Ms Simpson-Miller holds a single Bachelors degree in Public Administration. But so do/did several of the country’s leaders: Bruce Golding; Edward Seaga and Michael Manley. Indeed, Hugh Shearer armed only with a high school education and a one-year Colonial Development and Welfare Trade Union Scholarship worked his way up through the ranks and became Prime Minister from 1967 to 1972. Since then he has been cited by some as one of the island’s greatest leaders and Rex Nettleford proclaimed him "one of the primary shapers of our history, a political leader of the highest calibre and above all - a patriot". The question is therefore, if a single degree is good enough for these men, why is it not good enough for Ms Simpson-Miller? Unless of course the real reason is something else, like skin colour!

In 1992, Percival James Patterson became the 11th Prime Minister of Jamaica. Eminently qualified, academically accomplished and internationally recognised, no-one dared question his intellectual capacity. When he first came to power, journalists (and the public) remarked “first black man to lead the country”. Black in this case did not just refer to non-white, it pointed to the shade bias that is endemic throughout the island. But Patterson proved himself to be an exceptional leader in and out of Jamaica. In fact, he is now one of the few black members of the Global Leadership Foundation, an organisation that promotes good governance (democracy, open markets, human rights, rule of the law) and conflict resolution through mediation to governments.

So, having demolished the ‘shade thing’ with Patterson and the ‘education thing’ with Shearer and others, it seems we are left with gender as the real reason behind Dr Phillips’ (and others) obsession with ousting Simpson-Miller. Hitherto, there has been no serious female contender for the top job. There were no major criticisms when she served as a deputy and her record as a Minister has been commended. The sexism is so overwhelming, Phillips and his proponents appear oblivious to the fact that they are still on the same team. They ignore the fact that winners and losers all have significant roles in the future of their party and its ability to be the next credible government. They have scant regard to the adage “a chain is only as strong as its weakest link”. One could be forgiven for believing that the ‘Arise and Renew’ team have unwittingly been seconded to the JLP’s PR team.

Irrespective of political persuasion, modern history is replete with female black leaders: Eugenia Charles of Dominica; Maria Ph. Liberia-Peters, Nederlandse Antillen; Premier Jennifer Meridith Smith, Bermuda; and Foreign Minister Condoleezza Rice, United States of America. With the support, advice and guidance that are usually accorded to any leader, Portia Simpson-Miller is well placed to join that distinguished group of black women leaders.

Just think how galling it must also be to those who fear women at the helm that in the same PNP leadership contest, yet another female Angela Brown-Burke is rising above the parapet. Ms Brown-Burke gained the highest number of votes of all vice presidential candidates. And with the recent polls suggesting that were a national election to be called, most people would vote for Portia over both Bruce Golding and Dr Peter Phillips, there seems little question that Ms Simpson-Miller is indeed the 'best man' for the job.

JP Headlam (Black Women Leaders) and Michael D Brooks (DMA)