Don’t endorse male-dominated EU Commission, leading MEP warns Parliament

ADVERTISEMENT

Not respecting the principle of parity in the European Commission, the beacon of democracy for the rest of the world, cannot be the way forward in the EU. It would be ‘inconsistent’ for the Parliament to support such a situation, the head of the Parliament’s gender equality committee told Euronews in an interview. 

In July, MEPs elected Lina Gálvez, a historian and politician specialising in feminist economics, to head the EU parliament’s gender equality committee for the next two and a half years — and the stakes are already high. 

From EU capitals challenging Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on her demand to nominate both a male and a female candidate for her team, to the potentially negative impact of the green and digital transitions on women, here’s a look at what the next mandate for gender equality could look like. 

Euronews: If member states stick to their position of not nominating two candidates, will the nominees secure the support of MEPs?

Certainly from those groups and those MEPs who really believe that without equal representation there is a democratic deficit, no, it is not enough. Nor should it be enough in any parliament in the world, let alone the European Parliament, where we pride ourselves on carrying the banner of democracy within and beyond our borders. It would be inconsistent.

Euronews: Would Parliament turning down nominees on this basis create tensions between the institutions?

It would be a good opportunity to show real commitment to European values and democracy. If there had been no pressure in the past, people would not have started to see the obvious: that governments made up only or mostly of men do not represent society and limit its scope in the development of public policy. They are one-eyed.

Euronews: What message would you give to the EU leaders before next week’s deadline to candidates (30 August)?

First, rules and principles are there to be respected. And the principles of equality are clear in our treaties and in the legislation and policies we have adopted together. It should be borne in mind that the President of the Commission is a woman and was supported by a very large majority in the European Parliament.

Secondly, if we fail to make progress on equal representation in the College of Commissioners, we will be perpetuating a democratic gender deficit that has not yet been closed. It has not been closed because there is no parity in decision-making spaces and because it does not help to correct a historical deficit of lack of participation and representation of women, which has led to the construction of androcentric spaces, laws, procedures and cultures. 

Thirdly and finally, respect for the principle of parity seems to me to be particularly important at this historic moment of attack on democracy and the rule of law. Member States cannot buy into this anti-democratic framework and diminish the importance of equality between women and men as an essential political objective. I insist, they cannot buy such a framework.

Exceptions and non-compliance with equality agreements cannot be the way forward for an institution that represents the whole of Europe and should be a beacon of democracy and human rights for the rest of the world. Europe cannot afford it if it wants to remain a key player in the world, because our democracies are our strength. Just look at the misogynistic attacks that Kamala Harris is receiving for being a woman.

Euronews: In the committee you chair, four out of 39 members are men, do the numbers speak for themselves? 

The figures speak for themselves, but first of all I would like to say that although we are the committee with the greatest gender imbalance, we are not the only one. There are committees where it is the other way round, AFCO [Committee on Constitutional Affairs] for example, and yet we have a parity board [in FEMM]. Even though there are only four men, two of them are vice-chairmen. 

I think we have respected the rules of the game, whereas at the first Conference of Presidents, the European People’s Party asked that this principle of equality not be respected in the election of the fourth vice-chairman in five committees [a proposal that was eventually accepted by the majority of political groups]. In some committees, with good judgement, the election was postponed until after the summer, because what they have not found are women, whereas, I insist, in the most feminised and unbalanced committee, which has only four men out of 40, we have found two vice-presidents. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Euronews: What message does it send to citizens?

In fact, equality is still perceived as a women’s issue. It concerns us more because historically we come from a situation of undervaluation, inequality, discrimination, and fewer opportunities. Even today, we suffer violence because we are women. We have less income, fewer opportunities in general. We are less present in decision-making spaces, and I insist that we have more incentives to fight against this, but in the end it is something for all societies and men still seem to have to learn about it. 

Perhaps we also need to work harder to integrate men, but note that much of the gender backlash we are seeing now has to do with the fact that men have felt their privileges threatened. Rather than thinking that what is being proposed is a more egalitarian society that should benefit us all, the reaction has been that jobs are being taken away from them, when in fact women are still very much discriminated against in the labour market. 

Euronews: During the last parliamentary term, far-right forces suggested that this committee should be scrapped, and this term we have a new far-right group. How do you think this will affect the committee’s dynamics? 

ADVERTISEMENT

I see it with concern because the far right in general has anti-feminism and anti-gender politics at the heart of its proposals. In fact, these far-right groups, which are now consolidating and reorganising, have started to work together precisely on issues related to an anti-gender agenda, which has to do with feminism, but also with LGTBQ rights. It has to do with what they consider to be against nature, against the established traditional order, or at least what they consider to be the established traditional order, which is obviously patriarchal, androcentric, heterosexual, and so on.

[Their success] will depend on how central they make gender issues in their culture war. If they put it at the centre of their culture war, it will be problematic because while they may not agree in other areas, such as foreign policy, they can agree here because they have worked together for many years.

Euronews: What do you see as the biggest challenges for the next term?

I think there are issues where we need to look at implementation first. In laws such as the EU’s Directive on combating violence against women, we also need to look at its revision and continue to fight for rape [as non-consensual sex] to be considered a crime across the EU. And then we have to make sure that it is implemented, because there are a lot of member states that are very far away from what is said in this directive, so there is really a lot to do in terms of monitoring. 

ADVERTISEMENT

We also passed the EU Pay Transparency Directive, but there is still a lot to be done in the labour market. They [the Commission] should come up with something on skills and fighting stereotyping of professions. Now, there will be two transitions (green and digital) where most of the public money will go and which we believe will mainly benefit men. We need to see this and evaluate it. 

We still need to make progress on gender budgeting, and we need to make progress on gender sensitive policy evaluation. We need more disaggregated data, more gender-sensitive data, and, above all, data that allows for real mainstreaming in all policy areas. At the moment, we are very far from having a gender mainstreaming that also allows for conditionality in the EU funds, just as we have introduced green conditionality. In other words, just as any law, any fund cannot harm the environment, perhaps we need to do the same with gender issues.

There should also be something about parity in general, because there is still a democratic deficit. This Parliament has a lower proportion of women than the previous one. We have lost a small percentage point. It is not much, but it is significant because we should have gone up, and instead we have gone down. Obviously, there is no democratic deficit. We will indeed have women in the EU top jobs and that is a very good thing that we have to congratulate, but it is something that we have to keep fighting for, as it is not a given.