Tuesday, 11 October 2011

Quickie: Act now have more women in their top 10 than National

Very very quickly.

Act have confirmed their party list and I will re-do my analysis of it at some point soonish.

What leapt out at me is that they now have three women in their top ten, while National only have 2.

Top 5 - One (Catherine Isaac at 2) 1/5 = 20%
Top 10 - Three (plus Kath McCabe at 8, Robyn Stent at 9) = 30%

Top 5 - None (yes that's right, none) 0/5 = 0%
Top 10 - Two (Collins at 7, Anne Tolley at 8) 2/10 = 20%


Ros Hiini said...

Julie, WOT no women in top 5 of Nats list!! Act has beaten them!! Thith ith dithpicable. Ros Hiini, Working Women's Resource Centre

Megan said...

Her name is Catherine Isaac, not Isaacs.

Julie said...

Thanks Megan, have fixed it. I always struggle with the word Isaac, spelt one of my dear friend's name wrong for years and years and he never said a thing.

homepaddock said...

What matters is how many will get into parliament - on recent polling Act will be lucky to get any MPs.

Top 10 for Act is more like the top 50 or 60 for National.

Hugh said...

"Top 10 for Act is more like the top 50 or 60 for National."

I guess that "Don't take a win for granted" memo in the last National conference didn't really make much leeway, huh.

homepaddock said...

Hugh - National has 58 MPs now. Much as I'd like to believe the polls it's unlikely the party will get more than 50% of the vote (60 MPs) but it is also unlikely to end up with fewer than 50.

Only one of Act's women candidates is likely to become an MP.

Hugh said...

I still don't think that electoral success means a party should be excused from sexism. It's about priorities. If anything the fact that ACT is likely to have less MPs than National means that each female MP is more meaningful - each ACT list spot is much more closely contested.

homepaddock said...

I think if you go on % of members per MP you'll find each National spot is at least as closely contested, Hugh.