|
Women in
Politics in Hungary |
|
Katalin Koncz: Women in Politics in Hungary – An
Overview from the beginning of the transformation to nowadays,
990-2006 in an International Framework English Summary.
|
|
As it
approached the turn of the century, the Central European
region became the scene of dramatic changes. The
post-socialist countries embarked on a political and economic
path that was new in every way. The most important aspects of
the Hungarian change in regime were the democratization of
society, the transformation of the structure of ownership, and
the free reign given to the development of a market economy.
The changes brought about a corresponding fundamental change
not only in the political and economic spheres, but also in
family relations, as well as the interpersonal relationships
within families. It redefined the situation, opportunities and
perspectives of the individual in society. Though the scales
of the winners and losers of this restructuring were not meant
to be tipped along gender lines, some of the most obvious
consequences of the changeover affected men and women in
different ways.
While in the more advanced half of the
world the call for equal opportunity for both genders in the
social and political spheres has by now become a reality, in
Hungary the change in regime did not bring with it a
substantial qualitative change in the approach to women’s
issues, nor in the opportunities open to women in the practice
of politics. The issue of women’s equality is not among the
priorities of political and economic decision making. As
paradoxical as it may seem at first glance, the gradual
exclusion of women in political decision-making is a
phenomenon of our democratized society. In every one of the
countries involved, following the change in regime, women were
forced into the periphery of the political arena, and nowhere
else as blatantly as in Hungary. In order to ensure that the
social transformation should not be detrimental to women to an
even greater extent than now, it is paramount that we
recognize the danger to women’s interests and,
correspondingly, to strengthen the institutions engaged in
serving their interests. The political sphere has a
fundamental role to play in this respect that cannot be
replaced by any other sphere, nor relegated to any other
sphere, since only this sphere has the means (legal,
institutional, and financial) that are indispensable for
turning intent into reality.
Women are underrepresented
in all layers and spheres of political life. After the change
in regime, the number of female Parliamentary representatives
was drastically reduced, and today, with its present ratio of
women (10.6%), out of 173 countries, Hungary is 120th in line.
This discrepancy is equally glaring in comparison to the
countries of the European Union and the post-socialist
countries alike. In the first elected Parliament after the
change in regime, there were no women in the upper echelons of
political office holders at all. The breakthrough came in
2002, when Dr. Katalin Szili was elected President of
Parliament. Women are also underrepresented in the area of
committee leadership, with their numbers being even lower than
among the representatives.
In accordance with
international trends, the number of women elected as mayors
shows a more favorable ratio than their representation in
Parliament. Opportunities for women in the small towns and
settlements are substantially greater than in big towns and
cities and the lower levels of local government. These are the
entryways through which women have a better chance of entering
the political arena. Women are at an advantage when elections
are based on personal knowledge, since only personal contact
can counteract the adamantly recurring prejudice against them.
Though women enjoy a greater scope in forums of local
decision-making than nationally, their ratio of participation
does not satisfy the principle of parity democracy, which
relies on the ratio of men to women within a particular
population as its gauge.
The number of women in
government is negligible. In the wake of the change in regime,
one woman was entrusted with the office of minister without
portfolio, while today two women hold top government posts
(Dr. Kinga Göncz and Dr. Mónika Lamperth). In the second layer
there are 2 - 4 under-secretaries of state, and 4 - 5 deputy
under-secretaries of state who are women. While the
institution of government itself has been showing steady
development, the substantial setback we are experiencing today
in the role that the institution responsible for equal
opportunities are playing has resulted in these institutions
being relegated to a lower level of the hierarchy. The
elaboration of a policy for women in government is yet to be
worked out.
The ratio of women leaders at the top of
the various parties and unions is also low. Simultaneously
with the change in regime and as part of it, the women’s
movement was pluralized and the various parties and unions had
sections dealing with women’s issues. The women’s
organizations are playing a major role in the recognition,
popularization and safeguarding of women’s interests. The
women’s sections of the parties and unions, on the other hand,
lack effective power, and the number of organizations in the
developing civil or public sector dealing with women’s issues
is extremely low (189 out of 65 thousand). The civil sphere is
under-financed, and its influence is limited. Given the lack
of government support and sufficient experience, further
organization along these lines is difficult. The movements are
not strong enough to organize themselves, while their efforts
and attention are directed at the everyday struggle for
survival. Women in general also show little interest, while
the active nucleus has not yet found the common goals and
programs that would make the mass of women spring into action.
The cooperation between the feminist movement and
scientific-academic feminism as well as the various women’s
organizations representing different ideologies is next to
nonexistent.
When compared to their importance to
society, the insufficient participation of women in the
decision-making bodies holds up a mirror to their place in
society.
Their greater participation in politics
presupposes a change on every level of political activity,
while the cooperation of everyone in politics is necessary for
the development of a “female friendly” perspective.
The
political leadership is insensitive to women’s issues and
women’s equality. The demands for equal opportunity and its
major strategies worked out by the European Union can be found
only in traces. If the political leadership pays attention to
the subject at all, it does so exclusively with regard to
population growth and the family, with disregard to the
special needs, expectations, and opportunities for women, the
conditions for their fulfillment and their development as
human beings. Since women’s policies and their handling as a
priority issue is lacking on the governmental level, any steps
taken do not crash through the barriers of financial
priorities. The priority of the European Union for equal
opportunity has not been realized in action. The Union is much
more interested in economic stabilization than the policing of
equal opportunities strategies. For lack of demand from
outside, the demand for equal opportunities for women has
always been and will remain a function of economic
interests.
Parliamentary and local elections also
clearly indicate that election results depend on all the
participants, the parties, the nominees, and the voters. The
parties do not nominate women who could run for office in
sufficient numbers, the women do not accept their nomination
in sufficient numbers, while the majority of the voters vote
for male candidates. Unlike in the leading countries of the
European Union, political parties in Hungary do not resort to
“positive discrimination” in order to satisfy or increase what
might be considered the acceptable ratio of men to women in
politics. The political parties do not feel the negative
effect of the absence of women’s abilities because there are
plenty of “suitable” men for the political posts. The ability
of men to achieve their aims and their capitalizing on their
connections is greater than that of women, and the men in
decision-making prefer to see other men in positions of power.
Except for the young, metropolitan, educated layer of society,
popular opinion is conservative, and considers the wider
participation of women in politics unnecessary. People trust
women less than men, and as voters, they let the country know
it.
From the point of view of education, the
necessarily social conditions for women to participate in
politics are given. Other conditions, however, are not
favorable. The level of women’s employment has declined and is
appreciably below the European Union average. The declining
financial conditions of Hungarian families and the burden of
working men (given than they have jobs at all) increasingly
bind women to the traditional role of homemaker, an activity
that in itself is becoming more and more difficult to
organize, leaving women little energy for taking further care
of the family, for relaxation, and the pursuit of hobbies. The
conditions necessary for coordinating the dual rule of women
as workers and homemakers are themselves unsatisfactory (the
reduction of the network of childcare institutions, out of
date home utilities, methods of homemaking left over from the
middle of the last century, the lack of quality services, and
the high price of subscribed meals). The political activity
and presence of women with families in decision-making is not
possible without a reduction in their dual duties and without
the necessary help from society.
The women’s movement
has not lighted upon the things that women’s interests hold in
common, and for lack of this common ground, its definition of
its aims in arbitrary. Given the present social environment,
it is still too weak to become a factor in shaping the face of
contemporary politics. Due to their role in society, women are
missing from their customary set of roles the ability to
integrate into the manly world of power politics. The traits
they have gained in the process of socialization, the
competence gained in the school structure and the workplace,
are not in unison yet with the requirements of a successful
political career. Their style of leadership, however, may come
to fruition during the present century. In the terrain of
political opportunities open to them today, women’s interests
can at best trickle into the political arena through narrow
channels, as a result of which women are being left out of the
redistribution of political power. This leads to a paradoxical
situation, namely, that although democracy is a basic
requirement for bringing the interests of special groups to
the surface and asserting them, it is a society in the process
of democratization that is pushing the disadvantaged layers,
including women, to the periphery of the political
sphere.
If we are to find the alternatives for change,
when searching for the channels of change and opportunity, we
must look at the factors defining the political activity of
women. The example of the advanced market economies proves
that the speeding up of the integration of women and the
acceleration of the recognition that women should be
integrated is the byproduct of the recognition of mutual
interests. Pressured by European requirements, and in the wake
of ratified treaties, the government will hopefully recognize
the necessity for engaging a larger proportion of women in
process of policy making. It will probably take the European
Union’s equal opportunities policies to make the government
change its views on this issue, because the forces that could
bring about the dynamics of change without outside pressure
are missing inside (knowledge and preparedness, openness,
moderation and self-restraint).
The leading party
organizations, during the preparation for the elections will,
in the future, hopefully recognize the necessity of
approaching the principle of parity democracy and will place
more women candidates running for top office on their lists.
The union leaders, too, will hopefully realize that their
sphere of influence with regard to the safeguarding of
interests will have to shift toward female employees, and will
reshape their policies in accordance with the policies of
their more advanced European partners worked out in the
1980s.
In the civil sphere – including the civil
women’s organizations – it is hoped that there will be
increased recognition that self-organization is the major
means of representing special interests and setting limits on
power. It is hoped that in the wake of this new recognition,
they will organize their interest group networks in a more
efficient manner, and that they will make a point of
representing and keeping on their agenda the need for the
realization of equal opportunities, which is part and parcel
of any democracy. The women’s movement will, hopefully,
continue to gain strength as women will come to understand
that they are endangered, and it is hoped that women will join
forces with the activists fighting for the recognition and
enforcement of their interests. They will hopefully define,
from the body of common interests, the aims and goals whose
representation they can trust to willing politicians – men and
women both.
On the basis of the above, we may assume
that a more “female friendly” social environment than what we
are experiencing today will inspire all talented and qualified
women to take up the cause of furthering and safeguarding
women’s interests in the interest of society. What they
achieve may very well convince the political parties to
nominate more women, and the voters to vote for them in
greater numbers. In this process, which will affect every
member of society, education, a means of consciousness raising
on the level of society, should be ensured a major role.
|
 |
| News
author: Katalin Koncz |
2007-03-05
11:34:07 |
|
| | |
As it approached the
turn of the century, the Central European region became the scene of
dramatic changes. The post-socialist countries embarked on a
political and economic path that was new in every way. The most
important aspects of the Hungarian change in regime were the
democratization of society, the transformation of the structure of
ownership, and the free reign given to the development of a market
economy. The changes brought about a corresponding fundamental
change not only in the political and economic spheres, but also in
family relations, as well as the interpersonal relationships within
families. It redefined the situation, opportunities and perspectives
of the individual in society. Though the scales of the winners and
losers of this restructuring were not meant to be tipped along
gender lines, some of the most obvious consequences of the
changeover affected men and women in different ways.
While in
the more advanced half of the world the call for equal opportunity
for both genders in the social and political spheres has by now
become a reality, in Hungary the change in regime did not bring with
it a substantial qualitative change in the approach to women’s
issues, nor in the opportunities open to women in the practice of
politics. The issue of women’s equality is not among the priorities
of political and economic decision making. As paradoxical as it may
seem at first glance, the gradual exclusion of women in political
decision-making is a phenomenon of our democratized society. In
every one of the countries involved, following the change in regime,
women were forced into the periphery of the political arena, and
nowhere else as blatantly as in Hungary. In order to ensure that the
social transformation should not be detrimental to women to an even
greater extent than now, it is paramount that we recognize the
danger to women’s interests and, correspondingly, to strengthen the
institutions engaged in serving their interests. The political
sphere has a fundamental role to play in this respect that cannot be
replaced by any other sphere, nor relegated to any other sphere,
since only this sphere has the means (legal, institutional, and
financial) that are indispensable for turning intent into
reality.
Women are underrepresented in all layers and spheres
of political life. After the change in regime, the number of female
Parliamentary representatives was drastically reduced, and today,
with its present ratio of women (10.6%), out of 173 countries,
Hungary is 120th in line. This discrepancy is equally glaring in
comparison to the countries of the European Union and the
post-socialist countries alike. In the first elected Parliament
after the change in regime, there were no women in the upper
echelons of political office holders at all. The breakthrough came
in 2002, when Dr. Katalin Szili was elected President of Parliament.
Women are also underrepresented in the area of committee leadership,
with their numbers being even lower than among the
representatives.
In accordance with international trends, the
number of women elected as mayors shows a more favorable ratio than
their representation in Parliament. Opportunities for women in the
small towns and settlements are substantially greater than in big
towns and cities and the lower levels of local government. These are
the entryways through which women have a better chance of entering
the political arena. Women are at an advantage when elections are
based on personal knowledge, since only personal contact can
counteract the adamantly recurring prejudice against them. Though
women enjoy a greater scope in forums of local decision-making than
nationally, their ratio of participation does not satisfy the
principle of parity democracy, which relies on the ratio of men to
women within a particular population as its gauge.
The number
of women in government is negligible. In the wake of the change in
regime, one woman was entrusted with the office of minister without
portfolio, while today two women hold top government posts (Dr.
Kinga Göncz and Dr. Mónika Lamperth). In the second layer there are
2 - 4 under-secretaries of state, and 4 - 5 deputy under-secretaries
of state who are women. While the institution of government itself
has been showing steady development, the substantial setback we are
experiencing today in the role that the institution responsible for
equal opportunities are playing has resulted in these institutions
being relegated to a lower level of the hierarchy. The elaboration
of a policy for women in government is yet to be worked
out.
The ratio of women leaders at the top of the various
parties and unions is also low. Simultaneously with the change in
regime and as part of it, the women’s movement was pluralized and
the various parties and unions had sections dealing with women’s
issues. The women’s organizations are playing a major role in the
recognition, popularization and safeguarding of women’s interests.
The women’s sections of the parties and unions, on the other hand,
lack effective power, and the number of organizations in the
developing civil or public sector dealing with women’s issues is
extremely low (189 out of 65 thousand). The civil sphere is
under-financed, and its influence is limited. Given the lack of
government support and sufficient experience, further organization
along these lines is difficult. The movements are not strong enough
to organize themselves, while their efforts and attention are
directed at the everyday struggle for survival. Women in general
also show little interest, while the active nucleus has not yet
found the common goals and programs that would make the mass of
women spring into action. The cooperation between the feminist
movement and scientific-academic feminism as well as the various
women’s organizations representing different ideologies is next to
nonexistent.
When compared to their importance to society,
the insufficient participation of women in the decision-making
bodies holds up a mirror to their place in society.
Their
greater participation in politics presupposes a change on every
level of political activity, while the cooperation of everyone in
politics is necessary for the development of a “female friendly”
perspective.
The political leadership is insensitive to
women’s issues and women’s equality. The demands for equal
opportunity and its major strategies worked out by the European
Union can be found only in traces. If the political leadership pays
attention to the subject at all, it does so exclusively with regard
to population growth and the family, with disregard to the special
needs, expectations, and opportunities for women, the conditions for
their fulfillment and their development as human beings. Since
women’s policies and their handling as a priority issue is lacking
on the governmental level, any steps taken do not crash through the
barriers of financial priorities. The priority of the European Union
for equal opportunity has not been realized in action. The Union is
much more interested in economic stabilization than the policing of
equal opportunities strategies. For lack of demand from outside, the
demand for equal opportunities for women has always been and will
remain a function of economic interests.
Parliamentary and
local elections also clearly indicate that election results depend
on all the participants, the parties, the nominees, and the voters.
The parties do not nominate women who could run for office in
sufficient numbers, the women do not accept their nomination in
sufficient numbers, while the majority of the voters vote for male
candidates. Unlike in the leading countries of the European Union,
political parties in Hungary do not resort to “positive
discrimination” in order to satisfy or increase what might be
considered the acceptable ratio of men to women in politics. The
political parties do not feel the negative effect of the absence of
women’s abilities because there are plenty of “suitable” men for the
political posts. The ability of men to achieve their aims and their
capitalizing on their connections is greater than that of women, and
the men in decision-making prefer to see other men in positions of
power. Except for the young, metropolitan, educated layer of
society, popular opinion is conservative, and considers the wider
participation of women in politics unnecessary. People trust women
less than men, and as voters, they let the country know
it.
From the point of view of education, the necessarily
social conditions for women to participate in politics are given.
Other conditions, however, are not favorable. The level of women’s
employment has declined and is appreciably below the European Union
average. The declining financial conditions of Hungarian families
and the burden of working men (given than they have jobs at all)
increasingly bind women to the traditional role of homemaker, an
activity that in itself is becoming more and more difficult to
organize, leaving women little energy for taking further care of the
family, for relaxation, and the pursuit of hobbies. The conditions
necessary for coordinating the dual rule of women as workers and
homemakers are themselves unsatisfactory (the reduction of the
network of childcare institutions, out of date home utilities,
methods of homemaking left over from the middle of the last century,
the lack of quality services, and the high price of subscribed
meals). The political activity and presence of women with families
in decision-making is not possible without a reduction in their dual
duties and without the necessary help from society.
The
women’s movement has not lighted upon the things that women’s
interests hold in common, and for lack of this common ground, its
definition of its aims in arbitrary. Given the present social
environment, it is still too weak to become a factor in shaping the
face of contemporary politics. Due to their role in society, women
are missing from their customary set of roles the ability to
integrate into the manly world of power politics. The traits they
have gained in the process of socialization, the competence gained
in the school structure and the workplace, are not in unison yet
with the requirements of a successful political career. Their style
of leadership, however, may come to fruition during the present
century. In the terrain of political opportunities open to them
today, women’s interests can at best trickle into the political
arena through narrow channels, as a result of which women are being
left out of the redistribution of political power. This leads to a
paradoxical situation, namely, that although democracy is a basic
requirement for bringing the interests of special groups to the
surface and asserting them, it is a society in the process of
democratization that is pushing the disadvantaged layers, including
women, to the periphery of the political sphere.
If we are to
find the alternatives for change, when searching for the channels of
change and opportunity, we must look at the factors defining the
political activity of women. The example of the advanced market
economies proves that the speeding up of the integration of women
and the acceleration of the recognition that women should be
integrated is the byproduct of the recognition of mutual interests.
Pressured by European requirements, and in the wake of ratified
treaties, the government will hopefully recognize the necessity for
engaging a larger proportion of women in process of policy making.
It will probably take the European Union’s equal opportunities
policies to make the government change its views on this issue,
because the forces that could bring about the dynamics of change
without outside pressure are missing inside (knowledge and
preparedness, openness, moderation and self-restraint).
The
leading party organizations, during the preparation for the
elections will, in the future, hopefully recognize the necessity of
approaching the principle of parity democracy and will place more
women candidates running for top office on their lists. The union
leaders, too, will hopefully realize that their sphere of influence
with regard to the safeguarding of interests will have to shift
toward female employees, and will reshape their policies in
accordance with the policies of their more advanced European
partners worked out in the 1980s.
In the civil sphere –
including the civil women’s organizations – it is hoped that there
will be increased recognition that self-organization is the major
means of representing special interests and setting limits on power.
It is hoped that in the wake of this new recognition, they will
organize their interest group networks in a more efficient manner,
and that they will make a point of representing and keeping on their
agenda the need for the realization of equal opportunities, which is
part and parcel of any democracy. The women’s movement will,
hopefully, continue to gain strength as women will come to
understand that they are endangered, and it is hoped that women will
join forces with the activists fighting for the recognition and
enforcement of their interests. They will hopefully define, from the
body of common interests, the aims and goals whose representation
they can trust to willing politicians – men and women
both.
On the basis of the above, we may assume that a more
“female friendly” social environment than what we are experiencing
today will inspire all talented and qualified women to take up the
cause of furthering and safeguarding women’s interests in the
interest of society. What they achieve may very well convince the
political parties to nominate more women, and the voters to vote for
them in greater numbers. In this process, which will affect every
member of society, education, a means of consciousness raising on
the level of society, should be ensured a major role. |
|
| News author:
Katalin Koncz |
2007-03-05
| | |