Deborah Coddington: National's propensity to dump on women

Here's a little test.

The National Party believes its own women are for:
a) Bedding
b) Ignoring
c) Discarding
d) All of the above, not necessarily in that order

The exceptions to this are:
a) President Judy Kirk
b) MP for Clevedon Judith Collins
c) MP for Auckland Central Pansy Wong
d) All of the above

This is because these National women are:
a) Very capable and almost won the 2005 election for National
b) Very formidable and National men are scared of them
c) Very Asian and we live in multicultural times
d) All of the above

I'm not entirely serious, but if National wants to win the next election it has to do something about its propensity to dump on women. National is gratified that a combination of Dr Cullen's miserly budget and its own attacks on the Government saw its polling rise to 47 per cent, while Labour dropped to 38 per cent. But without a viable coalition partner, National needs a clear majority in 2008 to save it from another term in Opposition.

National has to take votes off Labour, and that means not overlooking the women's vote. Labour's internal polling of women shows it has, on average, a 10 point lead over National, and when it comes to social issues, Labour streaks ahead. An April 2006 UMR Research poll on party vote put Labour on 49.6 per cent for women and National on 36.2 per cent.

The hard bit for National will be changing its attitude to women, and that's not simply killing the nasty remarks across the debating chamber about "childless" Labour women MPs who, the thinking goes, are therefore gay and have no credibility when it comes to families.

By implication National is dumping on (again) one of its own - Dr Marilyn Waring. Unfairly known as being the first "openly gay" MP, she represented National from 1975 to 1984, and fought hard for families. In her book, Counting For Nothing, she wrote that as a politician, "I found it virtually impossible to prove that childcare facilities were needed. 'Non-producers', housewives, mothers who are 'inactive' and 'unoccupied' cannot, apparently, be in need."

But this cavalier behaviour has outlived Waring's nemesis, Sir Robert Muldoon. Ruth Richardson, Finance Minister, was in constant threat of being sacked from her portfolio because she upset the do-nothing, go-nowhere reign of Prime Minister Jim Bolger, aka The Great Helmsman.

Richardson produced a video for the 1993 National Party Conference, using real people in the workforce whose lives had actually benefited from policies she'd driven through. It saved her job for a while, but ultimately she was dumped on and discarded.

And who was going to save National's butt at the 2002 election? A flash new president, Michelle Boag. When that plan produced a disastrous result, it was all blamed on the hapless Boag. She was dumped on from a great height, but being a National stalwart supporter from way back, Boag swallowed her pride and accepted her fate.

There have been less public dumpings - Glenda Hughes, for instance, brought in to "mind" former leader Bill English and tossed aside like a smelly running-shoe when English was ousted by Don Brash. Then, when the new leader cleaned out the superfluous personnel, National sacked some of their best researchers - off they went to have babies.

Take the treatment of Linda Scott, Katherine Rich and Georgina Te Heuheu - possibly the only National MPs who could appeal to the intelligence and compassion of women, but side-lined and/or sacked from their portfolios for standing on principle. Dumped on, discarded, and now ignored.

Scott retired in disgust. Look hard on National's website and you'll find excellent speeches by Rich - on feminism and economic development - but te Heuheu, knowing how dumb National can be on Maori issues, speaks only on marae and wisely biffs her notes in the bin.

Attracting women voters is not just about publishing photos of nice mums with babies in campaign brochures. That's an insult to women, who - if the focus groups Act conducted are any indication - are more persuaded by a political "brand" than particular policies.

For instance, I reckon 95 per cent of New Zealand women never give a moment's thought to the cost of the Ministry of Women's Affairs. But abolish it, as National says it will do, and that will be taken as an attack on the status of all women. Keeping this bureaucracy ain't a vote winner, but axing it is a vote loser.

When the Right Honourable Sir Robert Muldoon gave his valedictory speech 15 years ago he said when he saw a "nice lady" he had an urge not to roar at her but to pat her. Brash, would be horrified at such a remark, but at the last election it was he who said he couldn't attack Prime Minister Helen Clark on television debates because of her gender. So have the male leopards in this party really changed their spots?