Gender Equality

It was n’t meant to be like this.

In her 2022 study of Anthony Albanese, Katharine Murphy describes a prime minister who thought he’d be efficiently managing an optimistic, creative and positive “new politics” that would prefer the Green independents rather than Dutton’s Liberals.

Albanese sounded assured that Labor would have a protracted term in office. He appeared to approve of her research despite afterwards adding Murphy to his communications team.

But, even at the moment Murphy’s Lone Wolf: Albanese and the New Politics was published, several critics, including myself, queried the “new politicians” situation. Although the Greys does represent a new political, it is obvious that we still have a lot of the same old Progressive politics, which was one of cultural wars and opposition to Labor’s economic and climate change policies.

Labor and the Liberals are now neck-and-neck in some elections, with minority government ( or worse ) potentially looming for Labor. However, Gareth Evans and Bill Kelty, key statistics from the Hawke/Keating time, have excoriated the Albanese government’s reportedly mediocre performance.

How did it all go so bad?

Great expectations, reasonable fact

Some of the causes can be attributed to problems in implementing Labor’s 2022 election strategy’s unrealistic expectations.

Albanese went to the 2022 poll with a “new elections”, collaborative-style&nbsp, agenda&nbsp, that sought to bring all Australians, including company, workers, Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, up. It was a small-target plan based on expected common passions, kindness and compassion rather than partisanship.

As a result, Labor successfully countered Scott Morrison’s nationalist, “us versus them” promotion strategy. But, Labor’s approach was to show easier to implement as an election plan than in state, as three cases show.

Second, Albanese channeled Bob Hawke when it came to bringing business and labor up. However, the Hawke government’s reconciliation with company was based on business being able to pay lower wages, because workers had been compensated by a government-funded” cultural income” in the form of benefits and entitlements.

In contrast, the Albanese government pledged to finish the Democratic years ‘ wage stagnation and boost wages in general. A lot of effort was put in place to raise the salaries of low-paid female staff. In the process, Labor tackled issues that arose from Keating’s weak, neoliberal-influenced, business negotiations design.

But, important business organizations criticized Labor’s resulting business relations measures, including multi-employer negotiations, increases in the least pay, and measures designed to address vulnerable and contract job. Business criticisms have largely prevailed over the Liberals.

Second, Labor’s attempts to bring Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians together, via the Voice referendum, fell victim to a divisive, populist campaign by Dutton and others. The Voice proposal, according to Dutton, is an elite” Canberra voice” that would grant Indigenous Australians special rights that other people have been denied, not as a result of a significant national gathering of Indigenous representatives.

Furthermore, he argued that government was so focused on elite “woke” issues such as the Voice, it was neglecting Australian workers ‘ cost-of-living crisis. Labor’s strategy for countering right-wing populism was in disarray.

Albanese’s response to the Voice loss was to go even more” small target” in ways that alienated progressive supporters. He gave up on important commitments, including protecting LGBTQI teachers and students from being fired from religious institutions, including the Treaty and Truth-telling process under the Indigenous Makarrata commission. Another outcome was the controversy over including gender identity questions in the census.

Third, international events and other parties ‘ politicization of them have impeded the government’s attempts at social cohesion. The Albanese government is accused of abandoning support for Israel by the Liberals and the Murdoch press, while the Greens and pro-Palestinian groups are also accused of being” complicit in Israel’s genocide” because the Middle East’s developments have polarized Australian politics.

Narrative failure

The government has struggled when it comes to telling a clear narrative about itself because its original mission of bringing Australians together has been increasingly undermined. By contrast, Dutton’s relentless, focused and simply expressed negativity has been cutting through.

Dutton’s failure to stop them from being able to control them is a part of Labor’s problem.

For example, Dutton’s claim the government has been too distracted by so-called “woke” issues to address the cost-of-living crisis has been particularly electorally damaging for Labor. So do his claims that Labor’s policies on renewable energy are raising inflation and increasing living costs further.

The government argues it has been providing extensive cost-of-living relief in the form of tax cuts, energy bill relief, rental assistance, wage increases, cheaper medicines and reduced childcare costs. However, the problem is that such government measures are being continually undercut by inflation, price increases, high interest rates, and the housing affordability and supply crisis.

However, decades of poor housing policy that predates the Albanese government have made the affordability and supply crisis worse. Furthermore, Labor’s attempts to address it are currently being stymied by a combination of Coalition and Greens opposition, once again sandwiching Labor.

Meanwhile, the Coalition contends that government spending is aggravated by high interest rates and inflation. Even the independent Reserve Bank, which sets cash interest rates and is critical of government spending, has drawn attention to several international factors that contribute to inflation. Some businesses ‘ price increases, which they use to increase their profits, have exacerbated the issue.

Furthermore, Treasurer Jim Chalmers&nbsp, argues&nbsp, that existing government spending levels have been essential to preventing Australia from sliding into recession while still enabling a budget surplus.

In the same way that Keating’s messages did, Chalmers has struggled to get through. However, Keating benefited from the Coalition largely agreeing with his neoliberal-influenced “reform” agenda, despite arguing it was n’t going far enough. By contrast, Chalmers has been facing a fundamentally hostile opposition, unsympathetic to key influences on his thought, such as Mariana Mazzucato.

Labor has also had trouble selling the government’s accomplishments because, as I’ve mentioned in a recent book, some of the Albanese government’s most effective reform initiatives have been focused on gender equality ( although much more still needs to be done ). In what is still a male-defined political culture, reforms that affect women tend to be undervalued despite women accounting for more than half of the population.

Furthermore, the working class is often conceived in terms of blue-collar male employment, so benefits for women workers are not being adequately recognized. This is particularly the case in Dutton’s hyper-masculine, strongman discourse.

Mobilizing gendered leadership stereotypes has been central to Dutton’s populist “us” versus” them” politics. On issues ranging from addressing the cost-of-living crisis to holding asylum seekers who have been released by a High Court decision and supporting Israel, Dutton consistently portrays Albanese as an emasculated “weak” leader.

Dutton is contrasted with the strong leader who will defend the rights of ordinary Australians who have been allegedly abandoned by Labor and the so-called elites.

This does not look like a “new politics” at all and it is a divisive, populist terrain that Labor is finding very difficult to negotiate.

Carol Johnson is emerita professor, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Adelaide

This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

When you think of modern, oil-rich Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates ( UAE), you may picture a life of luxury. However, there is a worrying fact hidden beneath the images of breathtaking skyscrapers and stunning great malls: women are frequently forgotten about.

Even though birthrates seem standard, with approximately 96 baby ladies born for every 100 infant kids, a dramatic change occurs in adulthood. For every 100 people in the Gulf, there are only 58 people. Qatar presents the most extraordinary situation, with only 38 people per every 100 people.

This disparity is largely brought on by an international worker flow. In certain Gulf states, foreign workers make up as much as 95 % of the workforce, and most of these are men.

Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate and economist, coined the phrase “missing people” in 1990 to define populations where ladies are socioeconomically underrepresented. Our estimates, which use data from the World Bank on the world average sex ratios, suggest that about 13 million women are “missing” in full from the Gulf states.

The origins of this sex imbalance are seriously entangled in the country’s cultural traditions. Despite recent reforms, some Gulf nations also have guardianship laws that require women to get adult consent before obtaining important rights, such as getting married, starting a business, or taking a flight.

Additionally, social conventions frequently confine women to household chores, which severely limits their chances of finding employment.

This does not mean that all people in the Gulf have jobs; 40 % of women in the workforce do so right now. However, those that are in employment generally receive smaller wages than their female acquaintances, primarily because they are not expected to remain breadwinners.

Additionally, research has revealed that women are generally unable to access in-person education. Some employers in the area are unwilling to support women’s professional development because they fear they may leave their jobs for family reasons.

holding their economy in check

Millions of women are kept from the work for a significant financial cost. According to a 2013 study, removing barriers to women’s employment was substantially increase growth in southern Mediterranean nations.

A higher percentage of workers may increase the wage gap, which makes it easier for companies to export their goods worldwide. Additionally, having more people at work leads to more money spent and more firm investments.

However, a review from 2015 by British consulting firm McKinsey &amp, Company found that improving women’s justice may include an&nbsp, estimated US$ 600 billion to annual GDP in the Middle East and North Africa region by 2025, compared with a business-as-usual scenario.

Gulf nations are denying themselves new insights that are essential for diversifying beyond crude by sidelining educated women. New research in the Gulf place suggests that having more gender diversity at work makes for better financial decisions.

And the Gulf’s heavy emphasis on foreigners is made even more dire by the restrictions on female work. Workers return a significant portion of their income house, which is a significant drain on Gulf economy. Remittances from Gulf states amounted to$ 669 billion in 2023, according to the World Bank.

Despite the deep-rooted obstacles that lady experience, change is on the horizon. The UAE, for instance, has achieved gender fairness at the political level. Saudi Arabia also lifted its long-standing ban on women driving in 2019, which may improve their flexibility and potential employment prospects.

Many Gulf nations are appointing women to top government jobs, giving clear examples of feminine accomplishment. For example, Shihana Alazzaz was appointed deputy secretary-general of the council of ministers in Saudi Arabia in 2022, becoming the first woman to hold the place.

Women in the Gulf are now home to the majority of university students in the area, creating a powerful talent network.

Both Bahrain and Qatar allow women to serve as magistrates, which is also changing the criminal system. Additionally, the private sector is beginning efforts to motivate people and provide more flexible employment options.

As Gulf nations grapple with the need to expand their markets beyond oil, financial need did undoubtedly speed up the pace of shift. However, these advancements are still insufficient due to the ingrained social norms and persistent legal obstacles that continue to prevent women from engaging in full economic activity.

A dedicated and thorough strategy is required to bring the missing women into the workforce. Legitimate reforms may replace the care regulations that still exist in the workplace. And education and training programs need to align children’s skills with market needs, as well as providing qualified growth possibilities.

A broader social change is also necessary, challenging traditional gender roles through the media, education and open discourse. Additionally, office plans need to be updated to include family-friendly practices and open career development opportunities for women.

This change may be accelerated by financial incentives like government grants or tax breaks for businesses that meet gender diversity goals.

Gulf places ‘ towering skyscrapers are a sign of rapid development. Real progress should not be measured in the benefits that are available to all citizens, but rather in the opportunities that are available to them. The key is today to create societies that harness the potential of both sexes for development, growth, and cultural development.

At Sheffield Hallam University, Amr Saber Algarhi is the head of finance, and Konstantinos Lagos is the head of business and economics.

The Conversation has republished this essay under a Creative Commons license. Read the original post.

Continue Reading