For Equalities Minister Helena Dalli, the government’s ‘roadmap’ for women’s advancement has always been clear: financial independence first. No wonder then the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report for 2016, regarding Malta, does not make impressive reading. The country placed 108 from among 144, performing badly in key areas like economic participation and opportunity, health and political empowerment.
In a message in this newspaper on International Women’s Day, when the theme was ‘Be bold for change’, Dr Dalli said the country should aim to be “bolder” rather than “bold”. No one can disagree with that.
There is no doubt that the government’s decision to provide free childcare to all working parents was a commendable move. It has brought out more women into the labour market at a time when the economy is in boom. However, women’s financial independence does not translate into gender equality. It is quite irrelevant.
Dr Dalli equates financial independence to autonomy, saying that only when women can provide for themselves can they walk away from abusive relationships. No one can disagree there either, but it has nothing to do with women’s advancement. Abusive relationships are not the norm and it is the State’s duty to help women in such situations, whatever their financial situation.
The problem with women’s advancement is not financial, it is cultural. Malta lags behind many other countries but there are areas of success, like in the tertiary sector.
Labour MEP Alfred Sant has argued that quotas are an effective way to increase the number of women in decision-making posts. The lack of female representation in decision-making positions was a result of societal factors and the solution should be a social measure. Quotas were a social, democratic and effective way to bring about the change desired, he said.
It is a suggestion worth considering, and it has nothing to do with financial independence. At the end of the day it is society itself that would bring about the change. It cannot be forced from above, but can be facilitated.
That women go out to work out of financial necessity does not bring about emancipation. The problem many people have is finding the right work-home balance. In other words, it has to do with the family, a major pillar of society.
Under this administration especially, the concept of family has been redefined to take into account the new realities of today. The Civil Unions Act even went as far as to introduce the right of gay couples to adopt, something that the government had no mandate to do. Instead of trying to invent new ways to define the family, the government would do better to support it.
Women have every right to be stay-at-home mums, if they can afford it. It is a decision they are free to make. The same applies to men. They do not need to be made to feel guilty for their choices. They are not less emancipated if they choose to be at home for their children.
Free childcare services help parents to both go out to work, but it does not necessarily help the country to have strong families where children learn life values from their parents.
If the right values are taught at home, women emancipation would follow, with the government providing the necessary support.
Money is not the answer. After all, Dr Dalli herself recognised the value of women in areas outside the working world when on Women’s Day she praised the Prime Minister’s wife for her work in the voluntary sector.