Curtis Matwychuk-Goodman

—

“Women now stand on the threshold of achieving more political power than they have ever had before.  A possible dream can become real if women translate their beliefs and votes into an organized electoral and political force”

Bella Abzug 1984, page 11

his paper will first define gender and what a gender gap is.  It will introduce relevant evidence of the existence of a gender gap in Canadian public opinion in addition to identifying a number of areas of both convergence and divergence of public opinion when gender is considered.  Furthermore, this paper will provide an update on recent developments in the study of gender and public opinion by identifying and explaining the findings of relevant literature.  Finally, this paper will discuss the importance of understanding gender as it applies to the Canadian political system in terms of the three elements of political culture: ideology, policy, and practice.

This paper will find that the way women live their lives today is different than twenty-five years ago.  This would imply that a meaningful difference may have arisen in women’s public opinion over this same time period.  However, there is little evidence suggesting a predictable and stable gender gap on particular issues of public opinion in Canada over time.  Although there have been instances of a gender gap existing, like in the 1988 Free Trade Election and the 1993 and 1997 federal elections.  The most concerning gap that does exist in Canada is the underrepresentation of women in the federal government.  This has implications for issues of equality and there should be a significant consideration of all political parties operating within Canada.

Meaning
What is a Gender Gap?

Gender can be defined as the classification of either the sexes: masculine, feminine, or less commonly neuter.  Gender provides classification of the fundamental differences of human life and can be considered in terms of biology, behaviour, lifestyle, and value patterns.

A gender gap can be thought of as the measureable differences between men and women; the corresponding roles and resulting patterns of “interactions, expectations and conditions towards each other, on themselves and on the opportunities they have.”[1] The gender gap in public opinion is considered to be one of many cleavages that exist in the Canadian political landscape.  A political cleavage is a concept used in analyzing voting behaviour and in some cases divides the voting populace into divisible blocs based on any number of factors (gender, language, religion, and region).[2] Next we will look at the origins of the gender gap by examining salient literature of any such existence in Canadian public opinion.

Origins
Explaining the Gender Gap

There have been instances of significant differences of public opinion between women and men.  One specific instance is the 1988 election which pundits dubbed  the ‘Free Trade Election’ because of the hot topic issue of the FTA with the United States.  In some constituencies there was a fear of job losses in traditional female industries – especially the textile sector; there was a noticeable impact on women’s views towards political parties and their stance on signing such a bilateral initiative.[3]

To explain the gender gap in Canada it is best to review literature and the significance of related research.  The scope of this paper will be limited to briefly discussing the findings from: the Status of Women Canada 2001; Kay, Lambert, Brown and Curtis 1987; Everitt 1998; O’Neill, Erickson 2002; Gidengil, Nevitte, Blais 2004.  Based on this literature review it will become clear that a gender gap does exist in public opinion but it is not stable or predictable over time.

First let us examine statistical evidence produced by the Status of Women Canada (SWC) that identifies major differences that have emerged in the roles of Canadian women over a twenty-five year period.  The SWC is a government department that produced “A Quarter Century of Change: Young Women in Canada in the 1970s and Today,” it effectively compares and contrasts the lives of women aged 20-29 over a period of twenty-five years. [4] Highlights of the quarter-century between 1976 and 2001 shows a change in four key areas[5]:

1. The percentage of total Canadian women aged 20-29 who were married in 1976 was 64.6%; compared to 41.9% in 2001 which indicates a 23% decline over time.[6]
2. There has been a marked decrease in the birth rate over time same time period – in 1976 there were 100 births per 1000 women – in 2001 this statistic was only 58 births per 1000 women.
3. Women’s enrollment in post-secondary education has seen a marked increase where the percentage of women with a degree in 1976 was 8.6%; in 2001 it was 21.4%.
4. “In 2001 71% of all women [aged 20-29] were part of the paid work force, up from 58% in 1976.” However, women are much more likely to be employed part-time and to be lassified as having lower incomes than men.  A significant majority of women are limited to positions in sales and service, clerical, teaching, or nursing.[7]

This body of research indicates that women are being employed in greater numbers, face lower levels of income-equity than male counterparts and are more likely to be employed only part-time.  Interestingly women are doing a double-duty in society as they are most likely responsible for a greater share of domestic duties including child care, cooking and cleaning.[8]

An interesting factor that is considered by the SWC is that multiculturalism adds an increasingly complex element to understanding women in Canada.  The research indicates that immigrant women, especially those of a ‘visible-minority,’ face extraneous hurdles above and beyond that of the average Canadian.  This research suggests that immigrant women are: more likely to be unemployed and have lower income levels; they are also more likely to live in either Toronto or Vancouver; and are now characteristically from Asia and the Middle East whereas before were typically from Europe. [9] This is concerning especially since on average women earn only seventy-two percent of their male counterparts.[10] This research suggests that the role of women in society has dramatically changed in the last twenty-five years.  Now let us examine how this has been explained as a result of changes in cultural socialization,

In the 1980s Barry Kay, Ronald Lambert, Steven Brown, and James Curtis (Kay et al.) explained the difference in gender and political activity as a result of a variety of factors: cultural socialization, role constraints, and the absence of mobilizing issues.[11] Utilizing data from six Canada Election Studies (CES) they were unable to identify general trends in gender-related differences in political activity.  The two major findings of their work suggest: women who have children are significantly less likely to participate in politics; and women with higher levels of education or income were more likely to have increased level of political activity.  Through further research the situational factors of children, education and income would later be confirmed as factors of the gender gap in Canada:

The gender difference becomes (marginally) significant only if we incorporate religiosity into our model.  Women are more religious than men, and it is in good part because of their greater religiosity that they are as likely to vote as men. (GIDENGIL, NEVITTE and BLAIS 2004, 232)

Gidengil et. al found that voter turnout is proportionally better among those: with higher incomes, who are married and are more religious.  These findings provide evidence that well-off women will have a higher propensity to vote as a result of their status in society.  These findings are logical and seem to be true of men as well – where educated, well-off individuals are much more active in politics.  This suggests that there is an element of gender gaps between the socialization of women and men that results in women being disinterested in the political while men are the opposite.

In the 1990s Joanna Everitt provided valuable insight of the gender gap in Canadian public opinion as related to cultural socialization.  Her article “Public Opinion and Social Movements: Women’s Movement and the Gender Gap in Canada” describes the women’s movement that resulted in a significant gender role change.[12] This role change dates back to the need for increased participation of women in all areas of society outside the home; which resulted in the women’s movement and eventually the post-women’s movement.[13] Everitt’s research suggests that support for feminism and equality issues gained considerable support during the period between the 1970s and 90s evenly among both men and women.  Furthermore support of such ideas is found among people socialized or directly influenced by the women’s movement which is more likely to occur in the young and is even more articulated when education and employment variables are isolated.[14] Overall, Everitt does conclude that “women’s support for feminism stems from personal experiences and gender consciousness whereas men’s develops from an ideological predisposition to equality.”[15] However, Everitt indicates her research is not able to identify clear and persistent differences of Canadian attitudes as related to gender.

This is confirmed by Brenda O’Neill and Lynda Erickson’s article “The Gender Gap and the Changing Woman Voter in Canada;” which provides an analysis of an emerging gender gap during the period between 1965 and 1997.[16] The article attempts to apply the realignment thesis, a common post-industrialist explanation for the gender gap in the United States, to Canadian political culture.  The realignment thesis purports that traditionally women were more likely to vote for centre-right parties; whereas “contemporary women voters have not just converged towards their male counterparts but are moving to the left of them.”[17] The results of the O’Neill/Erickson study demonstrate a gender value-change has occurred in Canada outside of Quebec and results as from structural gender role-changes.

Changes such as the extraordinary growth in women’s labour force participation and the increase in women’s levels of education could contribute to more leftwing voting preferences among women when combined with factors such as the occupational segregation, lower pay rates and higher levels of public sector employment that women experience compared to men and which are still features of postindustrial societies. But gender role changes and the structural/situational factors that accompany them are also said to both cause and interact with changes in cultural values and dispositions.[18]

The change towards post-industrialism exerts that role-changes having a positional gendered-effect on social values characteristically found in voting choices over time.   As a result of realignment an additional factor to consider in voting choice is the changed perceptional relevance of political issues to members of each gender.  In this way O’Neill et. al suggests a strong correlation exists between the importance of religion in making voting decisions; where women factor religion as a more important factor in casting their vote.  They acknowledge past research that has included religion as a structural or situation explanation for the gender gap in voting in addition to other demographic factors like class, marital status and age.[19]

In the 1997 election O’Neill et. al detected an increase in support for the NDP among women.  “Then, not only were women more likely to avoid a party clearly on the right, but they also showed more support for a party of the left.”[20] However, this is offset by the fact there is little evidence that a gender gap existed in the 1993 election results; where the Liberals and Conservatives shared a small gap in support among the genders.  The lack of a gender gap in 1993 was expected to have occurred as a result of Kim Campbell’s leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party; who was to emerge as Canada’s first female Prime Minister.  That is to suggest that female leadership of the Conservative party may have influenced voter decision-making.[21]

Together Everitt and O’Neill have identified that there are inconsistencies in public opinion as related to gender issues.  They suggest there are two ways of understanding this based on: structure and situation.  Structurally women are believed to be more reliant on the state by being more likely to be employed by the public sector and more likely to access welfare/social programs.  This may be exacerbated by gendered patterns of employment where women are concentrated in traditionally low-paying jobs and face significant pay discrimination.  The second explanation is situational, since women are the maternal force of society their thinking is fundamentally linked to compassion and providing support for those in need.  There are also gender-specific issues representing a material self-interest for women like: feminism, abortion, workplace discrimination, and lack of representation in government.  The result of structural and situational pressures on gender differences materializes in women preferences that are: generally more supportive of the welfare state, less supportive of the free-enterprise system, and more reluctant to the use of force.[22] If this is the case then one would expect to find differences of opinion in Canadian political culture on an issue-by-issue basis.

Implications
The Gender Gap in Canadian Political Culture

How does gender impact Canadian political culture?  Nelson Wiseman reminds us that a country can be understood by examining the political culture – or the patterns of a political community’s ways of life.  Political culture exists as a construction of inhabitants’ ideology, policies, and practices.[23] There are two ways of approaching understanding political culture in Canada.  The first is to study emergent properties through development of institutions and explaining history.  This will be done over the next three sub-sections.  The second way is a snapshot in time of personal preferences as interpreted from aggregate survey data; which has been presented in the previous section and can be found in the appendices.  Using this understanding let us examine the Canadian context of political culture by briefly describing each element: first the ideology, then the stages of policy-development and finally the political practices in terms of federal parties and voter turnout.

Canadian Political Culture
Ideology & Structure

Canadian political culture is ideologically and structurally based on a constitutional monarchy.  The monarchy is represented by the Governor General (GG) of Canada which symbolizes the top of the structural hierarchy.  The GG works as the commander-in-chief to the benefit of the entire nation by ensuring the constitution is upheld throughout all courses of government action.  The constitution outlines federal and provincial jurisdictional powers which are overseen by the GG.  The constitution formalizes many democratic values of which equality is entrenched in the Canadian constitution and is guaranteed to all citizens.[24] This includes equality of gender.  It is therefore important for political actors to pursue a course of action that minimizes any negative impacts resulting from gender gaps.  It is interesting to note that of the twenty-seven GGs in Canadian history only eleven-percent, or three have been female – Jeanne Sauvé (1984-1990), Adrienne Clarkson (1999-2005), and Michaëlle Jean (2005-present).  In terms of equality of representation at the highest level Canadian politics is obviously lacking the woman perspective.[25] Through all levels of federal government it is clear that women account for only 19% – 29% of total membership.  This suggests a structural-deficiency of female participation in politics especially at the executive level.

Canadian Political Culture
Policy-development

The second element of political culture is found in the policies of a nation.  In Canada policy is developed at a federal and provincial level.  Provincial governments are responsible for many aspects of daily life, but our discussion will be limited to federal level politics.  The federal government is a parliamentary democracy divided by an appointed Senate (Upper House) and the elected House of Commons (Lower House).  Currently the House of Commons is represented by three national parties (Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrat) and one regional party (Bloc Quebecois).  Over the past twenty-five years the national parties have remained very similar – the exceptions being the conservative parties merging at the turn of the century and the emergence of the Green Party.  The parties are elected by a first-past-the-post system in 308 local constituencies each of which represent a seat in the House of Commons.  The House of Commons is the main legislative body of the Canadian government; all legislation is passed pending approval from first the Senate and then ascension by the Governor General.

When examining female representation in the main policy process in Canada it is best to look at representation in political parties.  Female representation over time can be found in Table 5:  Total Female Representation by Party in All Sessions of the House of Commons; it provides evidence from Parliamentary records since Confederation in 1867 of the total number of females elected to the House of Commons. [26] In the one-hundred and forty-two year history of Canadian policy-making there have been a total of 216 elected female representatives.  The Liberal Party has been the most representative of women over time with 90 seats, while the aggregate of all Conservative parties are a distant second with 70 seats. [27] Since these two parties have dominated the political landscape in Canada it is not surprising that they account for nearly 75% of total historical female representation in the House of Commons.  It is concerning, however, that women have only ever held 5.2% of the total possible seats available over this same time period.  Moreover, there has only ever been one woman to form a government in Canada – Kim Campbell who led the Progressive Conservative Party in 1993 for a brief period between two of the most influential Prime Ministers of recent history Brian Mulroney and Jean Chretien.  This is compelling evidence of a significant underrepresentation by females throughout Canadian history in the primary policy-making process.

Looking further at the involvement of women at the federal level of politics we see a staggering lack of representation in the Senate.  Of the 903 total Senate appointments only nine-percent, or 82, were women.[28] Although this is significant of greater representation when compared to the House of Commons it still represents a severe lack of female involvement in the federal political process.  In the history of Canada the Liberal Party has appointed fifty women, the most of any party, to the Senate.  The ideological-right, or the aggregate of all Conservative parties over time, accounts for only twenty-eight appointments, while the ideological-left accounts for just one nomination.

Although a historical perspective is helpful, perhaps it is best to look at most recent data especially since female participation and representation has made a real breakthrough since the turn of the millennium.  Comparing the most recent elections (2004, 2006, 2008) we see the greatest shift in female representation away from the Liberals towards both the Conservatives and the NDP.[29] In these elections there has been a noticeable shift in the balance of power among political parties – from strong consecutive Liberal electoral victories to weak minority governments now dominated by the Conservatives.  With this shift in political power distribution there has been steady change in female representation overall.  In fact, the 2004 and 2008 election heralded record results for female representation in the House of Commons; with 65 and 69 female members being elected representing 21.1% and 22.4% of winning candidates respectively[30].  However, looking at female representation by political party we see considerable changes.  Appendix Table 6 shows that the number of elected female Liberal Party candidates has dropped by more than forty-percent. [31] Meanwhile, the NDP have more than doubled their female representation in the House of Commons; increasing the total number of seats held by women from just five in 2004 to twelve in both 2006 and 2008.  Likewise the Conservative Party has almost doubled female representation among their party in the same time period; with the biggest improvement in the 2008 election.

Canadian Political Culture
In Practice

The final element in describing political culture is found in the political practices of a nation.  This can be broken down into two categories of inquiry: how political parties operate and how Canadians interact with the political system which is best seen through voter turnout.

So how do federal political parties operate in Canada?  In the past twenty-five years of Canadian politics there have legitimately only been two parties vying to form government – the Liberals and the Conservatives.  However, Canada is characteristic of having a multi-party system which effectively splits the vote among other fringe-parties including the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois.   As a result of the multi-party system Canadian political parties are notorious for engaging in brokerage interest politics.  This means they are in constant conflict over the ‘centre-ground’ on popular issues of the day in an attempt to maintain and gain support during times of re-election.  Table 6 & 7 demonstrate that the Liberals have been the most successful in securing representation of women in executive levels of Canadian politics.  Throughout history the Liberals have been the most ideologically-centrist and therefore have been met with great electoral success.

Voter turnout is one of the most accurate measures of political culture at the individual level since it measures participation at the most accessible level to all citizens.  The Canadian Election Study (CES) provides comprehensive data which includes a broad evaluation of “respondent opinions about politics, political parties and leaders, and media and campaign activities.”[32] This data is used in many research studies and allows for accurate understanding of the three components of how an individual practices political culture.  The three components of political culture are: cognition, affection, and evaluation.  Cognition is how much one knows and understands their political culture.  Affection is how an individual feels towards their political culture through likes and dislikes.  And evaluation refers to judgments’ towards particular aspects of such a culture.  Although there are many models of voting behaviour this paper will adopt the Rational Choice Model of voting behaviour.  In this model elections are thought of as markets where national parties are producers and citizen-voters are consumers.[33] In such a model all actors want to minimize the political cost while maximizing political gains.  The rational choice model implies that voters are aware of their self-interest and of alternatives which leads them to make rational choices consistent with their self-interests.  This model is held in esteem because it is simple and relatively straight-forward in explaining voting behaviour.  However, it lacks an explanation of where individual preferences come from.  In addition this model assumes voters are fully rational in their decision-making which is questionable given personal preferences for habitual acts and a general laziness among the populace to commit time to becoming fully aware of the issues to make informed decisions.  The Rational Model would suggest women would be more likely to vote Liberal given the greater potential to gain political representation at the Senate level.  This was not confirmed during the most recent election 2008; a pre-election survey was conducted of approximately two-thousand Canadian citizens.[34] The results of this survey suggested a significant age gap exists between gender and political party preference.  When asked “If a federal election were held tomorrow, which party would you vote for?” men were more likely to response Conservative; while in each case women were more likely to vote Liberal, NDP, or Green.[35] The survey results also suggest that this gender gap exists in correlation to age demographics; where older men were more likely to prefer the Conservative Party and young women were more likely to prefer the NDP.

Discussion

This paper has discussed many issues related to the gender gap in public opinion and Canadian political culture.  It has suggested that literature on these issues explain the gap as a result of changes in structural and situational ways.  Gender is one of many cleavages which effectively divide public opinion over time and is one of many others like: age, religion, employment, and income.  All these factors combine as influencing events of an individual’s life – which act in concert with transformative events that arise from both situational and structural gender roles and expectations.

This paper has demonstrated that gender gaps have occurred in Canada on a number of issues.  Significant issues in the last twenty-five years are: the Free Trade Election of 1988, the 1993 general election that resulted in the first women Prime Minister, and both the 1997 and 2000 election that showed substantial female support of the NDP or leftist party.  Even most recently in the 2008 pre-election studies a gender gap has been evidenced in men’s general support of the Conservative Party and greater women’s support for all non-conservative parties.  There a numerous explanations for why a gender gap may exist – trying to accurately describe the gap is difficult.

Gender and corresponding gaps should be important considerations for any Canadian political party.  Since an individual’s political culture is based on cognition, affection and evaluation these findings should help federal parties to mobilize voter support by emphasizing specific gender-friendly platforms.  If a particular gender is pre-disposed to thinking or feeling a specific way then the parties that appeal to women may see an increase in voter support.  The 1993 election results suggest that a woman party leader may impact voter behaviour.

This paper has also demonstrated the significant lack of gender equality in representation of all executive levels of Canadian political culture.  Although this trend is beginning to change, women still lack representation-equity which presents a serious concern. Equality is constitutionally guaranteed therefore the strength of our democracy and meaningfulness of our formal political institutions could be gauged by the equity in representation of all citizens.  Currently Canada is not a leader in gender equity in political culture but has made some gains in recent years.  The most important thing is for Canadian political culture to support and encourage fairness and consideration for all of humanity.  This is especially true at the most executive levels of the policy process of the Canadian government.

APPENDIX

Table 1:
Ekos Poll – 2008 Federal Vote Intention by Demographics^[36]

Q. If a federal election were held tomorrow, which party would you vote for?

Table 2:
Demographic Factors of Women Aged 20-29 between 1976 and 2001[37]

Table 3:
Occupational Distribution – Statistics Canada Labour Force Survey, 1998[38]

Table 4:
Earnings of Women Employed Full-Time, Full-Year, as % of those of men,
by province, 1997[39]

Table 5:
Distribution of Positions of Power as a Percentage of Total Membership[40]

Table 6:
Total Female Representation by Party in All Sessions of
the House of Commons[41]

Table 7:
Total Female Senate Appointments by Party Affiliation[42]

Table 8:
Female Representation in Federal Parties by Election Result 2004-2008[43]

Bibliography

Abzug, Bella. Gender Gap; Bella Abzug’s Guide to Political Power for American Women. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1984.

Cohen, Marjorie Griffen. Feminism’s Effect on Economic Policy. Vol. 2, chap. 4 in Canadian Womens Issues: Bold Visions, by Ruth Roach Pierson and Marjorie Griffen Cohen, 281. Toronto, ON: James Lorimer & Company Publishers , 1995.

EKOS Election. “Election Harper’s to Lose.” EKOS Election. September 2008. http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2008/09/election-harpers-to-lose-2/ (accessed November 27, 2009).

Elections Canada . 40th General Election. http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=loi&dir=res/40eval&document=index&lang=e#14 (accessed November 30, 2009).

Everitt, Joanna. “Public Opinion and Social Movements: The Women’s Movement and the Gender Gap in Canada.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 31, no. 4 (1998): 743-765.

Gidengil, Elisabeth, Andre Blais, Richard Nadeau, and Neil Nevitte. “Women to the Left? Gender Differences in Political Beliefs and Policy Preferences.” In Gender and Elections in Canada, by Manon Tremblay and Linda Trimble.

GIDENGIL, ELISABETH, NEIL NEVITTE, and ANDRÉ BLAIS. “Where does turnout decline come from?” European Journal of Political Research (Blackwell Publishing) 43 (2004): 221–236.

Heard, Andrew. Women & Canadian Elections. October 2008. http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/women.html (accessed November 28, 2009).

Jansen, Dr. Harold. Political Science 3280: Canadian Political Behaviour. University of Lethbridge. Fall 2009.

Kay, Barry J, Ronald D Lambert, Steven D Brown, and James E Curtis. “Gender and Political Activity in Canada, 1965-1984.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 20 (1987): 851-863.

Lindsay, Colin and Almey, Marcia. A Quarter Century of Change: Young Women in Canada in the 1970s and Today. Policy Research, Status of Women , Canada, Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2005.

O’Neill, Brenda, and Lynda Erickson. “The Gender Gap and the Changing Woman Voter in Canada.” International Political Science Review 23, no. 4 (2002): 373-392.

Parliament of Canada. Women Federal Political Representation 1867 – Date. November 2009. http://www2.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/compilations/parliament/WomenRepresentation.aspx?Menu=HOC-Representation (accessed November 27, 2009).

Peebles, Dana. Increasing gender Inputs into Canadian International Trade Policy Positions at the WTO. Policy Research, Canada, Ottawa: Status of Women Canada, 2005.

Status of Women Canada. Women and Men in Canada: A Statistical Glance. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2000, 27 pages.

Wiseman, Nelson. In Search of Canadian Political Culture. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2007.

[2] (Jansen 2009)

[3] (Cohen 1995, 281)

[4] (Lindsay 2005)

[5] See Appendix Table 2:  Demographic Factors of Women Aged 20-29 between 1976 and 2001

[6] (Lindsay 2005, 4)

[7] Ibid. page 9

[8] See Appendix Tables 2 & 3

[9] (Lindsay 2005, 14)

[10] See Appendix Table 4:  Earnings of Women Employed Full-Time, Full-Year, as % of those of men,  by province, 1997

[11] (Kay, et al. 1987)

[12] (Everitt 1998)

[13] The women’s movement or ‘feminism’ can be described as increased awareness on issues of: domestic violence, maternity leave, equal pay, voting rights, sexual harassment, and sexual violence.

[14] (Everitt 1998, 746)

[15] (Everitt 1998, 755)

[16] (O’Neill and Erickson 2002)

[17] Ibid. page 373

[18] Ibid.

[19] (Studlar, McAllister, and Hayes 1998; Inglehart and Norris, 2000 as cited by O’Neill et. al 2002)

[20] (O’Neill and Erickson 2002, 379)

[21] Ibid.

[22] (Everitt, Kopinak, Terry, Wearing as cited by O’Neill et. al 2005)

[23] (Wiseman 2007, 13)

[24] Explicitly found in Part I – Section 2.6 and Part III of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

[25] See Appendix Table 5:  Distribution of Positions of Power as a Percentage of Total Membership

[26] See Appendix Table 6:  Total Female Representation by Party in All Sessions of  the House of Commons

[27] Aggregate refers to combination of the Canadian Alliance, Conservative Party of Canada, Progressive Conservative, and Reform as one “Conservative Party”

[28] See Appendix Table 7:  Total Female Senate Appointments by Party Affiliation

[29] This is confirmed in “Women to the Left? Gender Differences in Political Beliefs and Policy Preferences” by Gidengil, et al.

[30] (Heard 2008)

[31] See Appendix Table 8:  Female Representation in Federal Parties by Election Result 2004-2008

[32] (Elections Canada n.d.)

[33] (Jansen 2009)

[34] (EKOS Election 2008)

[35] See Appendix Table 1:  Ekos Poll – 2008 Federal Vote Intention by Demographics

[36] (EKOS Election 2008)
Note: Random sample of 2000 Canadians aged 18 and over responded to the survey; estimated margin of error +/- 2.2 percentage points (19 times out of 20). Survey completed September 2 to September 4, 2008.

[37] (Lindsay 2005)

[38] (Status of Women Canada 2000, 16)

[39] (Status of Women Canada 2000, 23)

[40] (Status of Women Canada 2000, 26)

[41] (Parliament of Canada 2009)

[42] (Parliament of Canada 2009)

[43] (Heard 2008)