This article aims to contribute to the growing literature on the substantive representation of women in conservative parties by evaluating MPs’ claims to ‘act for women’ during parliamentary debates on reproductive health and same-sex marriage in the UK and Australia. It argues that the actions of centre-right MPs who made claims about the situation of women in their speeches can be understood as the substantive representation of women, but the nature of this representation is problematised. While some legislators’ actions can be understood as a ‘feminist’ substantive representation of women, the action of MPs who supported liberalising reforms can be broadly understood as a different kind of ‘conservative’ substantive representation of women, which aims to address women’s status in a more traditional way. This can be differentiated from the actions of a group of conservative MPs who claimed to ‘act for women’ but did not seek to address women’s position (even in a traditional way), which is considered conversely as the representation of conservative interests. This article argues that to fully understand MPs’ legislative behaviour in Westminster democracies, consideration of an MP’s ideological view must be central to any explanation of the substantive representation of women on ‘morality politics’ issues.
As part of recent efforts to advance participatory policymaking, there is increased collaboration between government and women’s groups creating, in principle, ‘deliberative mini-publics’. While there is substantial literature debating the merits of mini-publics, their longer-term influence on ‘macro-political’ environments is still unfolding. This article examines the particular case of a successful collaboration between the New Zealand government and the sexual abuse sector (represented by Te Ohaakii a Hine – National Network Ending Sexual Violence Together or TOAH-NNEST) in the specially commissioned Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence, which ran from 2007 to 2009 to evaluate the processes and politics of engagement. Drawing on interviews and documentary evidence, the article maps the oscillating nature of engagement for TOAH-NNEST, and the gains and losses in partnering with successive governments since its inception in 2006. The analysis in this article identifies the factors that led to the success of the ‘mini-public’/Taskforce, and those that disabled the impacts of the successful collaboration at the macro-political level. The article concludes with a discussion about the challenges of engagement for community groups in dynamic political and policy contexts.
Our study investigates how political candidates’ occupational background and gender influence voters’ perceptions of candidates’ competence to handle a variety of policy issues and voters’ support for candidates. Using experimental data collected among American and New Zealand students (N = 794), our multivariate analyses indicate that students perceive candidates with political experience as most competent in handling security-related issues, candidates with a business background as most competent in handling economic issues, and candidates with a background in education as most competent in handling human services issues. This pattern is similar for male and female candidates and holds in both countries. The effect of candidates’ occupational background on the likelihood to vote for the candidate, however, differs between both countries. Whereas occupational background does not seem to matter for American students, New Zealand students are substantially less likely to vote for a candidate with a business background than for a candidate with political experience.
The article analyzes Taiwan’s legitimacy debate over trade negotiations with China. The theoretical concept of legitimacy is used to assess Taiwan’s cross-straits negotiation mechanism and trade agreements. This article argues that Taiwan’s current legal framework governing congressional supervision of cross-straits agreements falls short of procedural legitimacy and performance legitimacy. By explaining the constitutional design for Taiwan’s "white glove" mechanism, the article explores the initial procedural legitimacy deficit. As cross-straits negotiations involve increasingly substantive obligations, the legitimacy of bilateral agreements has changed fundamentally. The massive protest of the Sunflower Movement due to the Services Trade Agreement reinforced legitimacy concerns. Taiwan’s ambiguous congressional review procedures and negative public perception undermine the performance legitimacy of cross-straits agreements. Notwithstanding the conclusion of free trade agreements with Singapore and New Zealand, Taiwan’s domestic political impasse will jeopardize its efforts to integrate into regional free trade agreements. Hence, the legitimacy of Taiwan’s law and politics regarding cross-straits negotiations will have a profound impact on its cross-straits and foreign trade policies.