LIBERAL DEMOCRATS PROMISE SHARED PARENTING

It's been good to see so much interest in our articles on the party manifestos and I'm pleased we're even reaching an international audience. Today it's the turn of the Liberal Democrats to have their plans scrutinised.

Whilst the party''s views on education seem somewhat average, they at least recognise that schools are failing if not the fact that they're failing boys far more than anyone else. The proposals on healthcare are marginally better, for example noting that "people often struggle to get convenient access to GP services" though the only genuinely progressive solution from an equality perspective is to allow people to access their GP via email which is something I imagine would particularly appeal to men.

It's not until one reads the section on families that we get to see the most positive and genuinely progressive polices the Lib Dems have to offer. Most significantly there's a commitment to "introduce a Default Contact Arrangement which would divide the child’s time between their two parents in the event of family breakdown" No other party even mentions shared parenting in their manifestos so the Lib Dems are way ahead here.

The party's commitment to fathers is then reinforced by a proposal to "allow parents to share the allocation of maternity and paternity leave between them in whatever way suits them best", with the party actually noting how the current system give fathers two weeks off and whilst the mother get the whole year! There are also smaller commitments to fathers too such as giving them "the right to time off for ante-natal appointments.". Significantly, there's a clear acknowledgement that children are vicitms of family breakdown, although they don't actually list any of the actual consequences. Additionally, there's a recognition the importance of the wider family, such a the role played by a child's grandparents. Of course there are still big gaps, but the party really give the impression they've actually got an understanding of this issue and solutions to offer.

The Lib Dems have always had a strong commitment to civil liberties and their proposals in this area are reasonably positive. Unfortunately there's absolutely no mention of the issue of false allegations but they do at least match the Conservative promise to remove innocent people from the DNA database. Given the issue of false allegations and female sentencing discount, it's obvious the beneficiaries of such a policy will predominantly be men.

The final positive in the manifesto is the recognition that we need more men working in childcare, although disappointingly there's no clues as to how this will be achieved.  The document simply states that "they will support efforts by childcare providers to encourage more men to work in this hugely important and undervalued profession". That's a completely meaningless statement, and you'll never tackle the problem without first addressing wider issues in society such as the threat of false allegations not to mention the "all men are paedophiles" culture nurtured by the Labour Party. Despite such failings, by merely acknowledging this issue Lib Dems are actually ahead of every single party we've reviewed so far which is a quite damming indictment of those organisations.

Regrettably there are several downsides to the Lib Dem manifesto, though nothing too severe. There's the mandatory nonsense on the gender pay gap with the party noting how "women are still paid less than men" without noting the main reasons for this, the most obvious being the fact they spend significantly less time at work! The party claims that "no tax system should try to create total equality of income", yet you do worry there may be elements within the party more concerned with exactly that rather than actual equality of opportunity.

The section on science also has a gendered component, with the party promising to "tackle the gender gap at all levels of scientific study and research to help increase the supply of scientists." I don't deny that there might be a small amount of discrimination against women in certain sciences, but at the same time most women just aren't interested in the field or simply don't have the ability. If your sole objective here is to have more scientists, then you'd be far better off stopping the entire eduction system discriminating against boys, thus meaning the biggest pool of potential scientists dropped out long before even considering higher education.

Other than missing several key issues, such as men's health, false allegations and the gender education gap, perhaps the key flaw in the Lib Dem manifesto isn't any actual policy, but instead the wording and emphasis of some components. For example they state that "When a baby is born, the mother gets a year’s leave and the father gets just two weeks, meaning the mother has to take the lion’s share of the responsibility, even if their partner would rather share things more equally." The phrasing of this sentence tries to suggest that women are somehow the main vicitms of what is clear discrimination against men. The emphasis is totally wrong here, and the key consequences aren't so much the impacts on the mother, but the way the law forces fathers out of a child's life right from the moment they are born. Similarly, aspects such as the the excellent proposal on shared parenting really are far too hidden away in the document rather than a key component, with summarised versions of the manifesto ignoring them completely! One has to wonder why the Liberal Democrats don't make more of the fact they're the only party with such an incredibly progressive and important policy. It's quite strange to see how the campaign has given more emphasis on trivial topics such as the airbrushing of magazine images.

The trend of unfortunate phrasing continues in the proposals on shared parenting with the party adding caveat of "if there is no threat to the safety of the child." I'm not arguing for contact for abusive parents, but the fact is children shouldn't be in contact with abusive adults regardless of their particular marital status. Child abuse and parental separation are completely different issues, it's a bit like saying "we need more male teachers as long as they're not murders or rapists". Further still, the policy isn't actually a commitment to equal parenting and there's no specific mention of who the time is going to be divided. most children have their time divided between two parents, usually at a 20:1 ratio in favour of the mother!

There's also a tendency for the party to pick an choose, for example they correctly note how science education seems to be failing women, yet they choose to pretend the gender education gap doesn't exist.

In conclusion, although the emphasis of Lib Dem manifesto is wrong at times and at times slightly misguided, you really don't detect any of the same nastiness as with say Labour, none of the stupidity of the Conservatives, nor the disgraceful dishonesty of the Green Party. The document contains excellent commitments to shared parenting, fully shared parental leave, promises to remove innocent people form the DNA database and even hints at an awareness of the lack of men involved in childcare (though alas not in education). For the most part, the party does genuinely seem concerned with fairness and even the more dubious parts of the document, such as a focus on the gender pay gap don't actually propose any particularly harmful, or discriminatory actions.

There are obvious concerns such as completely ignoring key issues and they clearly lack answers in some areas. Similarly, shared parenting laws can still be rendered useless through false allegations, so that would be a concern too. Ultimately though, they do appear to understand family breakdown and the Lib Dems are perhaps the only party remotely worthy of any support at the election from an equality perspective. That really doesn't reflect well on the state of our democracy and it would be nice to actually have some sort of choice next time around.

John Kimble

Comments

[paul parmenter]

Thanks again for your analysis, John.

But put this into its electoral perspective. The Lib Dems are extremely unlikely to win the election outright; the best they can hope for is to hold the balance of power in a hung parliament - a result that is looking very likely right now.

In which case, it is a pretty solid bet that they will do what they have always done in similar situations: cosy up with Labour and keep them in power - at a price, of course, which will be thrashed out in secret behind closed doors and away from the eyes and ears of the electorate. All of which will mean that any truly "liberal" ideas will be washed away and will never become government policy. Can you imagine Harriet (or her feminist successor(s) in power, whoever that may be) allowing any concept of equal parenting to see the light of day?

[DThomson]

I think reality has done a bit of debunking of Paul's prediction there.

[BrusselsLout]

Ah, hindsight --- always crushes wrong predictions in its path.

Anyone who managed to predict Nick Clegg's decision to team up with the Tories is either a sage or an idiot.