Hundreds of Westminster seats effectively men-only

Gender equality in Parliament is held back by Westminster’s voting system, according to new research by the Electoral Reform Society.

Gender equality in Westminster is still a work in progress.

[dropcap style=”font-size:100px; color:#992211;”]G[/dropcap]ender equality in Parliament is being held back by Westminster’s voting system, with hundreds of seats effectively ‘reserved’ by incumbent men, according to new research by the Electoral Reform Society.

The figures show that although there is near gender equality among current MPs first elected in 2015 (45% are women), 170 MPs are men first elected in 2005 or before – with few opportunities for women to take those seats or selections.

Campaigners are warning that without change of the system, further progress will be extremely slow.

The problem stems from the fact that long-held seats were first elected in much more unequal times. But the MPs can hold on to their seats due to the one-member, closed-off nature of First Past the Post constituencies, as well the incumbency effect in Britain’s many ‘safe seats’.

Key findings:

  • Of the 212 currently-serving MPs first elected in 2005 or before, just 42 (20%) are women
  • Of 44 current MPs first elected in 1992 or before, only eight of them – 18% – are women

Yet the current levels of gender equality rely on the much better performance by parties in recent elections – especially the last two:

  • Of the MPs remaining who were first elected in 2015, there is near gender parity – 45% are women
  • 37% of MPs first elected in 2017 are women – much further from parity, but still far better than the rate for the ‘old-timers’

However, the dominance of men in long-held seats acts as a ‘major barrier’ to further progress, according to the ERS.

The ERS say the one-member-per-seat nature of First Past the Post exaggerates these problems, with Westminster’s system ‘the worst in the world’ when it comes to gender equality.

The campaigners calling for multi-member seats under a proportional voting system to be introduced, to ensure that women properly contest all seats.

Jess Garland, Director of Policy and Research at the Electoral Reform Society, said:

“While we’ve seen progress on women’s representation in recent elections, gender equality is being held back by Westminster’s broken voting system, which effectively ‘reserves’ seats for men.

“Over 80% of MPs first elected in 1997 or earlier are men, with the one-MP per seat one-person-takes-all nature of First Past the Post leaving few opportunities for women’s representation once a man has secured selection. Sitting MPs have a huge incumbency advantage. And since open selections are relatively rare, we face a real stumbling block in the path to fair representation.

“Parties have made significant strides, with near gender parity among current MPs first elected in 2015. But without change of the system, further progress will be extremely slow.

“Westminster’s single-member seat system is widely regarded as the world’s worst when it comes to achieving gender balance. Proportional multi-member systems – used in democracies around the world – mean there are always real opportunities for improving women’s representation.

“As parties evaluate their progress towards equal representation, they must consider a proportional voting system that puts real democracy and dynamism at the heart of our politics.”


Broadly speaking, the longer an MP has been in Parliament, the more likely they are to be male. MPs. While this has improved in recent years, the majority of MPs remain disproportionately male. MPs in place since 2018 are 68% male, while those elected in 2015 are 69.4% male. Nonetheless, this is an improvement on 2010 (with 75.5% of elected MPs being male), and certainly much better than 2005 and 2001 when 80.2% and 85.3% of constituencies repectively returned a male MP.

The cause of seat blocking

Deselection of sitting MPs by constituency parties is relatively rare. This means a large proportion of Parliament consists of men who have been there for decades. Moreover, the longer an MP holds his/her seat, the less likely a challenge seems.

This, and the prevalence of ‘safe seats’ under Westminster’s voting system, means that once a seat is in an MP’s hands, it may be theirs for decades.

While parties have made strides in recent elections, progress is being held back by the fact that 80% of MPs from 2005 or before are men. And there is little hope of diversity or space for new candidates unless sitting MPs stand down.

Removing the barriers

Recent elections have seen parties redouble their efforts to select women in winnable seats. This has led to major progress in terms of new batches of MPs. As noted, there is near gender parity among current MPs who were first elected in 2015.

Therefore, calling for parties to do more with open seats will now only produce modest gains. Parties need to look more closely at how incumbent men effectively ‘reserve’ a large number of seats.

Multi-member seats and proportional voting systems ensure all elections are open to real competition – including when it comes to gender. First Past the Post (FPTP) is the ‘world’s worst system’ for achieving gender balance, say the campaigners.


These figures are for the total number of MPs remaining in Parliament from that election. These are also yearly dates. So if an MP won a 1997 by election, they count as part of the 1997 intake.

When a sitting MP becomes a member for its successor constituency, they are deemed to have been first elected at the first election for the former constituency.

If an MP moves seats, the methodology deems them to be first elected in year of the new seat. This is because there would have been a fresh selection. E.g. Geraint Davies was MP for Croydon Central from 1997 to 2005 when he lost his seat. Davies was subsequently elected MP for Swansea West in 2010. But as he went through a separate selection battle he is deemed first elected for his seat in 2010.

Original image by Dave Morris @ Flickr. Used and modified under the terms of the Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0) licence.


Comments are closed.

Our weekly newsletter

Sign up to get updates on articles, interviews and events.