This year, the heated non-debate in Aotearoa New Zealand about pay equity, has left important answers unquestioned.

Equal Pay versus Pay Equity

The first point that must be made is to distinguish ‘equal pay’ from ‘pay equity’. Equal pay means, for different identity groups, the same pay for the same work. The concept has been mainly applied to sex, and to employees paid by the hour; with equal pay, a woman with the same qualification and experience receives the same hourly pay rate as a man.

In New Zealand, this was mandated into law in 1972 – the 1972 Equal Pay Act – and has been an unwavering centrepiece of New Zealand’s labour law ever since. Before 1972, women gained a ‘market wage’, and men – presumed to be current or future ‘family breadwinners’ – received a privileged wage. (This privileged wage was enabled, especially from December 1938, by a regime of import protection – tariffs and customs’ duties – which meant that New Zealand breadwinners were sheltered from direct competition with foreign workers earning much lower wages.)

As recently as last week, supporters of ‘pay equity’ (including the great-grandson of Elizabeth McCombs), were claiming that ‘equal pay for equal work’ is a current aspiration rather than a long-standing reality. (Refer First female MP would have been ‘appalled’ by pay equity changes, says great grandson, The Post, 11 August 2025: “I grew up with … ‘women [and] girls can do anything’, you know – equal work, equal pay. It just seems absurd that my daughters and granddaughters are still fighting for the same thing that my great grandmother and her sisters fought for.” The Post article, in making no attempt to mention the 1972 introduction of Equal Pay, was perpetuating a kind of politics based on assertion rather than knowledge. Also note this RNZ article: Unofficial People’s Select Committee Starts Pay Equity Hearings, Scoop, 11 August 2025. ‘Equal pay’ is mentioned three times. Of those three, the only mention relevant to the theme of ‘pay equity’ was by the Minister, Brooke van Velden. No effort was made by the authors of the story to reconcile the contradictory references to ‘equal pay’. Not even basic fact-checking, re 1972.)

Pay equity is something different from equal pay. It is corrective remuneration in a case where a whole occupation is underpaid on the basis of employer-discrimination against an identity group. In the situation which has been politicised in Aotearoa in 2025, that identity group is women. A pay equity correction is made by the authorities proclaiming and enforcing a new relativity re some ‘comparator occupation’ whose work is deemed equivalent.

Clearly, like the privileged men’s wages of the distant past, success here would be a privileged wage in the sense that it is imposed by ‘the state’ onto the labour market. Before such a pay-equity correction can be authorised, the alleged discrimination itself needs to be verified (beyond reasonable doubt?). Under present and past law, to be allowed to establish inter-occupational discrimination, the claimant occupation’s employees should be predominantly women. I would define female-dominant as meaning at least twice as many women as men in non-managerial roles. (On this basis, primary school teaching would meet the criterion; but secondary school teaching would not.) To prove discrimination, you have to be able to make a very strong claim that the reason for alleged under-remuneration is the sex-ratio, meaning that if two-thirds of the workers were men then that under-remuneration would not have occurred. (Is it credible that female secondary-school teachers are significantly meeker than male secondary-school teachers?)

By definition, remuneration based on pay-equity is a departure from a market-clearing outcome, so a pay-equity settlement would need to address the problem of an overpriced market; such as an employer subsidy (for an occupation in the economy’s non-tradable-sector) or an export subsidy (for an occupation in the tradable-sector). We note that the pre-1972 ‘privileged wage’ paid to men had coincided with some forms of protection, such as import protection. In a 2020s’ fiscal environment, we have already seen that higher nurses’ pay has led to fewer nurses being hired; that is, given the financial constraints imposed on the principal hiring authority.

We need to note that the fact that an occupation is female-dominant does not in itself mean that there must be inter-occupational pay-discrimination. Conversely, it is also possible that some occupations which have a majority of male workers may be subject to adverse discrimination; occupations with large numbers of immigrant workers come to mind.

Equal pay in 1972 was a revolution which both reflected societal changes (from the 1930s) of sex roles – from prescribed household economic roles towards individualism within households and towards greater diversity in household structures – and also facilitated such changes, even towards the adoption of subjective notions of what ‘male’ and ‘female’ actually mean. While the practical effect of equal pay was to replace the legislatively privileged male real wage with an unprivileged market wage, the wider effect was to incentivise individual labour force participation, making paid work (as distinct from ‘pay’ itself) come to be understood more as a ‘benefit’ and less than the ‘cost’ that it unequivocally is in neoclassical economics. Households needed to supply more hours of work. And paid work came to be interpreted as ‘liberation’. (We note that New Zealand’s benefit system remains the major discriminator against women; the Ministry for Social Development continues to uphold the view that unemployed people with employed partners cannot receive a job-seeker benefit.)

Ironically, in the year after the Marshall-Muldoon National government introduced Equal Pay, Roger Douglas, a junior minister in the Third Labour Government, introduced a comprehensive New Zealand Superannuation Scheme; a scheme which was fully predicated on the traditional view of the male householder as a breadwinner supporting female and junior dependents. It was Robert Muldoon, once again, who rescued the progressive new individualism over the increasingly quaint and regressive ‘working-class male-breadwinner’ social milieu; Muldoon scrapped New Zealand Superannuation in its infancy, replacing it in 1976 with National Superannuation, a Universal Basic Income for seniors (defined, practically, as all New Zealanders aged over 60); this was a comprehensive reinstatement of the ‘Universal Superannuation’ legislated for by the First Labour Government – the Savage government – in 1938.

New Zealand is still one of the few countries in the world to have any kind of rights-based Universal Basic Income, although today the age of eligibility is 65; and it now has the name of Douglas’s very different scheme, New Zealand Superannuation (NZS). As important way in which NZS reflects the liberal ambitions of Equal Pay is that it creates a liberal retirement-income regime, individualised, facilitating individual choice over when to retire; and acknowledging the societal contributions of those in their ‘working-age’ lives (including many women) who did not ‘make lots of money’. (Sadly, one of the first things the Labour Government quietly did in 2020 was to disqualify people – about 90% of whom were women – from accessing NZS as a ‘non-qualifying spouse’; this former provision for retired couples ensured that partners aged under 65 of persons aged over 65 could gain an income-tested version of NZS.)

The rise of the Funded Sector

It’s always been a bit of a puzzle as to why, in the late 1980s, barely 15 years after Equal Pay, the Trade Union movement started to clamour for something else; for Pay Equity. Part of the answer is that ‘organised labour’ changed fundamentally after 1984, under the auspices of ‘Rogernomics’ and ‘Ruthenasia’. And part of that fundamental change was the decline of the traditional male-dominated trade unions which in some cases fought valiantly, but in a fated struggle, to retain high wage jobs for their members.

In its place, we saw the rise of ‘white collar’ unions, which proved to be a substantial feminisation of unions. We saw a dichotomy between what is now called the ‘funded sector’ and New Zealand’s traditional export-focused private sector with its freezing workers, railwaymen, seamen, wharfies, miners, and workers in protected manufacturing industries such as car-assembly. The ‘funded sector’ is a wide interpretation of the ‘public sector’, where employment opportunities are directly linked to governments’ fiscal programmes and policies; it includes crown entities, state owned enterprises, state-contracted organisations such as the ambulance service, and local government.

There emerged substantial numbers of women in a new ‘upper working class’; women in their twenties and thirties earning relatively low salaries, employed in the ‘brave new funded sector’ following the neoliberal reforms. While most of these women were glad to be seen and treated as equals in their workplaces, many were pushed into fulltime work while they had young children; the mortgage had to be paid. So, we also then saw the emergence of a substantial childcare industry (and the decline of kindergartens and play-centres), which is – in effect – also part of the funded sector. As is, also, the growing age-care industry, especially the nursing homes (distinct from the new retirement villages which cater for retired elites and members of the privileged generations – born circa 1935 to 1960 – who have been downsizing from mortgage-free standalone houses on large sections).

Differences between male and female pay on average are linked to the nature of the funded sector itself, as the dominant employer of women; and in particular the unnecessary realities of prioritising ‘fiscal consolidation’ over ‘duty of care’ and societal investment.

The feminist premise which underpins pay equity

Feminism has two contradictory premises. The first premise is that women are the ‘meeker sex’, and therefore require collective intervention to support equitable outcomes for female individuals vis-à-vis male individuals. The idea is that women have been muscled out – figuratively and almost literally – from opportunities for individual self-realisation and influence. The alternative premise is that women are not meeker than men; indeed, that there is no ‘meeker sex’. The idea is that women have achieved lives equally as fruitful as men; but that the many individual and collective achievements of women have not been adequately reported by (mainly) male historians and journalists.

Neither premise is entirely incorrect. Thus, the two feminisms differ more on emphasis than on one being true and the other false. Pay equity is informed by the first of these feminisms. And the substantial and visible successes of women in public life in the last fifty years or so suggest that changes such as Equal Pay have enabled women’s many very real contributions to become more visible. One feminism favours directive policy; the other favours enabling policy and equitable recognition.

The Pay Equity argument is subject to an important ‘catch-22’. To gain the desired policy outcome women have to argue that women are subject to adverse discrimination because of their meekness. Yet, for women to successfully pursue this argument, they have to reveal women to be anything other than meek.

Indeed, the female leaders of the labour movement (who have been substantive leaders of organised labour since at least the 1980s) have revealed that women can be and have been at least as assertive – indeed stroppy – as men. Further, we have for many years now seen that such female-dominant professions as nursing and primary school teaching have assertively advocated for their interests for many years. And it’s not new. Magazines such as Woman Today and Working Woman were doing this in the 1930s. And we openly acknowledge the contributions of strong women in the past, self-realisers and community-realisers, such as Jean Batten and Dame Whina Cooper.

On the matter of catches-22 see ‘Turning women’s wages into a political piggy bank’, Newsroom, 12 Aug 2025. The argument here seems to be that pay-equity claims would first have to be initiated to establish if the claims have merit; but that the prior establishment of merit has become a pre-requisite for a claim to be initiated. I would like to have seen that ‘catch-22’ argument put to a government spokesperson. The resolution here would be the reality of ‘degrees of merit’. Some merit would have to be present from the outset; the adjudication of the claim would then evaluate sufficient merit to adjudicate in favour of an intervention.

My understanding is that there remains a clear pathway to lodging a ‘pay equity’ claim – and hopefully available to any employee group who feels they are underpaid on account of their predominant sex, religion, ethnicity etc – but that it must place emphasis on evidence indicating adverse discrimination. It can never be enough to evoke correlation; causation is the idea that an occupation is subject to low remuneration because of the demographic mix of its employees, meaning that a less-meek employee-mix would, of itself, yield higher wages and better working conditions.

Wage activism and pacifism in New Zealand’s history

New Zealand once (from the 1890s to the 1980s) had a directive system of setting ‘award wages’; the 1894 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, “The brainchild of Minister of Labour William Pember Reeves”. It morphed into a system of relativities; wage increases would be set for one occupation, and wages for other occupations were effectively indexed.

Or there would be general wage orders. As a result of compliant male-dominated trade unions, by the mid-1960s wages in New Zealand were substantially lower than they should have been, given substantial per capita economic growth. When in 1968 the Arbitration Court mandated a zero wage increase despite five percent CPI inflation, the creaky system of general wage mandates collapsed. It was up to the new Finance Minister, Robert Muldoon, to pick up the pieces, which he did successfully. From 1969 to 1973, wage increases outpaced productivity growth. The new regime was what the stronger unions had wanted – ‘free-collective-bargaining’ – and it took place during the inflationary 1970s. Real wages in New Zealand reached their post-war peak in 1981, although after-tax wages had to wait until 1982 to be corrected through a substantial new tax scale.

While wage relativities between occupations were finally scrapped in Ruth Richardson’s 1991 Employment Contracts Act, in that same neoliberal era a system of salary-relativities was introduced for Members of Parliament and senior public servants. Their pay would be ‘indexed’ to the pay of corporate executives, in full knowledge that the deregulations of the late 1980s would start a process in which the remuneration growth of business executives would substantially outpace the remuneration growth of ordinary private sector employees. The MPs had hitched themselves onto an inequality bandwagon.

We note that, in the very uncertain 2020s, workers in the ‘funded sector’ have been relatively privileged. There now appears to be a new aristocracy of labour, and it is large parts of the highly unionised funded sector. In the 1950s in New Zealand, the aristocracy of labour were the seamen, wharfies, miners, and meat-workers; and the strongest unions represented their interests over the interests of workers more generally. That ‘aristocracy’ was undermined in the 1960s by relativity processes largely connected to Labour Governments in the 1940s and 1950s. In the 1980s an elite ‘salariat’ formed, a new kind of aristocracy of managerial labour; more like traditional ruling-class aristocrats in their consumptionist mores. Nowadays, from the 2000s, we have a unionised funded salariat – the core of a new ‘upper working class’ which is closely linked to Labour politics – and an inherently insecure and under-unionised passive ‘lower working class’ precariat.

Economic ‘games’ (a technical term in economics) – such as ‘pay equity’ activist games – have become increasingly tone-deaf. This is especially true for this week’s secondary school teachers’ strike action – which appears to be a somewhat piqued reaction to its thwarted ‘pay equity’ submission – for a profession with employment security and reportedly having already achieved six-figure average salaries. And it is ‘tone-deaf’ in the context of what both National and Labour have framed as the present ‘cost-of-living’ crisis. Clearly, New Zealand can never match Australia for teachers’ salaries; that ship sailed more than 35 years ago, when suffocating macroeconomic policies created a decade of near-zero growth in New Zealand but not in Australia. For decades now, New Zealand has been to Australia much as what Poland or Czechia is to Germany. The fact that 63 percent of secondary teachers are female cannot be, in itself, a justification for raising the pay relativity between secondary-school teachers and (say) prison workers or defence force workers. Those other occupations have their issues, too.

Inflation, Cost-of-Living, and Economics 202

Setting wages on the basis of occupational relativities rather than in accordance with the market forces of demand and supply has not served New Zealand particularly well. In the 1960s compliant wage-setting had been counter-inflationary. In the early 1970s, the necessary wage catch-up almost certainly contributed to escalating inflation, though international factors were then the main drivers of inflation. I remember 25% CPI inflation in the United Kingdom in 1976, significantly higher than for New Zealand’s peak year.

In the late 1970s, following a coup in academia (most associated then with the name Milton Friedman, and the Chicago School), ‘expert thought’ about inflation was returning to the monetarist ideas which gained currency during the mercantilist era; ideas associated with the likes of Jean Bodin (16th century), John Locke (17th century), David Hume (18th century), and David Ricardo (19th century). Money was understood then to be gold and silver coin (specie); inflation was understood as a fall in the price of money; effectively a fall in the price of gold or silver. In the 1970s, after the gold-exchange standard was abandoned, the ‘fall in the price of money idea’ was adapted to modern fiat money, with Friedman’s provisos that a seemingly insignificant (at the time) over-restriction of the money supply could cause a ‘great depression’, and a seemingly insignificant (at the time) over-expansion of the money supply could cause a ‘great inflation’. In Economics 202 (intermediate macroeconomics), this idea is embodied in the Rational Expectations Hypothesis for which Robert Lucas won a Nobel Prize in 1995.

While the rational expectations’ theory is false in one key respect – the idea that it is normal for an inflationary ‘spiral’ to accelerate in the absence of macho policies of monetary restriction and credibility brinkmanship (noting that the present Governor of the Australian Reserve Bank is ‘macho’ in this respect) – it does offer a valid understanding of ‘demand-shocks’ and ‘supply-shocks’ as the beginnings of inflationary events; as the beginnings of ‘secondary inflation’.

A demand shock, such as an ‘over-stimulus’ (or a bout of animal spirits), brings about primary inflation. Whereas a supply-shock is not inflation at all; it’s simply an unexpected or unwarranted cost that has to be absorbed, such as the 2021 Covid19 supply-chain disturbances and the disruptions to food supplies in 2022 due to the Russia-Ukraine War. Secondary inflation can be understood as the adjustment ‘ripples’ emanating from the primary event. The idea that such ripples naturally accelerate – through an expectations’ mechanism – is metaphysical nonsense. Ripples settle – in this case through market mechanisms – unless invigorated by misplaced policy settings.

(A critical missing ingredient of the theory of inflation is the notion of ‘supply-elasticity’, also known as ‘surge capacity’. A sustainable anti-inflation program needs to create a destressed norm, which allows settled economies to respond to shocks – such as wars – in a responsive ‘quantitative’ way, through output flexibility rather than being thrown into inflation or deflation. The monetarist theory of ‘too much money chasing too few goods’ overemphasises the ‘too much money’ and underemphasises the reasons why there may be ‘too few goods’. Recent restrictive monetary policies have created supply rigidities by requiring the emigration of skilled workers, and by forcing sawmills and similar industries to downsize their capacity; see More Jobs at Risk in Tasman Sawmill Closure, 21 August 2015.)

One of the most-cited examples of a supply-shock in the literature is the ‘accommodation’ of a primary wage bid, such as a Pay Equity bid. The best way to think of a primary wage bid is to consider an economy that’s in a settled state (‘equilibrium’), and (for some ‘perverse’ reason) a group of workers seek to gain an advantage over other groups of workers. (Of course, ‘the economy’ is never in a ‘settled state’; nevertheless, careful analysis can establish whether any particular wage bid is stabilising or destabilising. An example of a necessary wage shock was the previously mentioned catch-up wage growth in New Zealand from 1969 to 1973.) A classic example of a destabilising wage bid is one which a strong union seeks to forge a new relativity.

To a classical macroeconomist, pay-equity claims in general – and including pay-equity-like claims such as the present teachers’ dispute – look very much like (if the employer grants the wage demands, that is) a textbook supply-shock which can initiate a spiral of accelerating inflation. The monetarists’ medicine to any ensuing secondary inflation (or to anticipated secondary inflation) is to suffocate the economy by ‘restricting the money supply’ ‘as much as it takes’ to terminate or prevent that event. (To use the ‘ripple’ analogy, it’s a ripple-suppression policy.)

In addition to the suffocating nastiness of that policy medicine, the interest-rate method of anti-inflation monetary policy adopted since the 1990s, such aggressive policy itself is a supply-shock (a ‘cost-of-living’ shock, albeit a non-textbook shock). An upwards intervention in the price of borrowed money adds to the cost-of-living, creating secondary inflation much as textbook supply shocks can create secondary inflation. The treatment of the ‘inflation cancer’ is itself such a cancer. Sometimes – though not typically with medical cancer – the best treatment is to wait with a watchful eye; to allow the ripples to subside.

Careless and tone-deaf Trade Union actions can precipitate the adoption of harmful and unnecessary policy interventions.

From a Trade Union viewpoint

The first thing a trade union should do is to contest the economic analysis of ‘the other side’. If it cannot or will not do this – if it cannot demonstrate that a pay claim is benign to the wider working and non-working classes – then it should not pursue the claim. The current teachers’ pay claim has made little attempt to contest the prevailing ‘cost-of-living’ narrative. This in a fait accompli political environment of ‘fiscal consolidation’ (aka ‘austerity’) and sensitivity to high prices. Unions’ priority should be to contest these uncontested and under-contested narratives.

All I have heard from the secondary teachers’ Union is that ‘the government could have done other things’ in 2024 – such as not granting ‘tax cuts’. They say that what their members have been offered is “less than the rate of inflation”, meaning a real pay cut. They have a credibility problem here, because in real terms (ie after adjusting for CPI inflation), the 2024 income tax adjustments were a tax increase rather than a tax increase; those income tax adjustments only partly compensated for CPI price increases.

The second problem is that only a part of the CPI-inflation that we have experienced is actual inflation. It is likely that the major part of the CPI increases this decade have been due to (ongoing) primary supply shocks, and not to (secondary) inflation at all. The sad thing about supply shocks is that we all have to bear them. Though some try to make others bear these real costs; for example, those who favour forever-wars tend to want others to pay the costs. (We should of course recommend ways to minimise future supply shocks; for example, to advocate peace over war, sustainability over profligacy, sufficiency over the quest of a few to make more-and-more money by selling more-and-more stuff.)

Our trade unions need to ‘read the room’, and to offer analysis and critique of the problematic narratives which enmesh us, and prevent the human world from evolving in the gentler and more sustainable ways which most of us favour. They should not be pushing the interests of one identity group over others.

Pushing for pay relativities vis-à-vis other occupational groups is not the answer; rather it’s part of the problem of some groups trying to ‘get ahead’ while others cannot or should not. Women – certainly modern women – are not meek. The assertive pretence of female meekness cannot achieve much. Thoughtful analysis and courageous counter-narrative can achieve much more. Governments – and the funded sector generally – need to see ways beyond their own financial housekeeping, and to emphasise their ‘duty of care’ and societal investment roles. If privileged wages in the funded sector are the answer, the wrong question was probably asked.

We have Equal Pay – equal pay for equal work. And we have a Universal Basic Income for seniors. Those are achievements we should celebrate, and draw inspiration from. Women assertively pursuing the narrative that women are paid less than men because women are meeker than men, could instead be critiquing the false macroeconomic narratives which represent the real problem.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Despite calls from women’s groups urging the government to implement policies to address the underrepresentation of women in politics, the introduction of temporary special measures (TSM) to increase women’s political representation in Fiji remains a distant goal.

This week, leader of the Social Democratic Liberal Party (Sodelpa), Cabinet Minister Aseri Radrodro, and opposition MP Ketal Lal expressed their objection to reserving 30 percent of parliamentary seats for women.

Radrodro, who is also Education Minister, told The Fiji Times that Fijian women were “capable of holding their ground without needing a crutch like TSM to give them a leg up”.

Lal called the special allocation of seats for women in Parliament “tokenistic” and beneficial to “a few selected individuals”, as part of submissions to the Fiji Law Reform Commission and the Electoral Commission of Fiji, which are undertaking a comprehensive review and reform of the Fiji’s electoral framework.

Their sentiment is shared by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, who said at a Pacific Technical Cooperation Session of the Committee on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in Suva earlier this month, that “putting in women for the sake of mere numbers” is “tokenistic”.

Rabuka said it devalued “the dignity of women at the highest level of national governance.”

“This specific issue makes me wonder at times. As the percentage of women in population is approximately the same as for men, why are women not securing the votes of women? Or more precisely, why aren’t women voting for women?” he said.

Doubled down
The Prime Minister doubled down on his position on the issue when The Fiji Times asked him if it was the right time for Fiji to legislate mandatory seats for women in Parliament as the issue was gaining traction.

“There is no need to legislate it. We do not have a compulsory voting legislation, nor do we yet need a quota-based system.

However, Rabuka’s Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs and Deputy Speaker Lenora Qereqeretabua holds a different view.

Qereqeretabua, from the National Federation Party, said in January that Parliament needed to look like the people that it represented.

“Women make up half of the world’s population, and yet we are still fighting to ensure that their voices and experiences are not only heard but valued in the spaces where decisions are made,” she told participants at the Exploring Temporary Special Measures for Inclusive Governance in Fiji forum.

She said Fiji needed more women in positions of power.

“Not because women are empirically better leaders, because leadership is not determined by gender, but because it is essential for democracy that our representatives reflect the communities that they serve.”

‘Shameless’ lag
Another member of Rabuka’s coalition government, one of the deputy prime ministers in and a former Sodelpa leader, Viliame Gavoka said in March 2022 that Fiji had “continued to shamelessly lag behind in protecting and promoting women’s rights and their peacebuilding expertise”.

He pledged at the time that if Sodelpa was voted into government, it would “ensure to break barriers and accelerate progress, including setting specific targets and timelines to achieve gender balance in all branches of government and at all levels through temporary special measures such as quotas . . . ”

However, since coming into power in December 2022, Gavoka has not made any advance on his promise, and his party leader Radrodro has made his views known on the issue.

Fijian women’s rights and advocacy groups say that introducing special measures for women is neither discriminatory nor a breach of the 2013 Constitution.

In a joint statement in October last year, six non-government organisations called on the government to enforce provisions for temporary special measures for women in political party representation and ensure that reserved seats are secured for women in all town and city councils and its committees.

“Nationally, it is unacceptable that after three national elections under new electoral laws, there has been a drastic decline in women’s representation from contesting national elections to being elected to parliament,” they said.

“It is clear from our history that cultural, social, economic and political factors have often stood in the way of women’s political empowerment.”

Short-term need
They said temporary special measures may need to be implemented in the short-term to advance women’s equality.

“The term ‘temporary special measures’ is used to describe affirmative action policies and strategies to promote equality and empower women.

“If we are to move towards a society where half the population is reflected in all leadership spaces and opportunities, we must be gender responsive in the approaches we take to achieve gender equality.”

The Fijian Parliament currently has only five (out of 55) women in the House — four in government and one in opposition. In the previous parliamentary term (2018-2022), there were 10 women directly elected to Parliament.

According to the Fiji Country Gender Assessment report, 81 percent of Fijians believe that women are underrepresented in the government, and 72 percent of Fijians believe greater representation of women would be beneficial for the country.

However, the report found that time and energy burden of familial, volunteer responsibilities, patriarchal norms, and power relations as key barriers to women’s participation in the workplace and public life.

Fiji Women’s Rights Movement (FWRM) board member Akanisi Nabalarua believes that despite having strong laws and policies on paper, the implementation is lacking.

Lip service
Nabalarua said successive Fijian governments had often paid lip service to gender equality while failing to make intentional and meaningful progress in women’s representation in decision making spaces, reports fijivillage.com.

Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry said Rabuka’s dismissal of the women’s rights groups’ plea was premature.

Chaudhry, a former prime minister who was deposed in a coup in 2000, said Rabuka should have waited for the Law Reform Commission’s report “before deciding so conclusively on the matter”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Media professionals have been urged to undergo gender sensitisation training to produce more inclusive, accurate and ethical representation of women in the news.

Fiji Women’s Rights Movement executive director Nalini Singh emphasised that such training would help avoid reinforcing harmful stereotypes and promote diverse perspectives, ensuring media coverage reflects the realities of all genders.

She made these comments during her keynote address at a panel discussion on “Gender and Media in Fiji and the Pacific” at the 2024 Pacific International Media Conference at the Suva Holiday Inn in Fiji on July 4-6.

In her presentation, Singh highlighted the highest rates of gender violence and other forms of discrimination against women in the region.

She said the Pacific region had, among the highest rates of gender-based violence in the world, with ongoing efforts to provide protection mechanisms and work towards prevention.

She highlighted that women in Fiji and the Pacific carried a disproportionate burden of unpaid care work, spending approximately three times as much time on domestic chores and caregiving as men.

This limits their opportunities for income-generating activities and personal development.

Labour participation low
According to Singh, women’s labour force participation remains low — 34 percent in Samoa and 84 percent in the Solomon Islands. The underemployment of women restricts economic growth and perpetuates income inequality, leaving families with single earners, often males with less financial stability.

She highlighted that women were significantly underrepresented in leadership positions as well. In Fiji, women held only 21 percent of board seats, 11 percent of board chairperson roles, and 30 percent of chief executive officer positions.

Despite numerous commitments from the United Nations and other bodies over past decades, including the Beijing Platform for Action and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Singh pointed out that gender equality remained a distant goal.

The World Economic Forum estimates that closing the overall gender gap will take 131 years, with economic parity taking 169 years and political parity taking 162 years at the current rate of progress.

Singh shared that women were more negatively impacted on by climate change due to limited access to resources and information, adding that media often depicted women as caregivers and community leaders during climate-related disasters, highlighting their increased burdens and risks.

The efforts made by FWRM in addressing sexual harassment in the workplace was also highlighted at the conference, with a major reference to the research and advocacy by the organisation that has contributed to policy changes that include sexual harassment as a cause for disciplinary action under employment regulations.

Singh challenged the conference attendees to prioritise creating safer workplaces for women in media. She urged academics, media organisations, students, and funders to take concrete actions to stop sexual harassment and gender-based violence.

“We must commit to fostering workplaces and online platforms where everyone feels safe and respected.

‘Free from fear’
“Together, we can create environments free from fear and discrimination. Enough is enough,” Singh urged, emphasising the need for collective commitment and action from all stakeholders.

The conference, the first of its kind in 20 years, was organised by The University of the South Pacific’s Journalism Programme in collaboration with the Pacific Islands News Association and the Asia Pacific Media Network.

It was officially opened by chief guest Deputy Prime Minister of Fiji and the Minister for Trade, Co-operatives, Small and Medium Enterprises and Communications Manoa Kamikamica.

Kamikamica said the Fijian government stood firm in its commitment to safeguarding media freedom, as evidenced by recent strides such as the repeal of restrictive media laws and the revitalisation of the Fiji Media Council.

Papua New Guinea Minister for Communication and Information Technology Timothy Masiu was also present at the official dinner of the conference on July 4.

He said the conference theme “Navigating Challenges and Shaping Futures in Pacific Media Research and Practice” was appropriate and timely.

“If anything, it reminds us all of the critical role that the media continues to play in shaping public discourse and catalysing action on issues affecting our Pacific.”

Launch of PJR
The official dinner included the launch of the 30th anniversary edition of the Pacific Journalism Review (PJR) and launch of the book Waves of Change: Media, Peace, and Development in the Pacific, which is edited by the Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance Professor Biman Prasad and Dr Amit Sarwal, a former senior lecturer and deputy head of school (research) at USP.

The PJR is the only academic journal in the region that publishes research specifically focused on Pacific media.

The conference was sponsored the US Embassy in Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Tonga and Tuvalu, the International Fund for Public Interest Media, the Pacific Media Assistance Scheme, Fiji Women’s Rights Movement, New Zealand Science Media Centre and the Pacific Women Lead – Pacific Community.

With more than 100 attendees from 11 countries, including 50 presenters, the conference provided a platform for discussions on issues and the future.

The core issues that were raised included media freedom, media capacity building through training and financial support, the need for more research in Pacific media, especially in media and gender, and some other core areas, and challenges facing the media sector in the region, especially in the wake of the digital disruption and the covid-19 pandemic.

Ivy Mallam is a final-year student journalist at The University of the South Pacific, Laucala Campus. Republished in collaboration with Wansolwara.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A new edition of the Okinawan Journal of Island Studies features social justice island activism, including a case study of Aotearoa New Zealand’s Pacific Media Centre, in what the editors say brings a sense of “urgency” in the field of diversity, equity, and inclusion in scholarship.

In the editorial, the co-editors — Tiara R. Na’puti, Marina Karides, Ayano Ginoza, Evangelia Papoutsaki — describe this special issue of the journal as being guided by feminist methods of collaboration.

They say their call for research on social justice island activism has brought forth an issue that centres on the perspectives of Indigenous islanders and women.

“Our collection contains disciplinary and interdisciplinary research papers, a range of contributions in our forum section (essays, curated conversations, reflection pieces, and photo essays), and book reviews centred on island activist events and activities organised locally, nationally, or globally,” the editorial says.

“We are particularly pleased with our forum section; its development offers alternative forms of scholarship that combine elements of research, activism, and reflection.

“Our editorial objective has been to make visible diverse approaches for conceptualising island activisms as a category of analysis.

‘Complexity and nuance’
“The selections of writing here offer complexity and nuance as to how activism shapes and is shaped by island eco-cultures and islanders’ lives.”

The co-editors argue that “activisms encompass multiple ways that people engage in social change, including art, poetry, photographs, spoken word, language revitalisation, education, farming, building, cultural events, protests, and other activities locally and through larger networks or movements”.

Thus this edition of OJIS brings together island activisms that “inform, negotiate, and resist geopolitical designations” often applied to them.

Geographically, the islands featured in papers include Papua New Guinea, Prince Edward Island, and the island groups of Kanaky, Okinawa, and Fiji.

Among the articles, Meghan Forsyth’s ‘La langue vient de la musique’: Acadian song, language transmission, and cultural sustainability on Prince Edward Island engagingly examines the “sonic activism” of the Francophone community in Canada’s Prince Edward Island.

“Also focused on visibility and access, David Robie’s article ‘Voice of the Voiceless’: The Pacific Media Centre as a case study of academic and research advocacy and activism substantiates the need for bringing forward journalistic attention to the Pacific,” says the editorial.

Dr Robie emphasises the need for critical and social justice perspectives in addressing the socio-political struggles in Fiji and environmental justice in the Pacific broadly, say the co-editors.

In the article My words have power: The role of Yuri women in addressing sorcery violence in Simbu province of Papua New Guinea, Dick Witne Bomai shares the progress of the Yuri Alaiku Kuikane Association (YAKA) in advocacy and peacebuilding.

In ‘La Pause Décoloniale’: Women decolonising Kanaky one episode at a time, Anaïs Duong-Pedica, “provides a discussion of French settler colonialism and the challenges around formal decolonisation processes in Kanaky”.

Inclusive feminist thinking
The article engages with “women’s political activism and collaborative practice” of the podcast and radio show La Pause Décoloniale.

The co-editors say the edition’s forum section is a result of “inclusive feminist thinking to make space for a range of approaches combining scholarship and activism”.

They comment that the “abundance of submissions to this section demonstrates the desire for academic outlets that stray from traditional models of scholarship”.

“Feminist and Indigenous scholar-activists seem especially inclined towards alternative avenues for expressing and sharing their research,” the coeditors add.

Eight books are reviewed, including New Zealand’s Peace Action: Struggles for a Decolonised and Demilitarised Oceania and East Asia, edited by Valerie Morse.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A group of “pink shoes” women in Aotearoa New Zealand campaigning for gender equality in the Catholic Church took their message with a display of well-worn shoes to St Patrick’s Cathedral plaza in Auckland today on International Women’s Day.

It was part of a national and global “Pink Shoes into the Vatican” campaign.

“Women from all over the country have sent their worn out shoes with their stories of service to the Catholic Church, only to find that the doors to full equality in all areas of the ministry and leadership remain firmly closed,” said an explanatory flyer handed out by supporters.

“A vibrant church requires a synodal structure in which all members share full equality by right of their baptism.”

The organisers, Be The Change, say: “We are interested in your story. You are invited to email or write to us telling of your experience with the church. You do not have to be a practising Catholic to participate.”

‘Pink Shoes into the Vatican’ campaign stories.  Video: Be The Change

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fijian national, jurist and lawyer Imrana Jalal has been awarded the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Medal of Honour by the World Jurists Association.

The award is given in recognition of inspiring women jurists who fight to defend and strengthen the rule of law, and to consolidate society’s advances in gender equity.

She is the first woman from the Australia, New Zealand and Pacific Island region to receive the award.

Jalal said she was stunned to receive the news, and that she was deeply honoured to be one of the recipients.

She said Justice Bader Ginsburg was her hero and one of her dreams was to meet her while she worked in the US at the World Bank but owing to covid that did not happen.

Jalal added that to receive this award in Justice Bader Ginsburg’s name was personally and deeply moving for her.

She will be one of eight women jurists to receive the award in a ceremony in Madrid, Spain, on May 8 and will be hosted by King Felipe VI of Spain at the Rule of Law Centre of the World Jurist Association.

The Ruth Bader Ginsburg Medal of Honour is a new international recognition, established by the World Jurist Association and presented for the first time in 2021.

It will be the second time since the death of the iconic Justice Bader Ginsburg of the Supreme Court of the United States that the award will be presented.

Jalal was selected by an eminent jury comprising members of the World Jurists Association, including the daughter of the Justice Bader Ginsburg, Professor Jane Ginsburg of Columbia Law School, New York, who was the president of the jury.

In 2021, the Medal of Honour was bestowed on eight distinguished female jurists and leaders from around the world including Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank and former IMF head; Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza, vice-president of the International Criminal Court; Maite Oronoz, chief justice of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico; Navi Pillay, judge of the Supreme Court of South Africa; Rosario Silva de Lapuerta, vice-president of the European Court of Justice; Sujata Manohar, retired judge of the Supreme Court of India; and Young Hye Kim, senior judge, Commissioner at National Human Rights Commission.

Rashika Kumar is a FijiVillage News reporter.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s new Minister for Women, Children and Poverty Alleviation, Lynda Tabuya, plans to use surveys and online platforms as an integral part of her ministry

During her official welcome yesterday along with her assistant minister, Sashi Kiran, Tabuya said that over the years she had made it her life goal to help those less fortunate.

She was happy that she could continue what she loved to do on a national stage in helping all Fijians.

“As an integral part of my ministry, I plan on asking you — the citizens of Fiji — about the best way forward utilising surveys and online platforms,” Tabuya said.

“One of the foundations for building a better Fiji is providing equal opportunities to all Fijians irrespective of age, gender, physical ability or income level.”

To promote inclusivity and development, her ministry would continue to serve all Fijians through:

• The care and protection of children
• Greater policy intervention for older persons and persons with disability
• More innovative and targeted income support to families living or caught in the cycle of poverty; and
• Promoting gender equality and empowering women to reach their full potential.

Tabuya looked forward to strengthening and building on good partnerships with organisations whose activities and outputs support the ministries strategic objectives and those who provide services in the area of child protection and safeguarding, older people, people with disability, gender equality, women’s empowerment and ending violence against women and girls.

“During the turmoil of the last couple of months, the hymn ‘We Shall Overcome’ was often used as a source of inspiration,” she said.

“At this juncture, Fiji faces daunting poverty levels and incidences of domestic violence, but despite all these challenges I believe with God’s help and everyone working together, we shall overcome.

“I’m looking forward to working for the most disadvantaged in our society and together rebuilding Fiji into the way the world should be.”

Talebula Kate is a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

She is brave — no other word can describe this Papua New Guinean woman.

Ruth Undi Siwinu isn’t only challenging the norms and a huge field of male candidates in Southern Highlands, but knows the task ahead and she is prepared to take them head on.

In a province where leadership is regarded as “men’s business”, Siwinu takes on everyone –– including the sitting MP and Pangu strongman William Powi.

“Let’s make history and vote a woman candidate into Parliament,” Siwini told hundreds of supporters at her rally in Mendi, Southern Highlands Province.

An independent candidate, Siwinu told the huge group that poverty was real in this province  and a country that were blessed with vast resources that were bringing in billions of kina every year.

“I have travelled to the length and breadth of this province. I have been to all the five districts in the province and I saw that my people are still struggling to live,” she said.

“Why are my people struggling when Southern Highlands is blessed with all resources and the country is sitting on the resources Southern Highlands produce.

‘A mistake somewhere’
“There is a mistake somewhere and we have to find out. We want a women leader to lead the province, we have given enough time to the men to lead the province but they have failed us big time,” she said.

Siwinu said male leaders in the province were not providing services that the people deserved.

“They are playing too much politics and did not serve the people for many years. We have to stop this,” she added.

She said that the national election has provided the opportunity for the people to change the leadership and vote in a women leader to drive Southern Highlands forward into the future.

She urged all mothers, girls, aunties and youths to vote in a women candidate in this election to effect change in the province. She called on all women to rally behind her for a better Southern Highlands.

‘Representing the marginalised’
“I am standing here representing you women, the marginalised. Women are the people who suffer most in this province and I want you all women to make a strong stand and make your vote count in Ruth Undi,” she said.

She said she had spent K1 million (NZ$446,000) investing in Southern Highlands, helping women through her Mama Helpim Mama Charity organisation.

“I have Mama Helpim Mama charity organisation, though this organisation I spent K1 million helping Southern Highlands mothers.

“I have seen the real struggle in the villages, I serve the people already, I am only need the political power to continue what I am doing,” she said.

Eighty six of the 2351 candidates registered for next month’s general election are women.

Kolopu Waima is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Women’s participation in decision-making is fundamental to improving gender equality but despite making up half of Fiji’s population, representation at all levels of leadership for women is severely lacking, says an opposition political leader.

The leader of the Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA), Viliame Gavoka, said this in his statement as the international community commemorates International Women’s Day today.

Gavoka said this year’s theme reminded Fijians that bias made it difficult for women to move ahead.

He said knowing that bias existed was not enough, action was needed to level the playing field.

Gavoka said that for far too long, Fiji had continued to “shamelessly lag behind” in protecting and promoting women’s rights and their peace-building expertise.

“A study carried out by the Fiji Women Right’s Movement reveals that 42 percent of Fiji boards or executive committees of for-profit or non-profit organisations or government agencies have no women at all and 26 percent have less than one-third female participation,” Gavoka said.

“The research on gender diversity and equality on boards looked at 192 board members across 38 government-controlled organisations and state-owned enterprises,” he said.

“The purpose of the research was to determine the level of women’s representation in the boards of the 38 entities.”

Lack of diversity
He said the research also identified challenges that limited the participation of women in Fiji’s leadership, such as lack of diversity and opportunity for women elected to preside as board chair.

“According to the research, women hold only 18 percent of board chair positions and sometimes it is the same women appointed as chair of boards in multiple organisations,” he said.

“In many cases, the same people are on multiple boards. This curtails the opportunities for others to join, contribute and gain board experience.

“Ensuring that women are better represented on boards is important to dismantle patriarchal ideals that are heavily entrenched into our society and limit women’s participation in decision-making.

“There is strong evidence that a gender-equal and diverse governance board improves accountability and diversifies the expertise, knowledge and skills available.”

Gavoka said that when SODELPA would be voted into government, they would ensure to “break barriers and accelerate progress”, including:

• setting specific targets and timelines to achieve gender balance in all branches of government and at all levels through temporary special measures such as quotas and appointments; and
• encouraging political parties to nominate equal numbers of women and men as candidates and implement policies and programmes promoting women’s leadership.

“On this year’s International Women’s Day, we should also pause and reflect on the sacrifices of our women in all facets of society despite the challenges they’ve endured to bring change and progress.”

Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Made up of present and retired police officers, former school teachers, village headmen, community leaders and representatives from the District Council of Social Services (DCOSS), 25 male advocates in Fiji have made a commitment to change themselves and their perception of women and honour their roles in society.

This was the outcome of a one-day Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) dialogue with male advocates from the Western Division in Lautoka on Monday.

The advocates who were part of a dialogue on engaging men to end violence against women and girls have committed themselves to be agents of change in their communities.

At the conclusion of the dialogue, the advocates made commitments to be agents of change and work towards ending violence against women and girls in their respective communities.

“When we leave this room and return to our communities, we will ensure that we get our house in order first before calling for change in the communities,” the male advocates declared.

“In our own homes, we need to bring up our boys in a manner that they learn to respect their own sisters, mothers, and other women in the community.

“We should teach our sons to respect women and girls and live with high moral standards.”

Rohit Deo is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Australian government has announced an A$170 million (F$267 million) programme for the Pacific region to strengthen gender equality initiatives over the next five years.

The commitment was revealed by Australia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs and Women Marise Payne during the high-level ministerial session at the 14th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women hosted by French Polynesia this week.

Payne said the programme reflected the importance of strengthening women’s leadership and would complement the work they were already engaged in with bilateral partners on gender and development.

“We’ll work in partnership with regional organisations and Pacific women’s funds and organisations. It’s a flexible programme designed to respond directly to partners’ needs,” she said.

“We want to build on our successes and learn from our experience. We’ll also focus on women’s rights, on safety, economic empowerment, on women’s health, including sexual and reproductive health.”

The challenges ahead for the Blue Continent included tackling the current pandemic and ensuring a sustainable future for the Pacific region, according to Payne.

“Addressing global challenges such as climate change requires us to use all of our resources and potential – that’s 100 percent of our populations,” she said.

Ensuring women’s safety
“If we ensure women’s economic security, we ensure their safety. We promote their health and wellbeing that’s not only of benefit to women and girls but to their entire communities.

“That’s one of the reasons Australia pivoted our development partnerships to better respond to the unique challenges posed by covid-19 through our partnerships for recovery strategy.”

She said they were working with Pacific partners to strengthen the region’s economic recovery, its health security and stability.

Australia has also partnered with regional stakeholders to deliver safe and effective vaccines as well as vaccine delivery.

These objectives, she said, could not be accomplished without first addressing the structural and cultural barriers that exclude and discriminate against women.

Fiji’s Minister for Women, Children and Poverty Alleviation Mereseini Vuniwaqa said the triennial conference and subsequent 7th Women’s Ministerial Meeting opening on Tuesday was an opportunity to be inspired, learn and recommit efforts towards accelerating and progress the goal of achieving gender equality through the endorsement of a bold, action-oriented, inclusive and transformative outcomes document.

“This is about reaffirming leadership, commitment along with concrete actions to prevent male violence against all women and girls before it starts,” she said.

Building back better
“It is acknowledging that, our work and efforts must address urgently the intersections between, women’s economic empowerment, unpaid care, safety, leadership, social protection and climate crisis preparedness and resilience.”

Vuniwaqa said recognising that building back better from covid-19 needed all women and girls at the centre, leading, making decisions that served the planet, addressed inequalities, and achieved equal power-sharing.

“It is also about recognising that data and statistics that adequately reflect the lived realities of all women and girls of the Pacific — gender statistics for short — are critical and indispensable tools for developing evidence-based policies, legislation and solutions to achieve gender equality and empowerment of all women and girls,” she said.

More than 1000 people participated in the conference, which ends tomorrow and delivered via a blended approach of in-person and virtual interaction given that travel restrictions are still being observed across the region due to the covid-19 pandemic.

The event was organised by the Pacific Community (SPC) with funding support provided by the Australian government and the Spotlight Initiative.

Josefa Babitu is a final-year student journalist at the University of the South Pacific (USP). He is also the current student editor for Wansolwara, USP Journalism’s student training newspaper and online publication. He a participant in the Reporting on Women’s Economic Empowerment workshop organised by the Pacific Media Assistance Scheme (PACMAS) in collaboration with the Pacific Community (SPC).

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz