Who’re Canada’s legislators? Traits and gender gaps amongst members of legislative our bodies

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25318/36280001202200900003-eng

Skip to textual content

Textual content begins

Summary

This research presents a profile of people who labored as legislators in 2016 within the federal public administration; provincial or territorial public administration; or municipal, native or regional public administration. It highlights variations in sociodemographic traits between male and feminine legislators utilizing census knowledge. In 2016, ladies made up just below one-third (32.5%) of all legislators, with roughly related estimates in any respect three ranges of presidency. In 2016, female and male legislators differed alongside a number of dimensions, resembling age, marital standing, presence of kids and schooling. Comparable proportions of female and male legislators had been immigrants. Primarily based on a subsample of legislators in 2016 who additionally responded to the 2011 Nationwide Family Survey and had been working in 2011 or 2010, roughly one-third of male legislators in 2016 had been additionally legislators in 2011, whereas lower than one-fifth of feminine legislators in 2016 had been additionally legislators in 2011. The share of girls amongst legislators has not modified considerably between 2001 and 2016. The share of female and male legislators who’re immigrants didn’t change over this era both. Some adjustments in common traits had been noticed in age, schooling and—amongst feminine legislators solely—presence of kids.

Creator

Aneta Bonikowska is with the Social Evaluation and Modelling
Division, Analytical Research and Modelling Department, at Statistics Canada.

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Girls and Gender Equality Canada.

Introduction

In 2015, Canada witnessed its first gender-balanced federal
cupboard. The share of girls amongst candidates in federal elections and elected
candidates has been rising in recent times, though the share of girls
elected to the Parliament of Canada stays decrease than the share of feminine
candidates (Home of Commons, Canada, 2019). Following the 2021 federal
election, ladies made up 30% of members of Parliament (MPs) (Parliament of
Canada n.d.)^Word  .
Canada ranks 56^th on this planet when it comes to the share of feminine parliamentarians.
As of November 2021, there have been six international locations throughout the vary of gender parity
in Parliament (between 47% and 53%)^Word  :
Sweden (47.0%), Iceland (47.6%), Mexico (50.0%), New Zealand (49.2%), Nicaragua
(50.6%) and the United Arab Emirates (50.0%). Two extra international locations exceeded the
53% mark: Cuba (53.4%) and Rwanda (61.3%) (Inter-Parliamentary Union 2021).
Many international locations with comparatively excessive illustration of girls have voluntary
occasion quotas, legislated candidate quotas or each (Krook and Norris 2014,
Inter-Parliamentary Union 2020).

Worldwide analysis into ladies in politics has delved
into the impression of the share of girls in Parliament on the vary of points
coated in election campaigns (Greene and O’Brien 2016); corruption and
financial progress (Baskaran et al. 2018); and the impression of feminine mayors on the
measurement of native authorities, municipal spending and crime charges (Ferreira and
Gyourko 2014). A variety of research have additionally examined numerous boundaries
confronted by ladies in politics, resembling voter bias (Black and Erickson 2003,
Fulton 2012), the presence of the incumbent impact (Kendall and Rekkas 2012,
Thomas and Bodet 2013), and the gender hole in therapy of politicians by
the media (Gidengil and Everitt 2003) and on social media (Rheault et al.
2019). Extra not too long ago, a report by the Standing Committee on the Standing of Girls
outlined a sequence of boundaries going through ladies in Canadian politics, together with harassment
and discrimination, lack of family-friendly workplaces, and difficulties
financing campaigns (Home of Commons, Canada, 2019). There was much less
deal with the traits of legislators and the way they differ—or not—between
men and women.

Utilizing census knowledge from 2016 and 2001, and the 2011 Nationwide
Family Survey (NHS), this research will reply 4 questions: (1) What had been
the traits of people serving as legislators in Canada in 2016,
and the way did their traits evaluate with these of eligible voters? (2)
How do traits of female and male legislators evaluate? (3) What
occupations did 2016 legislators maintain in 2011, and the way did this range by gender?
(4) Did the share of feminine legislators and the traits of female and male
legislators change between 2001 and 2016?

Knowledge and definitions

The evaluation on this research is predominantly based mostly on knowledge
from the 2016 Census of Inhabitants. Capturing 25% of Canada’s inhabitants, it
encompasses a pattern giant sufficient to check what’s a comparatively small
occupation group. The linked 2011 NHS and 2016 Census offers longitudinal
knowledge for a subsample of 2016 legislators who accomplished each the NHS^Word  and the 2016 Census. These knowledge are
used to look at occupations held by 2016 legislators 5 years earlier, in
2011. Lastly, the 2001 Census of Inhabitants is used to doc adjustments in
traits of legislators between 2001 and 2016.

Canada’s Nationwide Occupational Classification (NOC)
describes legislators as people who “take part within the actions of a
federal, provincial, territorial or native authorities, legislative physique or
government council, band council or faculty board as elected or appointed
members” (Statistics Canada 2021).^Word  Legislators
are recognized by the four-digit NOC code 0011. The four-digit classification
is essentially the most detailed one out there. This occupation group, nonetheless, might be
additional disaggregated by sector of employment (Chart 1). The most important share
of legislators labored in native, municipal or regional public administration
(46%). Of all legislators, 20% had been a part of Indigenous public administration.
Provincial and territorial public administration (e.g., members of provincial Parliament,
lieutenant governors) and federal public administration (e.g., MPs, senators
and the Governor Common) accounted for 14% and eight% of all legislators,
respectively.^Word  An additional 8%
labored in academic providers.

The evaluation on this research will deal with legislators who,
through the 2016 Census reference week, labored within the federal public
administration; provincial or territorial public administration; or municipal,
native or regional (hereafter municipal) public administration. College board
members and legislators in Indigenous public administration can be extra
appropriately analyzed individually from the opposite three sorts of public
administration. Moreover, the pattern sizes of those two teams are small and
restrict the extent of the evaluation that might be carried out. In consequence, these
two teams are excluded from the evaluation, as are legislators working in “different”
sectors.

To be eligible to run for public workplace in federal,
provincial or territorial, or municipal public administrations, an individual should
be a Canadian citizen and be at the least 18 years outdated. People operating for
workplace in ranges of presidency aside from federal should additionally meet residency
necessities (within the province, territory or municipality). Basically, if a
particular person can vote in a given election, an individual may run for workplace in that
election, with some exceptions.^Word  The pattern of
legislators on this research is thus composed of Canadian residents aged 18 and
older who had been employed through the census reference week (Might 1 to Might 7,
2016). The ultimate pattern of legislators is 1,378. Canadian residents aged 18 and
older dwelling in non-public households who weren’t employed as legislators throughout
the census reference week are used as a comparability group and known as “eligible
voters” all through the research.

Sociodemographic traits of legislators

About one-third (32.5%) of all legislators in 2016 had been
ladies, in contrast with about half (51.2%) of eligible voters (Desk 1). The
estimated share of girls was roughly related in any respect three ranges of presidency.
Though the share was highest within the federal public administration (35.5%) and
declined by stage of presidency (33.4% in provincial or territorial public
administration, and 31.7% in municipal public administration), the variations
between sorts of public administration weren’t statistically important.^Word 

Legislators in 2016 had been typically older than eligible
voters, with a median age of 56.8, in contrast with 48.5 amongst eligible voters.
Practically three-quarters (73.2%) had been aged 50 or older, in contrast with practically half
(49.1%) of the comparability group, whereas 5.6% of legislators had been youthful than
35, in contrast with 26.6% of eligible voters. Legislators had been extra more likely to be
married (69.7%) than the comparability group (47.2%). They had been additionally much less seemingly
to have youngsters youthful than 18 years dwelling with them.^Word 

A decrease share of legislators than eligible voters had been immigrants (8.4% versus 21.2%). Of these, fewer than one in 5 (17.8%) immigrated to Canada between 1991 and 2016 (25 years or much less earlier than the 2016 Census). Simply over half of all grownup immigrants who had been Canadian residents on the time of the 2016 Census immigrated through the similar interval. The share of immigrants was highest amongst federal legislators, at 12.5%, with 7.8% on the provincial and territorial stage and seven.9% on the municipal stage.



The next share of legislators, in contrast with eligible
voters, reported an Indigenous id (6.8% versus 4.5%). The share was
highest on the federal stage, at 14.2%, adopted by 8.1% on the provincial and
territorial stage, and 5.2% on the municipal stage.

Legislators had increased ranges of schooling than eligible
voters—77.8% of legislators had a postsecondary credential, in contrast with 57.3%
of grownup Canadian residents. The hole was pushed by these with a college
diploma (45.1% of legislators versus 23.1% of eligible voters). Amongst these with
a postsecondary credential, virtually half of legislators, in contrast with practically one-third
of eligible voters, studied topics in two broad fields: enterprise, administration
and public administration; and social and behavioural sciences and legislation.
Legislators had been additionally much less more likely to have studied in engineering or
health-related fields than the comparability group.

Legislators reported working, on common, barely shorter
hours through the reference week in 2016 than did eligible voters. Nonetheless,
their weekly hours labored had been additionally extra dispersed, with legislators having
labored fewer hours than the comparability group within the 25^th percentile of their
respective distributions, whereas legislators within the 75^th percentile labored extra
hours than the 75^th percentile of the comparability group. Weekly hours labored
different by stage of presidency. Legislators on the federal stage reported having
labored, on common, 49.5 hours through the reference week, in contrast with 50.1
hours on the provincial and territorial stage, and 29.5 hours on the municipal
stage.^Word 

How do traits of female and male legislators evaluate?

Feminine legislators, at 54.5 years on common, had been youthful
than male legislators, at 57.9 years on common in 2016 (Desk 2). Over one-third
(35.5%) of male legislators had been aged 65 or older, in contrast with lower than one-quarter
(24.1%) of feminine legislators. Amongst feminine legislators, 28.1% had been aged 35 to
49, in contrast with 17.9% of their male counterparts.

A decrease share of feminine than male legislators had been married
(60.0% versus 74.3%). The share of feminine legislators who had been divorced or
separated was practically 3 times increased than that of male legislators (12.8%
versus 4.6%). The next share of feminine than male legislators had been widowed (and
not remarried or in a common-law relationship). In contrast with eligible voters,
the distribution of legislator marital standing was skewed towards being married,
significantly amongst males. For each women and men, the share of legislators who
had been married was increased than amongst eligible voters: 25.7 proportion factors
increased for males and 14.0 proportion factors increased for girls.

An identical share of female and male legislators (about one
in 5) had youngsters youthful than 18 years of their census household, decrease than
amongst eligible voters. For instance, 20.0% of feminine legislators had youngsters youthful
than 18 years, in contrast with 28.1% of eligible feminine voters. Equally, 4.4%
of feminine legislators had youngsters aged 5 years or youthful of their census
household, in contrast with 11.1% of eligible feminine voters.

A roughly equal share of male and feminine legislators had been immigrants, each general and by interval of immigration. Likewise for legislators reporting an Indigenous id. The small noticed gender variations in every of those traits weren’t statistically important.

Feminine legislators labored fewer hours than male legislators
through the census reference week, on common, at 34.3 versus 36.6 hours. For
each women and men, the dispersion of hours labored was bigger amongst legislators
than amongst eligible voters, i.e., each female and male legislators labored fewer
hours than eligible voters on the 25^th percentile of the hours-worked
distribution for every group, however extra hours on the 75^th percentile, with
roughly related hours labored on the median. Legislators in municipal authorities
positions had the bottom variety of hours labored (30.1 hours amongst males and 27.2
hours amongst ladies, on common). The distinction in hours labored between males and
ladies was increased amongst federal authorities legislators (49.7 hours for males and
44.1 for girls) than amongst provincial and territorial authorities legislators
(49.5 hours for males and 47.9 for girls).

Feminine legislators had been extra educated than male
legislators, with the next share of girls than males holding a postsecondary
credential: 35.2% of girls had a non-university postsecondary credential,
in contrast with 31.5% of males, and 47% of girls had a college diploma, in contrast
with 44.2% of males.^Word  The next
share of girls than males had a college diploma within the common inhabitants—24.4%
of girls versus 21.7% of males—though a barely decrease share of girls than males
had a non-university postsecondary credential. A decrease share of feminine than male
legislators didn’t have a highschool diploma (1.9% of girls and 5.1% of males),
each decrease than the respective shares amongst eligible voters.

Amongst legislators with a postsecondary credential, smaller
variations in area of research existed between female and male legislators than
within the common inhabitants. The 2 commonest areas of research for each male and
feminine legislators had been social and behavioural sciences and legislation; and enterprise,
administration and public administration. The following two commonest fields of research
amongst feminine legislators had been well being and associated fields, and schooling, whereas
for males the subsequent two commonest fields had been structure, engineering, and
associated applied sciences; and schooling. Amongst feminine eligible voters, essentially the most
frequent fields of research had been enterprise, administration and public administration; well being
and associated fields; social and behavioural sciences and legislation; and schooling. Every
accounted for between roughly 10% and 25% of girls. Against this, structure,
engineering and associated applied sciences, and enterprise, administration and public
administration collectively accounted for greater than half of male eligible voters
with a postsecondary credential, with all different fields accounting for lower than
10% every.



Amongst legislators with a postsecondary credential, the 5
commonest detailed fields of research^Word  had been additionally
very related for males (Chart 2) and girls (Chart 3). Enterprise
administration, administration and operations was the commonest area for each male
and feminine legislators with a postsecondary schooling, with enterprise/commerce
(common) additionally among the many prime 5 fields for each. Political science and
authorities, and schooling (common) had been additionally frequent to each. Regulation and public
administration rounded out the highest 5 fields for women and men, respectively.

The highest 5 detailed fields of research accounted for 30%
of all male legislators with a postsecondary schooling and 27% of feminine
legislators with a postsecondary schooling. The remaining legislators with a
postsecondary schooling (roughly 70%) obtained their highest credential in a single
of all kinds of disciplines.

Can variations in traits between female and male legislators be
accounted for by variations in age?

A number of the gender variations amongst legislators could also be
pushed by the truth that feminine legislators had been, on common, youthful than their
male counterparts. Desk 3 reveals the noticed and age-adjusted gender gaps
in these traits.

Feminine legislators had been round 14 proportion factors much less
more likely to be married than male legislators; accounting for age variations
diminished this hole by fewer than 2 proportion factors. Feminine legislators had been
additionally about 4 proportion factors extra seemingly than male legislators to be widowed.
Accounting for age variations diminished this hole by half. The age-adjusted hole
within the share of separated or divorced legislators was barely smaller than the
noticed hole.

Feminine legislators had been barely much less more likely to have
youngsters youthful than 18 years of their census household (though the distinction
will not be statistically important). Nonetheless, when variations in age had been taken
under consideration, feminine legislators had been about 11 proportion factors much less more likely to
have youngsters of their census household than their male counterparts.^Word 

As well as, feminine legislators had been much less seemingly than their
male counterparts to have lower than a highschool schooling; age variations
between them accounted for lower than one-quarter of that hole. They had been additionally
about 3 proportion factors extra more likely to have a college schooling; age
variations accounted for about half of that hole.



Occupations held by legislators earlier than they ran for workplace

For a subsample of 2016 legislators, occupations they held
in 2011 might be examined utilizing longitudinal knowledge created by linking the 2016
Census and the 2011 NHS.^Word  Of the 2016
legislators within the research pattern, 25.3% additionally responded to the 2011 survey. Of
those that responded to the NHS, an additional 17.4% weren’t employed on the time
of the survey and had not labored since January 2010 (estimate not statistically
considerably completely different between women and men). The estimates on this part
are based mostly on the subsample of legislators who had been discovered within the NHS dataset and
who had been working on the time of the NHS, or had held a job since January 2010.

Practically one-third of males (32.3%) and 17.9% of girls who had been
legislators in 2016 had been additionally legislators in 2011 (Desk 4). Practically one in
5 of them labored in a distinct stage of presidency or sector in 2011 than
in 2016. Greater than half (58.9%) of the ladies labored in three broad occupation
teams, particularly administration occupations; enterprise, finance and administration
occupations; and occupations in schooling, legislation and social, neighborhood and
authorities providers. Lower than half (44.1%) of males labored in these similar three occupations
teams, though the next share of males (25.8%) than ladies (15.4%) labored in administration
occupations.



Have the traits of legislators modified since 2001?

In 2016, 32.5% of legislators had been ladies, whereas in 2001, the
proportion was 35.7% (Chart 4). An identical sample was noticed throughout the
three ranges of presidency. In all instances, nonetheless, the distinction between the
two years was not statistically considerably completely different from zero. Whereas there
is not any compelling proof of a decline within the share of girls legislators over
this era, there may be actually no proof of a rise.

In contrast with 2001, legislators in 2016 had been older—the
common age elevated by 4.2 years for male legislators and by 5.0 years for feminine
legislators (Desk 5). The rise was pushed by the next share of
legislators within the 65-or-older age group. The share of male legislators aged 65
or older rose from 16.9% in 2001 to 35.5% in 2016. The share of feminine
legislators aged 65 or older rose from 6.9% in 2001 to 24.1% in 2016.

Modifications in marital standing had been typically small and never
statistically important for legislators of each genders. Whereas the share of male
legislators with youngsters aged 0 to 17 years of their census household has
primarily not modified over this era, the share of feminine legislators with
youngsters dropped by 12.4 proportion factors, from practically one in three (32.4%) in
2001 to at least one in 5 in 2016. The share of feminine legislators with younger
youngsters of their census household (ages 0 to five years) fell by about half,
from 9.2% to 4.4%.

There was primarily no change within the general share of legislators who had been immigrants between 2001 and 2016. The next share of male legislators reported an
Indigenous id in 2016 than in 2001.^Word 

Legislators in 2016 had been extra educated than these in 2001.
The share of legislators with no highschool diploma declined by 8.4
proportion factors amongst males, from 13.5%. The share with a college diploma
additionally declined (though this modification was not statistically important) by 4.1
proportion factors, from 48.2%. This was balanced by a rise within the share
with a highschool diploma and a non-university postsecondary credential. The
share of feminine legislators with no postsecondary credential declined over
this era. Notably, the share with a college diploma elevated by 7.6
proportion factors, from 39.5% to 47.0%. Whereas a smaller share of feminine than male
legislators had been college graduates in 2001, the other was true in 2016.



Conclusion

Who’re Canada’s legislators? This research presents a profile
of legislators who labored within the federal, provincial or territorial, or
municipal public administration in 2016. Legislators had been, on common, older
than eligible voters and extra more likely to be married. Immigrants made up a smaller share of
legislators than of eligible voters, whereas people reporting an Indigenous
id made up the next share. Legislators had been extra educated than eligible
voters, extra more likely to maintain a college diploma and fewer more likely to have a excessive
faculty schooling or much less. Whereas some fields of research had been extra frequent amongst
legislators than eligible voters—significantly fields associated to administration,
enterprise, social sciences and legislation—general, all kinds of fields of research
had been represented amongst 2016 legislators. This means that area of research does
not preclude people from efficiently operating for public workplace.

In 2016, ladies made up just below one-third (32.5%) of all
legislators, with roughly related estimates in any respect three ranges of presidency.
There have been some notable variations in traits between female and male
legislators. Male legislators had been, on common, older than feminine legislators,
extra more likely to be married and fewer more likely to be separated or divorced. Whereas
there was no noticed gender hole within the share of legislators with youngsters
youthful than 18 years of their census household, adjusting for age variations
between female and male legislators revealed that ladies had been 11.1 proportion
factors much less more likely to have youngsters youthful than 18 years of their census
household than equally aged males. Adjusting for age had little impression on the
magnitude of noticed variations in marital standing.

Feminine legislators had been extra educated than their male
counterparts; age variations accounted for among the gender hole in
schooling. Amongst these with a postsecondary credential, the distribution of
fields of research was extra related between female and male legislators than
between eligible female and male voters.

Primarily based on a subsample of legislators for whom longitudinal
knowledge had been out there, and who had been employed in 2011 (or 2010), simply over one in 4
males labored in administration occupations in 2011, the next share than some other
occupation group, whereas ladies had been extra evenly distributed throughout jobs in administration
occupations; enterprise, finance and administration occupations; and occupations
in schooling, legislation and social, neighborhood and authorities providers. The next share
of males than ladies had been already working as legislators in 2011.

The share of feminine legislators general, and inside every of
the three ranges of presidency examined, has not modified considerably between
2001 and 2016—the small declines noticed weren’t statistically important.
There has additionally not been any notable adjustments within the proportion of legislators
who had been immigrants. Each male
and feminine legislators in 2016 had been older than these in 2001. The next share of
male legislators reported an Indigenous id in 2016 than in 2001; nonetheless,
it isn’t clear whether or not that is brought on by a change in reporting noticed over
time, or an actual improve. Extra female and male legislators had at the least a excessive
faculty schooling in 2016 than in 2001, and the next share of girls, however not
males, had a college diploma.

References

Baskaran, T., Bhalotra,
S., Min, B., & Uppal, Y. (2018). Girls legislators and Financial
Efficiency (IZA DP No. 11596). IZA – Institute of Labor Economics.

Black, J. H., & Erickson,
L. (2003). Girls Candidates and Voter Bias: Do Girls Politicians Must Be
Higher? Electoral Research, 22(1), 81–100.

Division for the
Development of Girls. (2005). Equal Participation of Girls and Males in
Choice-Making Processes, with Specific Emphasis on Political Participation
and Management. (Report of the Professional Group Assembly, 24 – 27 October, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia). United Nations.

Ferreira, F., &
Gyourko, J. (2014). Does gender matter for political management? The case of
U.S. mayors. Journal of Public Economics, 112, 24–39.

Fulton, S. A. (2012).
Working Backwards and in Excessive Heels: The Gendered High quality Hole and Incumbent
Electoral Success. Political Analysis Quarterly, 65(2), 303–314.

Gidengil, E., &
Everitt, J. (2003). Typical protection/unconventional politicians: Gender
and media protection of Canadian leaders’ debates, 1993, 1997, 2000. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science
politique, 36(3), 559–577.

Greene, Z., &
O’Brien, D. Z. (2016). Numerous events, numerous agendas? Feminine politicians and
the parliamentary occasion’s function in platform formation. European Journal of
Political Analysis, 55(3), 435–453.

Home of Commons, Canada.
(2019). Elect Her: A Roadmap for Bettering the Illustration of girls in
Canadian Politics. Report of the Standing Committee on the Standing of Girls,
Okay. Vecchio, Chair. [online].

Inter-Parliamentary
Union. (2020). Girls in parliament: 1995-2020; 25 years in evaluation.

Inter-Parliamentary
Union. (2021). Month-to-month rating of girls in nationwide parliaments.

Kendall, C., &
Rekkas, M. (2012). Incumbency benefits within the Canadian Parliament. Canadian
Journal of Economics, 45(4), 1560–1585.

Krook, M. L., &
Norris, P. (2014). Past Quotas: Methods to Promote Gender Equality in
Elected Workplace. Political Research, 62, 2–20.

O’Donnell, V., & LaPointe,
R. (2019). Response mobility and the expansion of the Aboriginal id
inhabitants, 2006 – 2011 and 2011 – 2016. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 99-011-X201902. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

Parliament of Canada. (n.d.). Present Members of Parliament. Retrieved August 8, 2022.

Rheault, L., Rayment, E.
& Musulan, A. (2019). Politicians within the line of fireplace: Incivility and the
therapy of girls on social media. Analysis & Politics, 6(1),
1–7.

Statistics Canada. (2020,
January 13). Legislators. Nationwide Occupational
Classification (NOC) 2016 Model 1.3.

Thomas, M., & Bodet,
M. A. (2013). Sacrificial lambs, ladies candidates, and district competitiveness
in Canada. Electoral Research, 32(1), 153–166.

United Nations. (2017). System-wide
technique on Gender Parity.