On gender parity Corporate Canada has failed

In 2012, Catherine Clark interviewed Michelle Rempel on “Beyond Politics,” the one-on-one television show that, as its name makes clear, invites viewers into casual, soft-focused conversation on the personal side of public life.

So, no surprise, Clark quizzed the rookie Conservative MP about her hobbies — aspiring sommelier and sometime pianist are two.

This is the same Michelle Rempel who grabbed a sliver of the post-election spotlight Wednesday night by tweeting a string of mocking, self-negating criticisms reaffirming the built-in biases against a young (35), assertive woman should she consider running for her party’s leadership.

“But but but she’s so YOUNG...and SO BOSSY,” Rempel said of herself.

Sometimes she found it easier to communicate in the first person: “I mean, I’m too brash, impetuous and abrasive, right?”

(Responses were mostly civil, from “fortune favours the bold” to “I would never vote Conservative but you sound all sorts of awesome. Also maybe a bit drunk, but that’s okay.”)

Hold that thought as we return to Ms. Clark (the daughter, need we remind, of a guy named Joe who was elected MP at the age of 33, became leader of the Progressive Conservatives at 36 and prime minister, briefly, at 39. What’s all this hoo-ha about Justin Trudeau’s age?)

In exploring Rempel’s decision to enter politics, Ms. Clark asked: “What did your husband say when you brought it up?”

Rempel attempted to answer: “The discussion was very much around...’

Clark interrupted with: “How am I going to make supper...”

Now, you can see this in the fair-comment context of the strains imposed on relationships by political life — or the strains imposed by ambition, for that matter. Or you can see it through the lens of reflexive and imbedded biases and stereotypes that seem harmless in the instant, but really aren’t.

Rempel may have had much to say on the topic, but Clark quickly pivoted to the next point of interest: “And you have cats too, right?”

In a previous life I would have been more forgiving. I may have even joked about Clark going blonde-on-blonde with Rempel.

Now I’m just pissed off.

Long ago, I watched the emergence of an organization in New York called Catalyst and, honestly, dreaded having to write stories about the glass ceiling or interview white male bank executives who earnestly tabled corporate initiatives in support of the advancement of women.

I dreaded it because I saw forced gender parity and diversity as no different from law schools introducing quotas: unnecessary. And I didn’t believe white male bank executives were anyone’s definition of “change agents.”

The world would change organically. I really believed that. Smart women were flooding into university, graduating top of class, and arriving in the workplace wearing blouses with floppy ties. (I speak of the Eighties here.)

I was wrong.

Forget anecdotal tales to the contrary. Do not bother me with incremental improvements.

Fact-based evidence has always been my drug. So look again at that recent survey by Canadian Securities Administrators. Out of 722 publicly traded companies, 50 per cent had not a single woman on the board of directors. None. A further 29 per cent had one woman on board. One.

“Merit” is a hollow argument here. No one can seriously assert that no women merit board inclusion on more than 350 public companies.

Corporate Canada has failed. Full stop.

The federal election has brought some hope that it is Ottawa, and not Bay Street, that will force a long-overdue change.

The rollout of Trudeau’s cabinet on Nov. 4 will be assessed against his gender parity promise, but also against whether the roles assigned to women are substantive and not, say, junior minister of field hockey. Of equal importance will be the ramping up of the representation of women on the boards of Crown corporations. There’s loads of work for the new government to do there.

Both tasks, handled properly, will send the message that women are at last on par. Perhaps then we will be able to shake old-style gender stereotypes.

As for Ms. Rempel, she stood out during the election relative to her Conservative colleagues for her visibility, her appearance in two debates and her response to interview requests.

On Friday, in a Facebook post, she characterized her late-night, post-election tweet stream as “highly unorthodox.”

“I'm not perfect. I am, however, willing to take risks because I have faith in the fact that we can re-inspire Canadians by doing so. Maybe I'll mess up once in a while.”

That reads like an apology, and that’s too bad. She was only saying what needed to be said.