The Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM) and the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) recently expressed support for the opening of discussions with the Council of Ministers on a bill to improve the gender balance on boards of listed European companies. The European Parliament has since given its full backing to the talks. Swedish EU parliamentarian Sara Skyttedal (KD/EPP) has expressed deep scepticism about the proposed directive, so Swedish Enterprise wanted to ask her why.
The proposed directive, often referred to as the “Women on Boards” directive, aims to improve the current gender distribution among non-executive board members of listed companies by setting 40 per cent as a quantitative target for the proportion of the underrepresented sex on the boards of listed companies in the EU. In cases where candidates are equally qualified for a position, the candidate of the underrepresented gender should be prioritised.
Swedish Enterprise certainly supports the overall aim of the proposal – to improve gender balance on the boards of listed companies – but does not agree with the proposed means to achieve this. The main reason is that quota rules for listed company boards that are introduced at EU level would entail an excessive encroachment on ownership rights enshrined in national company law.
Sara Skyttedal, you have expressed considerable scepticism about the proposals for gender-quotas for company boards. What are your main objections and why?
– Firstly, I don’t think that this is an issue for the EU. Secondly, for me, equality is about seeing people for who they are, regardless of gender, not dividing people into quotas based on gender. And thirdly, it should be for business owners – not politicians – to decide who sits and does not sit on their boards. It’s as simple as that.
“Equality is about seeing people for who they are, regardless of gender, not dividing people into quotas.”
Given that the Council and the European Parliament have adopted their positions and started trialogues, do you see any room for manoeuvre in the Parliament? Are there other MEPs who share your position?
– There are of course lots of MEPs who are against this. But we’re still a clear minority. The European Parliament adopted its position as early as 2013, and the majority that formed that position still exists. Unfortunately.
If, or when the proposed directive is approved and is implemented by member states, what consequences do you think this will have for Sweden and Swedish listed companies?
– If we take the position of the Council of Ministers, Sweden already meets the so-called “critical threshold” of thirty per cent female board representation, which means that the effects on Sweden will not necessarily be especially far-reaching. However, as always, it remains to be seen how the details will look after talks between the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament have concluded their negotiations. And then, of course, we need to be extremely vigilant about future proposals from the Social Democrats to over-implement this regulation.
– It’s also important to mention that once a directive is in place, it will be subject to future revisions. What changes to this regulatory framework will be proposed next time the European Commission wants to prove itself to be progressive and point out how extremely important gender equality is? You can imagine what could be on the cards in five or ten years.
Are there reasons to intervene politically to increase gender equality in boards and in business in general? If so, are there any reforms in this area that you would like to see instead?
– Of course, there are sectors of the economy that have far too few women, no doubt about that. And of course, politics has a role to play in giving men and women equal opportunities in terms of careers and education. But if we start from a political point of view to set fixed targets for how many in group X should be gender Y, then I think we’re on a downward slope.