iKNOW Politics: You come from a family of politicians. How has this background impacted your participation in politics?

Martha Roldós: My father, Jaime Roldós Aguilera, who was president of Ecuador [1979-1981] died with my mother in 1981. Their plane crashed in circumstances that haven´t been fully explained. One of my mother’s brothers was also president of Ecuador, Abdalá Bucarám [1996-1997]. I was part of the opposition. My ex-husband is the nephew of Omar Torrijos, former president of Panama. Even though I was on the sidelines of active politics, I was always interested.

I studied economics, international politics and sociology. I always read and followed politics in the country. My father’s brother, León Roldós, was socialist and became vice president of Ecuador [1981-1984]. He founded a movement called the Red Ética y Democracia [Ethics and Democracy Network], that I am now a member of.

Though I participated in university politics, I recently entered national politics with the 2006 elections. That year I was elected as a deputy to Congress, along with the government of President Rafael Correa [inaugurated in January 2007]. I was a deputy for six months and later resigned in order to run as a candidate for the Constituent Assembly. This was part of a project that we were promoting from the Ethics and Democracy Network. It was the aspiration of social movements, progressive political movements and many citizens to have a Constituent Assembly. I was elected as a member of the Assembly that functioned from November 2007 to July 2008.

Following the approval of the new Constitution [2008], a transitional regime began and instated a Legislative Supervising Commission [Oct. 2008 - Feb. 2009] where some of us assembly members continue in office, legislating and supervising.

I have always been center-left, I think always going increasingly more toward the left, with a profound interest in environmental issues and gender issues. For me, environmental issues are vital; the defense of the environment is the defense of life. This is one of the most important causes of the social and indigenous movements. It is one area in politics that I greatly identify myself with.

iKNOW Politics: In recent years Ecuador has experienced accelerated changes. What progress do you think has been made in women’s agenda, particularly in relation to women’s participation in politics?

Martha Roldós: I think that in the last few years in Ecuador we have advanced. We have been seeking equality under law, but the most important thing is that we have advanced in practice. The time we have had the most female participation has been precisely in the Constituent Assembly. Many lists headed by women were presented. This implied a qualitative change. We achieved not only equality but also alternation in the lists because previously on a list of 18, for example, they would put the nine women at the end. Now men and women have to alternate. In fact, the Constituent Assembly got close to 40 percent women. When the Legislative Supervising Commission was elected, some of us opposed reducing the number of assembly members because we thought it would be difficult to maintain the balance among provinces, political groups and gender. As is common, the gender ratio was sacrificed.

However, the presence of women does not necessarily imply an advance in women’s agenda. Those who most oppose women’s agenda, in terms of sexual and reproductive health, were other women from right wing parties. They had a program, I would say a menu, equivalent to what we see in other countries in Latin America that was inspired in the Vatican’s position, in certain protestant churches and the government of George Bush [former United States president, 2001-2009]. Their stance opposed international agencies such as the United Nations Development Program [UNDP], which was one of the principal resources for many assembly members in issues of women and gender.

iKNOW Politics: Numerous experts and studies claim that quotas are not enough. Other affirmative action initiatives in favor of women have similarly proven insufficient and would need to be accompanied by some sort of social norm structure. Based on your experience, what strategies do you think should be implemented to promote structural changes in this area?

Martha Roldós: Indeed, quotas in candidacies are not enough. In fact, the greatest achievement we’ve had was getting the lists to alternate. We need to get more women designated and into Congress. I think that there should be an internal norm within political parties obligating them to take women’s candidacies seriously. In many cases candidacies are offered to beauty queens as a way to attract votes.

In order for the quota to be effective, parties must have channels allowing the participation of women members. In this way we could prevent female candidacies from going to famous or well-known women who are unrelated to the party.

However, this leads to a very interesting point. Women’s political participation is not reduced to parties and elections. There are other ways to participate, such as what I do, for example, by associating myself with groups that are against the mining law. A large number of leaders of community defenses are women, and women are the ones that must be given more space. I think that this is interesting. When you go to the community protests — for food sovereignty, for water, against mining — this is where you find more women with a very high level of commitment and decision. Many fellow women have been criminalized, such as Lina Solano, for fighting against mining, or Esther Landeta, who received death threats from hit men. It is interesting to see how in these other areas of politics women have gained so much territory and are usually the most persecuted.

iKNOW Politics: And in relation to society, what strategies do you think are most effective to counteract machista and patriarchal mentalities that delegitimize women’s call for equality?

Martha Roldós: I think that there should be a communication strategy to counteract the machista ideas that have spread across society. But also those of us women who are in politics have to empower ourselves in our role and not allow ourselves to be intimidated. The most common way of intimidating a woman is to threaten to reveal elements of her personal life, issues that would be completely irrelevant in a man’s life. It’s time for us women in politics to begin to say, ‘Yes, and?’ I knew of a woman from a right wing party that stopped being part of the opposition the moment that the president [Rafael Correa] said on a radio station that she had a questionable reputation. I do not agree with any of that woman’s positions, but no one has the right to attack her like that. We women do not question anyone’s reputation, nor do we allude to the sexual partners that men in politics have had. One of the first things that would have to be done is to impose strong sanctions on these campaigns across the board. These are unacceptable forms of discrimination.

It is very difficult when a woman’s children hear these things, it is not easy for most women. However, you have to teach your children to say, “So? My private life is my private life.” People have to begin to respect the private life of women in politics, there is no reason for it to be the object of mockery or political debate. We should enforce the norms. It should be considered a form of harassment or discrimination, regardless of where it comes from.

Lastly, I think it the issue of financing for women’s campaign is very important. It is much more difficult for women to get financing for their campaigns than men. It gets complicated and it becomes a personal issue. We should begin to think more about this issue.

iKNOW Politics: The Ecuadorian Association of Women in Municipal Government [AMUME] has created a bill on harassment and violence against women involved in politics. What do you think about this?

Martha Roldós: I am familiar with the initiative. Margarita Carranco, president of AMUME presented it to me. Perhaps in congressional areas this violence and harassment happens less since we are more in the limelight. It happens more often in municipal areas, overall in town councils. I have a woman friend, who is a councilor from my political movement, that has been intimidated in Santo Domingo following the accusations of corruption that she presented against the mayor. So threats form part of the political game and in small communities, it is a physical threat. In the case of women this is even graver since this physical threat can hint at other kinds of aggressions, such as sexual aggressions, improper comments or harassment.

iKNOW Politics: Indigenous communities have had an important role in the region and Ecuador is one of the most representative countries in this respect. How do you see the situation of indigenous Ecuadorian women in politics? What projections do you see for the future?

Martha Roldós: There are Ecuadorian indigenous women in politics, such as Mónica Chuji, who represents not only indigenous women but women in general and who forcefully defends issues related to sexual and reproductive health.

I remember the noticeable participation of women in social movements in Chimborazo. For example, Cucuri insisted that when the rights of native peoples were recognized, they must also be made to respect the rights of women. Here in Ecuador, we have a growing, very marked participation, starting with Nina Pacari, then with Lourdes Vivan, Dolores Cacuango, Blanca Chancoso and many others whose names escape me. This progress must be encouraged. Many fellow women are claiming greater space in politics in their communities and society. This space must be respected by all men and women.

iKNOW Politics: What challenges do you feel having to cope in a predominantly male environment such as politics? How do you overcome these challenges?

Martha Roldós: When I entered Congress, there were six of us legislators from the Ethics and Democracy Network and they decided to name me head of the party caucus. This ended up being very uncomfortable for some of the other caucus leaders. One of them even refused to address me, instead addressing his male colleagues each time he had to negotiate something. They said, “no, the one in charge of that is Martha, you have to talk to Martha,” but he wouldn’t do it because we were at an impasse on other issues. Finally, his caucus decided to change its leader and chose someone else who was able to talk to me.

I think women have to make themselves be respected. At the beginning it’s a lot of work, you arrive shy and a little scared. One of the things that you learn when in politics is that you must not be scared of them calling you a witch. A woman can be a witch to those who are abusive and be generous, but have all her heart, mind and hands open for the causes of those who need them.

iKNOW Politics: What strategies would you recommend in order to form alliances with men in office on issues of gender equality?

Martha Roldós: I work very well with men, the majority of them. The first thing is to have a good sense of humor, know how to converse and be frank, put the cards on the table: what do I want, what do you want. As long as you don’t beat around the bush, you will be able to foster the alliances you need or want. If you beat around the bush, you’re probably hiding that you don’t want that person to be one of your allies. I think that in this era, time is short and causes are urgent. We have to go straight to the point with friendship and a sense of humor. For me this is the most important thing. At first, others can look down on a woman, but everyone ends up recognizing her work ability when she arrives before others, she knows more than others and leaves after them.

Of course this is difficult and unfair, because a woman should be able to be equal and not have to work harder, but at first it is always a question of doing much more. This has always been the role of women: to do much more. It is a matter of demonstrating that you are equally or more prepared and trained than any man.

iKNOW Politics: In your political career, you have had the opportunity to work in alliances and networks. What has this meant for you?

Martha Roldós: I have participated in networks on current affairs and I have worked very well both in women’s groups and with environmentalists on various issues. The fundamental aspect of making these alliances work is for a woman to demonstrate her commitment to a common cause. If so, she can promote or lead with no problem. I believe struggles for protagonism are harmful. It’s important to build leadership without looking for it. These days there are many leadership programs and I think that these encourage political climbing. Many of these programs lack real content, they don’t talk about the causes that we have to defend but rather the places that we have to be. It is possible to go very high without much purpose, and in the end the “new leaders” are going to do the same that the others did.

If you assume a cause and pursue it passionately, with dedication, you will probably end up leading. I don’t like to lead certain causes. If someone can do it better than me, I do not have a problem giving them the space to do it. Sometimes, when you feel fully committed to a cause, you realize that few people are willing to do what you are. That is the leadership that is worthwhile; the leadership based on really embracing a cause rather than on wanting to put your name above everyone else’s.

I am in politics because I want certain things to happen and others to not. Based on this, I will see who I join up with, who I talk to; and also who I won’t join up with and who I won’t talk to. If I begin to think about whose photo will be taken or who will talk to the cameras and I fight over that, then I betray the causes and I am lost — even worse, the causes are lost.

iKNOW Politics: What advice would you give to young women, not only in Ecuador but in the region, who are interested in participating in politics but who think it is inaccessible?

Martha Roldós: It may sound funny, but many will think of my case as the child who wants to be a trapeze artist because her whole family did it. Another is the case of the child that comes home from the circus and says she wants to be in the circus, too. However, I know many women that have a prominent role in politics without having a family history in politics. In fact, I rejected politics for a long time and entered not because of my last name, but because I wanted to fight for certain causes, because I had a program that I wanted to defend. And that was over twenty years after my parents’ death.

When you go into something it’s because you have a passion for what you do. You go finding your path. My recommendation to anyone, not only for those who enter in politics, is to do what you want in life and to find what makes you passionate. I would not be able to tolerate people that I have to tolerate or fight with people that I have to fight if it weren’t for my passion, if I didn’t have certain things that I passionately defend. Without these, I would be better off at home taking care of flowers.

iKNOW Politics: Do you have any final comments?

Martha Roldós: I have realized that we do not know whether we will be alive or dead the following day. That is a life lesson. This is why I always try to do the best with what I have, in the time that I have. I do not know where I will be in a few months, probably still in politics, I have a lot of things that I want to fight for, I have a country that I love deeply. I have lived in many areas with very good people. In general, latinos are very good people, people that you love, that you commit to intimately. However, they do not always protest as they should, which frustrates me.

I remember when I talked to some very exploited workers from the banana plantations, one told me that a toxic substance had fallen on him and he lost his vision in one eye and all of his hair. And with utmost sincerity he said: “well, it seems that I had bad luck and my eye was ripe.” That is not bad luck, I told him, “you have been exploited, they have made you use a toxic substance that is internationally prohibited, nobody warned you.” That kind of injustice gives you the fuel to keep fighting.

In my life, I have done many things. I have been a student and a professor, I have done surveys and part of my daughter’s childhood I was only a housewife. You can always have different stages in life; there is a path that has brought me here and that will probably keep taking me further.

I invite people who want to fight for causes to participate in politics. As for those who just want to see their name on the marquee, it is better to dedicate yourself to show business.

iKNOW Politics: Thank you very much for accepting this interview with iKNOW Politics. I would like to start by asking you to tell us a bit about your experience in politics, including the challenges you have had to face.

María Paula Romo: I have always liked politics. I formally began at university, where I was president of the student government. From there made contacts with other youths and people from the women’s movement. At that time there was a national youth forum and a few years later we launched a political youth movement. They called us “la Ruptura de los 25” [Rupture of the 25] since Ecuador was celebrating its 25 years of democracy and we were also about that age. Up to that time, those who were authorized to speak up in politics were the same as always while we were “marginal.” Even when looking at the ballots for the presidential elections, you always found the same candidates.

So we showed up saying that 25 years of the same old thing was enough, that it was necessary to break that cycle and build a new one, raise awareness. There was a very complicated institutional crisis; at that time we had gone almost eight years without having a president finish his term in office. That’s how we began in national politics, beyond youth groups and university. We later decided to be part of the Acuerdo País [Country Agreement] with the Movimiento País [Country Movement] and Alianza País [Country Alliance] political parties, supporting Rafael Correa Delgado’s candidacy for president and promoting the formation of a Constituent Assembly. Correa won the presidency [2006] and with him we promoted a national referendum to decide whether to make a new constitution. In this referendum, we were backed by 82 percent of the population. We presented our lists of candidates for the Constituent Assembly and I headed the list in the province of Pichincha [2007]. It was one of the only lists headed by women, even though lists were required to have 50 percent women candidates, in alternating and sequential order, so that they don’t end up as proxies [at the end of the list].

For the Constituent Assembly elections, we had an unprecedented voter turnout in Ecuador in all social sectors.

iKNOW Politics: What challenges have you had to face in your political career, which has been rather long in spite of your age?

María Paula Romo: I think that my time in politics has not been that long, though it has been very intense. We have had various electoral campaigns, one after another: the presidential election, the referendum, the Constituent Assembly and the approval referendum.

The principal challenge has been that we are a very young political organization. We are surrounded by a very strong tradition of political favoritism in Ecuador. You have to know how to take decisions and work as a team. In the Constituent Assembly [november 2007 – july 2008], 80 out of 130 of us representatives were from the political party in power. We started to learn how to manage the diversity, the different positions in the group, to reach a consensus and have united positions, and I think that this was done well.

Indeed, I have had to face certain challenges for being a woman, particularly a young woman. I say this because we still live in a society where we women are questioned in certain areas and I think that politics and the public and legal spheres — I am a lawyer — are still masculine areas. In our country at least, it is like this. So I believe there is always a challenge to prove twofold, we are always on trial and we have to demonstrate that we deserve to be there; meanwhile our male counterparts do not since they have always been there.

iKNOW Politics: Various studies indicate that indifference and skepticism prevail among youths in the region. Based on what you’ve described, it seems as if Ecuador is an exception. Could you share your take on this issue?

María Paula Romo: I think that the idea that we youths are apathetic to politics is the result of reducing politics to elections. Youths in Ecuador and Latin America are involved in politics in other ways, which was one of the messages that the “Rupture of the 25” wanted to convey.

In order to be active in politics, it is not necessary to be a candidate. Involvement in politics can also be through music, theatre, art, graffiti and activism. These are much more legitimate forms for youths. We don’t oppose formal politics since this is where decisions are made, and in order to facilitate participation we’ve eliminated the age requirements that Ecuador previously had. In Ecuador there were also age limits for ministers and deputies. The only thing we’ve maintained is that all candidates must be legal adults [at least 18 years old]. In democracy, people’s support is much more important than age. Age is not related to ability or honesty, which we’ve strongly emphasized. We have also given an optional vote to youths between 16 and 18 years of age.

In general in Ecuador, youths are interested in participating in politics. A survey among youths might give similar results to the ones you mentioned if framed around traditional political parties or customs. But that does not mean youths are apathetic about what happens in the country and the world, or that there is a lack of proposals. That is politics, the ‘Rupture’ strongly emphasized that and we hope to continue to be freethinking in such a formal world.

iKNOW Politics: As a member of a political party, how do you view the panorama of women’s, and particularly young women’s, participation in political parties?

María Paula Romo: In Latin America and particularly in Ecuador, we have a crisis of parties and representation that forces us to reformulate the way these are organized and what their objectives are. We are currently undergoing this because the new Constitution [2008] calls for parties to re-register, newly presenting their affiliations and declaration of principles, government programs, verifying that each one has popular support. We were wondering what kind of political organization we want to have, and the answer is that we want a very citizen-based membership — not blind or submissive members but rather ones that can criticize. We want to be flexible rather than make a difference between those who are members and those who aren’t because a political party must represent the interests of the majority, not just of its members.

The constitution is very clear about women’s rights. It requires half of the leaders of all levels of political parties to be women, half of the lists to be women and also an equal amount of men and women in offices of controlling bodies, which are designated and not elected. What was previously a goal of the women’s movement in Ecuador — respect for women’s political rights, equality — is now a constitutional law. We have resolved our problem of “quantity” of representation, now we have to face the issue of “quality” of representation. Women do not always promote women’s agenda; sometimes women candidates effectively reproduce the patriarchal system, repeating patterns of discrimination against other women. Here we have a challenge: to achieve firm representation. Lastly, I think that another challenge is to incorporate men in the defense of women’s agendas. Equality is not a problem for women, but rather an issue for everyone.

iKNOW Politics: What benefits have these changes in women’s representation brought?

María Paula Romo: In Ecuador, the quota law was approved in 1997. The law obligated the candidate lists to have 30 percent women and to increase 5 percent each subsequent election until reaching 50 percent. This was approved more than 10 years ago, but was never enforced. Political parties and their leaders always find a way to dismiss that law. They put 30 percent women, but at the end of the list or as proxies to male candidates.

For this reason, we were absolutely clear in the party statute used for the Constituent Assembly elections: 50 percent women in the list meant that there should be one man, then one woman, one man, one woman, or vice versa. There is no room for a different interpretation. Furthermore, already at 50 percent, the alternating and sequential formula is effective and any lists that don’t follow this are disqualified. So years after they approved regulations that deliberately allowed for other interpretations, there was finally a political decision and willingness to make it 50 percent.

iKNOW Politics: The first E-Discussion held by iKNOW Politics was on the “Elimination of violence against women involved in politics” [Dec. 10-14, 2007]. The Ecuadorian Association of Women in Municipal Government [AMUME] has headed the creation of a bill on the issue. What do you think about this effort?

María Paula Romo: I have worked on this issue with female colleagues in the Ecuadorian Association of Women in Municipal Government [AMUME]. As a lawyer, I don’t think that recourses can be designed according to the type of person. I believe that the proposal is not the most orthodox in legal terms. For example, there should not be a recourse for “imprisoned persons,” but rather for the protection of freedom. Recourses should be classified according to the right protected, not according to the person who can use them. There are no special recourses to protect children, senior citizens or people with disabilities, rather there are recourses to protect violations related to discrimination, recourses to protect freedom, resources to protect against illegal arrest.

For this reason, I disagree with the way that this bill has been presented. I think that it should focus on the rights protected through the recourse rather than the subject protected. I believe that indigenous populations and Afro-Ecuadorians suffer the same harassment in politics. The bill should be reformulated as the protection of one or several rights through each proposed recourse.

iKNOW Politics: How would you reformulate it?

María Paula Romo: In reality, six different kinds recourses for immediate protection are included in the new Constitution, which can be suspended, in order to avoid the violation of constitutional rights. It seems that these meet women’s expectations in this area.

I have talked to the women at AMUME and I think that the following step is to create legal precedents, take emblematic cases and pressure different bodies, such as the Constitutional Court, to take a stand by creating a clear precedent on the issue of political discrimination against women. It is a very difficult issue to write it into law with every possible situation in mind: to have a special recourse for when they don’t invite you to a meeting, a special recourse for when they discriminate against your right to stand up and give your opinion, etc. I think it would be much more useful in legal terms to have a sentence, a resolution from the Constitutional Court that clearly defines the behavior that can be classified as discriminatory and what the consequences are, whether or not the Electoral Council should intervene, etc.

iKNOW Politics: What do you think are the three principal strategies to develop in order to keep promoting women’s access and participation in politics?

María Paula Romo: People ask women for more preparation, skill and work time. All strategies respond to these demands. We have to make a serious effort to build our capacities and learn together. We have to beat men in order to promote women’s initiatives. We have to be skilled in carrying forward the agendas that we have been elected to do. If our presence in the political realm does not generate changes in the lives of women who will never be candidates, I think we haven’t fulfilled the principal objective.

iKNOW Politics: In your political career, you have surely had to build alliances and work through networks. What do you think of this kind of work?

María Paula Romo: Yes, of course. There is not just one form of exercising power. Even now this exercise follows the masculine model, which we must question. Networks and alliances propose a different, much more horizontal model of exercising power. This is a challenge for all men and women: to demonstrate that these forms of work, these forms of decisions can be as effective as traditional authority. That is the big question that we women and the progressive sectors in Ecuador and Latin America ask ourselves: how should power be exercised? How can work in politics be more inclusive, more democratic and more horizontal?

iKNOW Politics: What suggestions would you make to women interested in politics who feel that it is a distant and inaccessible territory?

María Paula Romo: Politics is difficult: I always say that you shouldn’t go into politics thinking that things are going to be easy and everyone happy. Politics is more difficult than you might think, but despite this, it’s worth it. I am very bad at giving advice and don’t really like receiving it from others either, but I would say that politics has certain gratifications that make it worthwhile. To be able to say that certain processes transpire makes the difficult parts worthwhile. You have to be proactive, to be brave and to ignore others who say that we can’t or that we belong somewhere else. We have to prepare ourselves daily. Women’s participation must be brave, but never improvised.

iKNOW Politics: How would you like to be remembered? What would you like to leave as a legacy of your involvement in politics?

María Paula Romo: That sounds a little vain to me, perhaps people won’t even remember me. In any case, when I finish with politics, I myself would like to think that I was consistent with my work and commitments.

iKNOW Politics: Thank you very much for your time, Orsinia. I’d like to start by asking you to tell us about your career. How did your interest in politics begin, what inspired you? And in particular, how has being a woman and, moreover, an indigenous woman, affected you?

Orsinia Polanco: First, I’d like to send out warm greetings. Thank you very much for this interview. I am proud and honored to represent Colombian women in my country’s Congress. But isn’t easy — it certainly isn’t easy. It is very difficult because I am the first indigenous woman to be elected to Congress in Colombia’s history.

Politics is in my blood. My father was a political man, an orator; an indigenous man that solved conflicts within the indigenous communities. Since I was 13, I have participated in political movements thanks to him; he was the one who got me involved. I always liked politics. When I was 18 years old, I ran as a candidate for councilor in my municipality, Guajira. My mom was against my continuing in politics because it seemed tiring to her. My dad used to bring a lot of people to the house and she would always host them all.

It was my vision and interest that brought me to politics. I saw that my indigenous community had a lot of needs. I saw that we women didn’t have our own, individual voice, so many indigenous women suggested I participate and run for election. Then I ran at the national level.

I have worked at the Guajira Regional Autonomous Corporation as bilingual Secretary of Indigenous Issues in the Guajira department; as a professor at the National University and as an administrator in the Catholic University. In the Javeriana University I have been a professor of indigenous languages and indigenous culture. I have always promoted my culture and the Wayúu language in Colombia and internationally. I have a masters degree in linguistics from the National University. I am filled with pride and satisfaction because I am young and I am a woman and I have had to fight hard.

Women have been shut out of political scenes because machismo is still predominant. A woman is usually at home and when she is an activist, she is the one seeking votes from men and selling empanadas to finance her campaign. At best, a woman is valued as an activist, but not for her intellectual or political ability. A woman is hidden, she isn’t permitted to go out.

iKNOW Politics: What was your candidacy like? What movement or party did you participate in? Were there any problems with you being included in the list?

Orsinia Polanco: I am a member of the Alternative Democratic Pole, the only party in Colombia that allows ethnic communities to participate. Its statute recognizes it as a multiethnic, multicultural party. When I was a masters student as well as a professor at the National University, I realized that the majority of my professors and classmates belonged to the Democratic Pole. I was also drawn by the fact that the party’s current president was previously a member of the Constitutional Court and tenaciously defended the indigenous peoples. The sentences he issued favored the indigenous, preserving their values and customs and respecting their autonomy. It is odd to find people in that category that respect us, indigenous persons. That’s why I joined the Democratic Pole. And when I joined, I was not rejected, at least not explicitly. I did have to compete, however, because there were people who proposed an indigenous man [as candidate] since they thought that as a woman I was not fit to get elected. Then I competed with an indigenous man who had received 17,000 votes four years back and I beat him because we were both asked to present a proposal. The man didn’t even have advertising or a headquarters. I had both a headquarters and advertising. My political platform was very clear: to defend women, children and indigenous peoples. The majority voted in my favor. I won based on my abilities; for being responsible, for being up to date in everything and for being organized. In terms of organization, women outdo men. They thought that I was not prepared, but I came back strong — very strong — and my speech was very well grounded and argued.

iKNOW Politics: You have talked a lot about the support your father, a politically active person, gave you. How did his ancestral culture facilitate or hinder your participation in politics?

Orsinia Polanco: In the Wayúu culture, women represent men in almost all political, social and economic scenarios. This is our history. My father used to tell me that women must go out to the streets because women are sacred and cannot be sacrificed. When we turn 12 years old, considered the age of puberty, we Wayúu women are prepared to be women; to present ourselves in society and to be wives, and also to represent the entire community in different political, social and economic scenarios. This is why the woman is the one that represents the community in general, because she is given this role, this function. In other Colombian indigenous cultures, this does not exist. I am fortunate because I was born in the Wayúu culture, where we have a more matriarchal system in which the woman is the one who gives orders, organizes and represents. Fortunately, I didn’t have problems with my [political] participation in my own community. On the contrary, the indigenous men in my community were happy for me and very proud. They would tell me, ‘you have to be reelected because you have represented us very well.’ At no time have they opposed.

The other indigenous cultures in the country do everything possible to hinder my work, saying that a man must be here. Machismo in Colombia is very strong, both among ‘arijunas’ — non-indigenous persons — and indigenous persons from other cultures.

iKNOW Politics: Could you tell us what principal strategies you’ve used to stay in office and carry out your goals?

Orsinia Polanco: Well, one is tolerance and understanding, which you must have with other colleagues. In the Chamber of Representatives, we women are very few: of 166 members, there are only 13 women, almost nothing. There are times in sessions when there are only two of us women and I am the only indigenous woman. So in order to move forward, we must be tolerant and win allies little by little.

On the other hand, you must prepare yourself well at all times, using your intellectual ability to write legislative bills and later argue them.

However, perhaps the most important thing is to know how to get around the situations at hand that are unique to politics. In this aspect we don’t only deal with bills; we also have to monitor the country’s overall situation. In the case of indigenous communities, we have carried out several strikes to demand our rights. Since the national government has treated us like terrorists, then I have to face this situation because everyone asks me for explanations at the same time, like wasps.

When I recently got elected, I didn’t know how to maneuver political, formal and diplomatic situations. I would present my arguments against a bill and everyone attacked me because they wanted for there to be a consensus. I said no and raised my voice a little, losing control when I talked. I got angry a lot. Now I give explanations to others with a lot of respect and diplomacy. I am more strategic, I have learned a lot. I tell them that the president represents all Colombians and that I am Colombian and the indigenous peoples are also Colombian; they have to understand why I am against a bill. I give them my arguments and they see that I am more prepared. I never talk when I am not prepared. If I do not know the issue, I prefer to stay quiet. And in this way they have come to respect me.

iKNOW Politics: Have you had any particularly unpleasant experience while you’ve been in office, any situation in which you have felt discriminated for being an indigenous woman? What are the principal lessons you have taken from those experiences?

Orsinia Polanco: One of the experiences I most remember, which was very painful, was when they stepped on my manta — my indigenous attire. My indigenous dress is quite long and one day when I arrived, I needed to use the restroom. When I came out of the restroom and ran to vote against a bill, several men got together and stepped on my dress. I couldn’t move. I asked myself, what is this? I was about to report this, I was very upset and I thought it was terrible for them to do this to me. I thought, ‘I am in a democratic country, in a legislative chamber with thinking people’…The time came for the session to begin and I was all alone. There was another woman in the area but she disappeared without saying anything. So I asked myself, ‘Was it because I am a woman? Was it so that I wouldn’t vote? Was it so that I have no allies here? I have to find allies! Then I began to look for them and I have many allies now. I have learned to meet them.

The principal lesson is that after a very strong, well argued debate in which you have been very critical, you must turn back into a super nice, well-loved woman and smile at them. Then you must not show them any susceptibility, sensitivity, or anything. A friend of mine says that the best weapon you can have against your enemy is niceness. You can destroy your enemy’s indifference with a big hug and show your friendliness if you have been offended.

iKNOW Politics: The women’s parliamentary benches have received a lot of acceptance at the regional level and have become an important mechanism in promoting women in politics. What is your opinion on the Colombian Congress Women’s Commission?

Orsinia Polanco: It is excellent that all of us women unite in the Women’s Commission. We have participated in forums, we form part of the Inter-American Parliamentary Group (GPI) and we have shared with women from Costa Rica, Peru, Ecuador and other countries. I think it is excellent for us women because it allows us to talk about both political and nonpolitical issues. I believe that the Women’s Commission should not disappear because it is where we forget about political parties and men’s influence and begin to create very important strategies and proposals for public policies that benefit women.

iKNOW Politics: In your opinion, how has the internal conflict in Colombia affected the participation of women and particularly indigenous women in politics?

Orsinia Polanco: The internal conflict is very unfortunate. It has spilled a lot of blood and many indigenous people have been victims of forced internal displacement. Many women have been obligated to live in cities with their children in their arms and have been driven to poverty and begging. The state has given no support to indigenous persons. We have lost a lot of land, which is why we are currently marching throughout the country since the federal government has failed to fully comply with the return lands that had been snatched from indigenous communities. We have to stand up, organize ourselves and tell the government that we do exist and we need these lands in order to live.

With forced displacement, women have suffered a lot, more so when they are from a community that has unique values and customs. They begin to lose them because they move to the city, which could result in the extinction of their culture.

iKNOW Politics: What do you think of work networks and alliances? Have they been important in your experience in politics?

Orsinia Polanco: I believe they are very important. They help to publicize women’s presence in politics. If a lot of people in Colombia don’t know I exist — moreover as an indigenous woman — then I believe they will know who I am after this interview. And this will reinforce the perspective of indigenous and non-indigenous women, strengthening our participation in politics. Ignorance gives way to mistakes, but if we know each other through networks, then we begin to make connections and have the opportunity to learn a lot more. The knowledge that can be obtained on public policies at the international level is a great help. And that knowledge is the result of working in networks. In this way we can tell others what we are doing and simultaneously better prepare ourselves to participate more efficiently in Congress.

iKNOW Politics: What advice or suggestions would you give young women, especially indigenous women, who are interested in participating in politics?

Orsinia Polanco: In first place, be strong. And in second place, prepare yourselves very well in order to prove that we are very capable and that nothing is impossible in this life. Being a woman is not synonymous with being inferior, and that is a direct message to indigenous women. I know many indigenous women who consider themselves inferior to men and this mentality is unfortunate. We must get fear of men out of our minds. I think that a woman must have a lot of character in order to thrive. It is like saying, ‘I am all that I can be, I am more than you,’ but without saying it, rather by demonstrating through acts. That is what makes you a politician. I didn´t get into politics with money. I got here doing campaigns by foot, making my political proposals known and I ended up getting 29,599 votes.

iKNOW Politics: What are your plans to promote women’s and indigenous women’s participation in politics? How would you like to be remembered? What legacy would you like to leave?

Orsinia Polanco: The first thing in my agenda as an indigenous woman is to ardently defend the rights of indigenous communities, whether they be human rights or their rights to land so that they can subsist through farming. I am also concerned about education and health and other areas where the indigenous communities need to be kept in mind. It is also in my agenda to keep making myself known and to be an example for women not only in Colombia, but also for my personal stories and experiences to reach every corner of the planet.

As for my legacy, more than being reelected I would like to get water for the Wayúu indigenous territory. They live in desert lands where there is no water, not even to drink, and animals die of thirst. We live in a border area and there is water in Venezuela in the Lago Maracaibo and Río Limón. Why don’t we look for a way to bring water through tubes, just as gas is transported from Colombia to Venezuela?

I would like to be remembered as a radical woman, a defender of women and indigenous peoples. I would like to keep moving forward in politics. Who knows, I could even make it to being president. But in order for this to happen I must better prepare myself; complete doctorate studies, go abroad and return in order to keep fighting for women’s rights in Colombia. This country has never had a woman president, why couldn’t it be me? I would like not only to address women’s problems, but also to address other problems in the country. The indigenous are not the only ones who suffer here; the campesino farmers are also displaced. There are people here that live in the city, but they are very poor. There is a lot of inequality in Colombia and I would like there to be a true democracy.

iKNOW Politics: You were elected to the Canadian House of Common for 13 years and you’ve been a Senior Cabinet Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of Canada; what challenges have you faced as a woman in these leadership positions and how did your past experience as a law professor and Dean of the law faculty prepare you to meet these challenges?

Hon. Anne McLellan: Well first of all, let me answer that last question, because while obviously you can stand for political office from any background, I do think it helps if you have a basic understanding of our constitution, our system of governance, the difference between a parliamentary democracy and a republican system of government. They are not different essentially but, to me, I guess it is basic civics. Unfortunately, we don’t teach civics anymore in our schools. So, I just think if you have that legal training, you understand naturally, you feel comfortable with the framework in which laws are made, you understand a great deal more about how laws are made, the process, the importance of language in making laws. At committee, where you have the clerk of the committee and expert witnesses; often the language used is not that familiar to people of certain backgrounds, whereas if you have a legal background, not all, but a lot of that comes a lot more naturally. So I would say that you can be an outstanding member of parliament from virtually any background but having a legal background helps. The first question, challenges: I think, one of the big challenges for women, and I’ve talked a lot about this as I talk to women across the country about why more of them don’t stand for elected office, I think the big challenge is accommodating or trying to make sure you have some kind of balance in your life around work, and if you’re in federal politics in a big country like Canada, the geographic distance is so great, you’re away from home and the parliament is sitting probably 4 days a week; how do you balance that with any kind of normal family life? And especially if you have children and smaller children, we know Statistics Canada tells us women are still the primary caregivers. That’s changing a little bit, men are stepping up to the plate more and more in families but women are still the primary caregivers. Is it possible to make that balance work? I think that’s the question a lot of women ask themselves if they’re running for federal office in a country as large and complex as Canada. So I think that is something we need to talk honestly about with other women, to learn from their experiences, but also we have to talk about those kinds of issues in our families. Too often I think a decision may be made without fully understanding the pressures and the challenges, and all of a sudden you have one member of the family saying: “Hey, this isn’t what I signed on for” and I’ve seen that happen with a number of my female colleagues and its hard. It is hard and I think we just need to be honest about acknowledging that and figuring out how we can make that work at a given time in our lives.

iKNOW Politics: What first inspired or motivated you to go into politics?

Hon. Anne McLellan: It was probably my mother. My mother was an elected municipal official and she ended her political career as a deputy reeve of our county in Nova Scotia where I was brought up. My mother was English, she came to Canada after the war and met my father. She was an only child, I think only children tend to be fairly assertive, and they’re very verbal people and they’re used to being treated like adults from the time they’re born. My mother was very much out there and you get used to being around a powerful, assertive woman; you get used to having people coming to the house to solicit her opinion on issues and look up to her in terms of helping solve their problems. We got our first TV in 1955, I’m revealing how old I am, and it was the first television in our rural village of 450 people in Nova Scotia. And mom and dad would sit us down every night and we would watch the news and we would talk about these issues. It was a political environment in which I was brought up but I suppose when I think about the role model that was most influential and led me to believe that women, if you put your mind to it, can do just about anything in spite of the challenges, that would be my mother.

iKNOW Politics: In your first election campaign, you won by only 11 votes - what advice would you have for other women who are facing very tight elections?

Hon. Anne McLellan: Anything is possible and don’t give up. You know, you work up into the very last moment in terms of knocking on doors, calling people, trying to get people to get out there and vote for you, convincing people that you’re the right candidate for that riding. I was a Liberal running in Alberta, we hadn’t elected Liberals in Alberta in 25 years, since 1968. I went into the election not thinking I would win. My campaign team was largely but not exclusively women, my campaign manager was a woman, the reason I ran in 1993 or worked for the nomination which we got in December of ’92 was because a group of women, with a couple of wonderful men, but largely women, had come to me in the summer of 1992 and said: “we’ve heard you speak about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and we really think you should do this”. I had been involved in the party my whole life, I grew up in a Liberal family in Nova Scotia. As I moved from Nova Scotia to New Brunswick to Alberta, I was involved with the party but more in terms of policy or organization supporting other candidates but this group of people suggested to me that this was something I could do, should do. Anything is possible and if you work hard you never know what the result will be.

iKNOW Politics: As Minister of Justice, you introduced Canada’s first integrated anti-terrorist legislation after the September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. You became the first minister for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. What stereotypes did you have to overcome in this non-traditional role for women and what message do you think your success sends to other women?

Hon. Anne McLellan: I don’t think I had to overcome any stereotypes. I think that by the time I was Minister of Public Safety, people did not doubt that I was strong enough or tough enough to do the job - I had a good sense of all of government. I chaired various standing committees of cabinet. It was my fourth cabinet portfolio and I was also Deputy Prime Minister. I had a good sense of what was required to get people to work together, which is what you have to do when dealing with public safety and public security – you have to get people past turf protection and thinking about how they share information, how we integrate that information, analyze it and get it to people who are in the business of safety and security and law enforcement in a way that that makes a difference. I’m not convinced that there were stereotypes of me as a woman that got in my way. I had already been one of the longest serving Justice Ministers in Canada, and people by then had a pretty firm view of my philosophical approach of justice issues. I’d already reformed the youth justice legislation – which had been a huge fight; we changed our criminal code in regards to organized crime – trying to deal with some of the really tough issues in terms of the globalization of organized crime. I think people knew that I was strong enough or tough enough to do this. If anything, there were probably people in some communities who thought that I was too tough - that I was going too far after 9/11 with that terrorist legislation, it was very controversial. I spent my time in politics doing a lot of very controversial things – I don’t know why, it followed me around – when I was Health Minister, I had to deal with SARS – my time as Minister of Health is sort of defined by SARS. As Justice Minister: the youth justice reform, the anti-terrorism legislation; when I was Minister of Natural Resources: the oil sands, the beginning of the debate between energy development and global warming.

iKNOW Politics: What would you perceive as your greatest accomplishment during your time in government, particularly when it comes to women or young women?

Hon. Anne McLellan: I think my greatest accomplishment is probably just being there, beating all the odds four elections out of five. Also, there was the issue of gun control which was a difficult issue for someone being elected as a Liberal from Alberta, but believing in my gut that gun control was the right thing. That doesn’t mean we got all the details right, it doesn’t mean that we developed the program as efficiently as we should have, but knowing in your gut that gun control is the right thing to do, it makes a safer society, and when you’re talking about safety, you’re often talking about the safety of women and their children. People pretend that, with long-guns, you’re trying to criminalize hunters and in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. As we know in rural Canada, women die from long-guns used by partners, husbands, whoever against them. I think there are times and issues where you have to stand up and say: “I know there is a political cost to this, but I believe that this is the right thing and we stay the course”.

iKNOW Politics: You were chair of the Liberal Party’s renewal task force on women, and you held meetings across the country with women. What did you learn from this process?

Hon. Anne McLellan: Actually, the meetings became less partisan over time. They started out being meetings of Liberal women but ethnic women wanted to come, aboriginal women, equal voice, the Edmonton YWCA initiative, one woman one vote – they actually started to involve larger groups of women that weren’t necessarily Liberals. I guess the thing I learned was that there are very clear reasons why more women are not seeking elected office. There are three main reasons but the number one reason, what we talked about earlier, is what we call work/life balance. It is very hard for women to see a line of sight between their responsibilities as a mother and wife or partner, and being away from home four days a week, 30 weeks a year for an extended period of time. That’s the number one reason women do not stand for elected office.

The other two reasons are interesting too: the culture of politics, women don’t like what they see as the overly-aggressive partisan approach to politics – they don’t like the language that’s used – that it’s a sport, a fight, actually we use a lot of military language in politics – we talk about campaigns, we talk about the fight – we talk about opponents, we talk about defeat or victory. That’s language that I suppose is generic, but it’s also the language of war and I think a lot of women feel uncomfortable with some of the language that’s used. I thought our former premier actually encapsulated unintentionally the reason women find the culture of politics so difficult. When asked about politics, he said, upon his retirement: “You know, politics is a blood sport, it’s a man’s game”. You know all that language that just puts women off.

Then, the third reason that was identified by the young women’s forum was that they don’t like the way the media depict women – they really paid attention to what happened to Belinda Stronach when she crossed the floor – and how the media described that event and how the discussion of the event was less about the merits of floor crossing but more about Belinda as a person. I think the way the media treat women in politics is also something that really puts women off.

iKNOW Politics: Do you think that networking with other women, particularly women’s caucuses or an international network like iKNOW Politics, has helped you in your career?

Hon. Anne McLellan: Certainly networking with women is important, and that is one of the things I talk about when I go out and talk about why we don’t have more women in politics. I think mentoring is important, role models are important, networking is important. You can have formal and informal networking – or formal and informal mentorship programs in places of work and in politics. If you’re going to do it well with quantifiable outcomes, you need some kind of formal program of mentoring. I am convinced, the more I talk to women of all ages that mentoring is important – that they need people who have been there, who have lived through this, who have lived through the ups and the downs, the bad and the good to help them understand what its all about.

iKNOW Politics: How do you see ways that women can work with men in order to encourage more women to run for politics and to be more effective in politics?

Hon. Anne McLellan: I’ve always worked reasonably well with men, in part because when I went to law school in 1971 that was the first year any significant number of women went to law school. During my early career I was working in areas that were primarily male. When I went to law school from ’71-’74, it was the beginning of women in law schools in larger numbers. Then when I started law teaching I was the first tenure-tracked professor at the University of New Brunswick Law School. I was the only woman, they had one sessional before I showed up, but I was their first tenure track female professor. I would go to law society meetings in New Brunswick to represent the law school, I would be the only women in the room because the hierarchy in the law society was still all male because there were so few women.

That changed, through the 1980s you started to see more women in law school, more and more women as lawyers and judges. Then, when I became Minister of Natural Resources, I started going back to rooms of all men because there weren’t many women in the oil and gas business, in the mining industry, the forestry industry. I kept going on this roller coaster ride. Women and men, we roughly represent 50% of the population and we have to get along. We have to figure out how we make our world a better place, how we have safe and secure communities where we prosper, how we make sure the division of labor at home is such that both men and women can be productive members of society. Men still have the majority of positions of power and influence whether its in business, whether it is in law firms, whether it is in politics, universities. It makes no sense for us to automatically assume they’re the enemy and are out to get us. What we need to do is make sure we find ways to work with our male counterparts because their objective is the same as ours in most cases. Its not that they’re venal people, its not that they want to do harm. They want happy, functional families and communities just like women do, in most cases. I think it’s a case of figuring out how we work together. The one thing I will say though is that if you have power, you usually don’t give it up willingly. That’s one thing women need to understand, that men still have a disproportionate amount of power and influence and they’re not just going to hand it to us. That doesn’t mean that we end up in warfare with them but it means that we have to step forward. If we want to be the managing partner of a law firm, then don’t expect to be asked to do that because guys like being managing partners of law firms or they like being Prime Minister of Canada or Cabinet Minister. We are going to have to prove ourselves in the sense of standing for office, working hard, being successful and meritorious and then when the time is right, putting our hands up and saying ‘You know what, I can do that job, I can do that job as well or better than x,y, and z, so I would like you to consider me’.

iKNOW Politics: If you had to give one piece of advice to a young woman who is considering politics and doesn’t necessarily know how to proceed, what would the advice be?

Hon. Anne McLellan: I guess, talk to people like myself and other women who have been there. If you’re not sure whether this is something that you want to do or you’re working through whether you think you have the right disposition to do this, I think it’s important to talk to people who’ve done it. Now, you never know until you’re there – I’ve learned a lot about myself in the 13 years I was in public life, both good and bad – I think understanding more in terms of what the real expectations are. One of the things that I think it is maybe harder for women to cope with out of concern for their family and kids is that once you decide to stand for office, especially at the federal level, the word that’s key there is public. You give up a huge amount of personal privacy and your family gives up personal privacy. And for women, that can be a real disincentive to get involved because they know their kids can end up being the center of attention, be it at school or wherever, in a way that they don’t want and don’t think is fair for their kids. People need to understand, it is putting yourself out there and people will write things that you think are unfair or untrue, they will be mean-spirited at times and cruel and everybody gets to read it. It will be on the front page of the newspaper. If you don’t think you can be comfortable with that or you don’t want that for your family, then I think you do need to work through that because you have to accept the fact that you’re giving up a big chunk of your zone of personal privacy. There’s a level of intrusion on the part of your constituents. You can’t go to the store and buy groceries anymore in a way that you’re use to because that becomes a public space where you’re not anonymous, where people know who you are and they have every right to come up and talk to you and engage you and say ‘Hey you’re my Member of Parliament and I just want you to know x,y, or z’. If you’re not comfortable having that intrusion and giving up that aspect of your private personal space, then I think it can be very hard and very stressful and it takes getting used to. I sm by disposition, a very private person, I don’t like to talk about myself; you get used to talking about yourself after awhile. I never talked about my family because my family made it plain that politics is something I do, it is not something they do. They will become very angry and resentful if they end up being included in the public space, because that’s not their space. People need to be realistic about what this is about and then if you’re successful at it, then it is more of the same. You give up more of that zone of privacy and if you’re a Cabinet Minister then you give up more again and if you’re a high-profile Cabinet Minister, you give up more again. You have to think these things through and until you’ve done it, you never really know what it is all about. I think it is important for people to talk to others who’ve been there. Talk to people who are honest about it, both the good and the bad because there are both. At the end of the day I had a blessed political career. Who knew as a Liberal from Alberta I would win 4 out of 5 elections, I’d end my career as Deputy Prime Minister, I’d hold amazing Cabinet positions dealing with some of the biggest issues our country confronted at that period of time? I wouldn’t give that up for anything but people need to be realistic, you’ve got to be hard-headed about it in the sense that there are costs that come with all of that.