A reader writes in:
I think this might be worth a quick blog.
In fact, of the 13 legal and polocy advisors apparently employed at the Law Commission, 11 are female and just 2 male. Is this healthy for an organisation that deals with some very important legal and policy issues, which often become law in one form or another?
For instance, presently, the Law Commission is working on proposals to change the Property (Relationships) Act in a way that massively change the way pre-relationship and post-relationship acquired property is divided in a separation. It also proposes an unprecedented, radical change to Trust law that would essentially render Trusts of no value in relationship property matters – the division of property would be assessed essentially as if the Trust did not exist, under their radical proposals.
To what degree have these radical proposals been able to gain momentum due to the heavy female representation of the LC’s legal and policy staff?
I think the reader has a fair point. An organisation dealing with such legal and policy issues should be more balanced in terms of gender representation. If it was 85% male, I’m sure it would be criticised for a lack of diversity.
I’ve personally found the work output by the Law Commission to generally be very good. But the area of property relationship law is incredibly controversial and complicated, and you often do see things through your own personal experiences and perspectives. That is why diversity is a good thing.