In the City Parliament of Zurich, motions for gender-inclusive urban planning have been introduced. The Green Liberal Party (GLP), the Social Democratic Party (SP) and the Green Party have submitted a motion, while the SP and the Greens have also submitted a postulate. The aim is to oblige the city of Zurich to include a chapter on inclusive urban planning in the municipal structure plan.
The motion was referred to the City Parliament by 85 votes to 30, according to an article in the newspaper "Tages-Anzeiger". The postulate from the SP and the Greens passed with 75 votes to 39. The Swiss People’s Party (SVP) rejected the two motions, calling them “nonsense”, according to the article. The City Council resolution dated 10 May is available to download from the City of Zurich’s website.
The motion outlines “inclusive” urban planning and the application of the principle of gender mainstreaming in urban planning projects. This requires the different impacts on men and women to be considered in all decision-making processes to guarantee equality.
In order to safeguard diversity when hiring new professionals and to introduce the principle of gender mainstreaming as a condition when awarding projects to external parties, the City Parliament should not only include a new chapter on inclusive urban planning and design in the structural plan, writes the article. It must also sensitize city employees to the issue.
For Hannah Locher (SP) and Anna-Béatrice Schmaltz (Greens), urban planning has always been oriented around the traditional concept of the healthy male employee, writes the article. The politicians continue that little consideration has been given to people who balance employment with unpaid care work, or to people with physical or mental disabilities. They cite the city of Vienna as an example, saying it has systematically adopted an inclusive perspective in planning and building.
"Gender mainstreaming is a nonsensical term," Johann Widmer (SVP) was quoted as saying. The SVP rejects the proposals. The left of the City Parliament is uniting to advocate the concerns of a "small, loud minority". With their "monstrous, empty rhetoric", they are causing confusion among citizens to whom the “gender gaga” means nothing. ce/gba
