Yes.
There are always things you can do legislatively—in some sense as much as Parliament can bind itself—to express formal commitments to a particular kind of decision-making process and a kind of accountability in that decision-making process. The government could commit, in preambular words or in actual textual provisions, to gender equity. It could say something about the kind of ministerial positions it will seek to have women fill. It's not rocket science. That's actually one of the things that concrete measures call for in terms of increasing representation of under-represented groups.
People talk a lot about affirmative action. It's actually a continuum of things that you can do. The government could look across the continuum at efforts to get more women on the government side and the other parties sitting in the House, to begin with, from which cabinet members are selected. They could make some statements—as I said, either preambular or in the text of the bill itself—about a commitment to institutionalize a rule of 50% gender representation.
These are not things that are unthinkable. They're very easy to do. They're harder to do politically, of course, than simply saying something in a press release about a commitment to gender equality, or than simply saying “Because it's 2015.”
We need more leadership. We need more substantive education and commitments that have some toughness to them to really be able to claim that we're a feminist government.